Summary of 2012 Discussions & Conclusions (so far)

Started by Sharon Doubell on Sunday, November 25, 2012

Participants:

Related Projects:

Showing all 9 posts
11/25/2012 at 9:45 AM

Following some Discussion:

*Discussion in which we decide that there is no Catherina Mare Jnr; she is actually Francina; & who knows who Gerrit married? Not us, so far! : [http://www.geni.com/discussions/110788?msg=801895

*Discussion about Catherina as Ignace's sister or his daughter. Also covers their place of origin - Calabria/ Cambresis , Waldoons & more; a bit about whether Paul is verifiably the father; & includes the exciting revelation of the existence of an elder son, Ignatius: http://www.geni.com/discussions/110795?page=4

* Discussion culminating in the birth of older brother Ignatius on Geni: http://www.geni.com/discussions/115232?msg=833321

11/25/2012 at 9:46 AM

I think it should look like this (if we remove extra siblings)
(Better viewed with indents on the actual project):

A) Paul Mare marries NN

B1) Ignace Mare i (c1670)

marries first NN

C1) Catherina Mare (c 1690)

marries in 1713 Johannes Janse Van Vuuren i (1694 )

D1) Gerrit Janse van Vuuren (c 1716)

D2) Anna Elisabeth Janse vanVuuren (c 1718 - c 1727)

D3) Johannes Janse van Vuuren (c 1721)

D4) Lucas Janse van Vuuren (c1724)

D5) Anna Elisabeth Janse van Vuuren (c1727)

D6) Susanna Janse van Vuuren (c 1732)

C2) Ignatius Mare ii (c1690 - c1728)

marries second in 1706 Suzanne Janszoon van Vuren i (1691)

C1) Johannes Mare (c 1708)

C2) Anna Elisabeth Mare (c 17110

C3) Susanna Mare (c 1713)

C4) Lucas Marthinus Mare (c 1716)

C5) Francina Mare (c 1718)

C6) Maria Maree (c 1721)

C7) Paulus Ignatius Mare (c 1724)

C8) Magdalena Fenesie Mare (c 1726)

C9) Ignatius Mare iii (c 1729)

xxOOxx

A) Gerrit Janszoon van Vuren i (1667) marries Suzanne Jacob (1671)

B1) Suzanne Janszoon van Vuren i (1691)

marries in 1706 Ignace Mare i (c1670)

C1) Johannes Mare (c 1708)

C2) Anna Elisabeth Mare (c 17110

C3) Susanna Mare (c 1713)

C4) Lucas Marthinus Mare (c 1716)

C5) Francina Mare (c 1718)

C6) Maria Maree (c 1721)

C7) Paulus Ignatius Mare (c 1724)

C8) Magdalena Fenesie Mare (c 1726)

C9) Ignatius Mare iii (c 1729)

B2) Johannes Janse Van Vuuren i (1694)

marries in 1713 Catherina Mare i (1692)

C1) Gerrit Janse van Vuuren (c 1716)

C2) Anna Elisabeth Janse vanVuuren (c 1718 - c 1727)

C3) Johannes Janse van Vuuren (c 1721)

C4) Lucas Janse van Vuuren (c 1724)

C5) Anna Elisabeth Janse van Vuuren (c 1727)

C6) Susanna Janse van Vuuren (c 1732)

11/25/2012 at 9:55 AM

Conclusions
1) THE MARES ARE NOT THE MARAIS:

Problem:

See Discussion

Placing Catherina Mare as Catherina Marais, daughter of Charles Marais

Summary of Discussion:

The addition of Charles Marais as a father of one of Paul Mare's children is erroneous, and the Catherina Marais involved appears to often acquire all the life details of this Catherina Mare, making it appear a logical merge until the tree gives her two different fathers!

Decision:

The Mare & Marais lines are two different families and the one is not an evolution of the other

11/25/2012 at 9:55 AM

2) WITHIN THE MARE LINE: THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE TWO CATHERINA (MARE) VAN VUURENs

Problem:

See Discussion:

a) If there are 2: The elder Catherina Mare has either a name-sake niece or half-sister, Catherina Mare ii (1718), who then - to make the 'rompslomp' worse also became her daughter-in-law (with the effect that they both become Catherina Van Vuuren on marriage.)
b) If there are not 2, then who does Gerrit Van Vuuren ii (1716) marry in 1738?
Summary of Discussion:

a) It turns out that we cannot find primary sources for the existence of child of Ignace's called Catherina.

b) So far the only source on Geni for Gerrit marrying Catherina is Ancestry, with no good validation for it: I started a Discussion asking Judith Susanna Hendrika 5 Marais b2c1d6e5f2g7h7i12j2 if she had sources, and she doesn't find any either. Further, Alexander pointed out that “ The SAG has a number of mistakes in the Van Vuuren register'... it appears that Daniel and Andries Van Vuuren [both married Viljoens] are incorrectly placed as the children of Johannes Van Vuuren & Catherine Maree when they belong under Johannes Van Vuuren & Johanna Oelofse.

