(Now outdated) Catherine
Lejeune reasoning:
Where
was I able to obtain the names of Catherine LeJeune's parents, wife of François
Savoie?
I
believe that Stephen White says that Catherine and Edmee (sisters) are the
daughters of “parents
unknown.”
No parents are listed in
the DGFA for these two sisters. According to Rameau de Saint Pere, A Feudal Colony in America, Acadia
1604-1881, Vol 2, p. 318-320,: “… the LeJeune-Briard family was part Métis
Native American, and part French. The LeJeune Métis family had settled at
Merligouesh (Indian and Métis village located between Cap-de-Sable and
La-Heve), because two men from
Three of their sons appear to have become
"coureurs de bois" with the Indians and Métis: Jean, Francois and
Germain Gautherot... These marriages will later be blessed by the Recollets
when they come back to
The LeJeunes will use the
surname of Briard: sometimes the surname of their true ancestor, LeJeune; at
other times they will assume his surname of Briard which would seem to indicate
that their ancestor came from Brie, a region east of
The consanguinity of the LeJeunes, (called) dit Briard, is sometimes difficult
to establish for the reason that many of them will continue to live in Indian
and Métis villages; others will settle in Piziauid, south of the Bassin des
Mines. This being said, little remains of the registers from the two parishes
of this settlement: Sainte-Famille and l'Assumption. The Acadian ancestor of
the LeJeune-Briards had at least three children who reached adulthood: Emdee,
Pierre, and Catherine.”
In addition to the Rameau source, this above info comes from:
Steven Cormier’s “Acadians in Gray: Appendice A: Pioneers of Acadian Families
Who Migrated to
(A document that I have erroneously described as…) “The 1661 Quebec
Register “ refers to two sisters Edmee and Catherine LeJeune “en Acadie” as
“vici en France ou de mère indienne” – this just illustrates that even
in 1661 the origin of the two girls was not certain, but that indian blood was
suspected, else it would not have even been mentioned in the register. The
See: http://www.electroauthor.com/marcotte_genealogy/1661_Quebec_register.htm
Stephen White identified this document as a working document of
researcher Archange Godbout, rather than a 1661
register of any sort.
It is also worth noting that Edmée’s son
Charles Gautreau married Francoise Rimbault, the Métis daughter of (mtDNA-proven haplotype A)
Amerindian Anne-Marie.
Recent mtDNA test results for several of Catherine and Edmee’s descendants have consistently indicated a haplotype
of U6a.
www.acadian-home.org list this type as “U6a-European,” but more
formal genetics sources and studies consistently refer to U6a as North African
in origin, primarily concentrated in, but certainly not limited to Morocco,
Several people have stated at Internet genealogy foruma and websites that Sterphen White has stated that it is a son Pierre, Jr., that married an Ameridian, not the father, so Edmee and Catherine would not have Amerindian blood; only the descendants of the son Pierre, Jr. would have that Amerindian blood.
No one is disputing the
claim that the younger
http://acadian-home.org/SAW-CloserLookRecords.html
Sue Allen presents a
document trail supporting the Métis origin at her site :
http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/a/l/l/Sue--A-Allen/?Welcome=1094685137
In addition to letters from the
There has been so much controversy about this particular line that
several of their descendants have now done DNA testing to see if there is
Indian blood. You may peruse at your leisure such discussion at Genforum.com
and find a couple of postings that say theirs came back strong positive for
Indian blood, and another one that said no (although that person had a mtDNA
test = maternal line only, done and her lineage was inaccurate according to how
to how Stephen White details the same line. Per that lineage the tested
individual was NOT a direct descendant of Catherine or her sister Edmée LeJeune, - instead,
that person’s matrilineal line led to Marie Gautrot\Gautreau, daughter of Marie
(unknown) who FIRST married Francois Gautrot instead of his SECOND wife Edmée. This test therefore provided no insights other than not one of that test subject’s female
ancestors had Indian blood, including the unknown Marie. The previous
question, however, discussed other more recent test results that discount the
likelihood of Amerindian blood, at least on the part of the girls’ unknown
mother and their maternal grandmother.
Here are some extracted Stephen Whites comments at Lucie
Consentino’s site about Amerindian/Métis families: http://www.acadian-home.org/Mikmaq.html
Many people who feel that there is too
little information to prove any ancestor, just stop at that point. You
certainly don't need my consent or anyone else's to take that option. I have not
stopped at that same point with certain ancestors, because: first) I believe that
evidence is strong enough to warrant it; second)
It is easy to say that now-deceased, but once-equally-acclaimed genealogists
made lots of errors, but that does not compute that therefore they were also in
error on an entirely different person; third)
at least some Acadian Genealogy centers and paid professional researchers still
agreed (until mtDNA tested otherwise) with the Métis ancestry, and finally)
Official Métis oragnizations still listed Edmee and Catherine's descendants as of Métis descent.
**** Now
having U6a haplotype results for Catherine Lejeune, I
have removed my Amerindian tag for Catherine Lejeune.
- MM