Decision:

We STARTED TO clean up that Van Vuuren line; removed the younger Catherina Mare altogether; & have left Gerrit with a NN wife for the moment.

11/25/2012 at 9:56 AM

3) IS CATHERINA MARE i IGNACE'S DAUGHTER, OR HIS SISTER?

Problem: See Discussion

Either a) Ignace Mare i (b c1670) has Catherina Mare (b c 1690) as his daughter by his unknown first wife; and then he comes out to SA in 1700-5 as a widower - together with his daughter,
Or b) he comes out to SA with his much younger sister, Catherina Mare (b c1690) (daughter of Paul Mare and NN)?
Either way, they both marry siblings after they get to SA:

In 1706 Ignace Mare i (1670) marries Suzanne Janszoon van Vuren i (1691) ;

In 1713 Catherina Mare i (1690) marries Johannes Van Vuuren i (1694 )

Summary of Discussion:

a) The first Fifty Years Project has her as his DAUGHTER. Their citation says " Edited & augmented by GISA Originally compiled by J.A. Heese & R.T.J. Lombard, S.A. Genealogies 5 L-M, p. 467." They also push his birth date back to c1670, but don't have data to validate this, so I'm [Sharon] assuming that this is in order to make him old enough to accommodate Catherine as his daughter. They also leave off Paul Mare as his father altogether - where we have him (without sources, though)as the father, born in 1661 (making the 1670 birthdate for Ignace, impossible.)

Contacting the FFYP provided new info that an adult Ignace Mare was on the 1713 Muster rolls with another adult Ignace Mare. The French ship records confirmed two Ignaces and a Catherina on the boat in 1705. Checking our records, we found that the Ignatius son (b1729) we had on our records was correct - pointing to there being two sons by this name. This gave weight to the possibility that Ignace (b1720) had come out to SA with two children, rather than one child and his own sister.

b) Pieter Coertzen: 'The Huguenots of 1688-1988, Tafelberg Publishers 1988' has Ignace and his SISTER Catherine

Sharon felt that their portraits do NOT look 20 years apart in age (as a father & daughter would). "As there are no portraits for spouses or other children (which it is reasonable to assume there would be if they were father and daughter), I assume the portraits (obviously by the same artist) were painted before they arrived in SA. (ie They are not likely to be a father and daughter painted at the same age, but not at the same time - otherwise the painter would have had to emigrate with them.) So, I think we should keep them as brother and sister, and assume Ignace's birth date is later than c1670." There was a difficulty validating the portraits - available, labelled on the net, but with no proofs. Further, some people felt that they weren't obviously painted by the same artist anyway.

Decision:

Balance of probability favoured the creation of a profile for an older son called Ignatius (b c1690) for Ignace (b c 1670), who came out on the 1705 boat with his sister, Catherina (b c 1690) and not his aunt. Catherina Mare (b c 1690) was thus positioned as Ignace (b c 1670) 's DAUGHTER. We presumed the younger son, Ignace (b 1729) may have been so named because his older half brother had died by then.

11/25/2012 at 9:56 AM

4) IS IGNACE FROM CALABRIA OR CAMBRESIS?

Problem:

See Discussion

Pieter Coertzen: 'The Huguenots of 1688-1988, Tafelberg Publishers 1988' has birth place of Ignace and Catherine as either Calabria in Italy or Cambresis in Germany, and points out also that there remains debate as to whether they were Huguenots.

Either a) He is from Calabria Italy (not France!)
Or b) He is from Cambresis (France? or Germany?)

STILL BEING DEBATED

11/25/2012 at 10:27 AM

The moree I read, yhe more I wonder. How are we going to safegaurd the new basis when new entrants use the "incorrect" information from the abovementioned incorrect sources and merge it in our so called "lily pure" basis?

11/25/2012 at 10:54 AM

The way we've always done - by bombarding them with info :-)

11/27/2012 at 11:57 PM

We have to lock fields - not profiles - just the fields and explain on every profile to safeguard and "re-educate". I also think that a supporting document has to be added to the profiles with Curator note - we did this with Niemandt early generations where information was differrent from the generally publicised and accepted.

Showing all 9 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion