Antonio Leme - dates - data

http://gw.geneanet.org/valdenei?lang=fr;pz=valdenei+correa;nz=silve...

There is a bad merge at this profile. Two different Antonio Leme are merged. I´m just work around the problem.

I will apreciate if you take a look after.

Thank you.

I've been working on it (and correcting things :-) ). My opinion... please do not take current references on geneanet as a source (not for the Leme dynasty). These early profiles are from an era when the Leme were going back and forth between Bruges-Lisboa-Açores. The Paulistana source has never researched the Bruges archives, and they made wrong assumptions (which have been replicated - like on geneanet). The only source that has researched the archives of Bruges AND Lisboa AND the Açores is historian André Claeys (as reported on the web site of the Açores government).
Much confusion stems from the fact that there are quite a few Martim Leme - and there are actually TWO Martim Leme III. One was the son of António Leme born c1445, who was the son of Maerten Lem I and Leonor Rodrigues. The other one (born 1476) was the son of Maerten Lem II and Adriana van Nieuwenhoven.
In addition, the archives clearly establish that Maerten Lem I was married to Joana Barroso and that she moved with him to Bruges. However, through his ongoing travel to Lisboa, Maerten also had an extra-marital relationship with Leonora Rodrigues, with whom he had more children than with Joana. Besides the archival proof, you can see from the Paulistana that the dates there don't match up.
Of course, new research may always shed more light on these complex relationships (for instance, there is much more to be discovered about the Lems in Bruges). But, in this particular case, it the Paulistana is proven to be wrong in many respects.
Unfortunately, the André Claeys research has never been translated into Portuguese, but it IS reference on the Açores web site as the ultimate source for the Flemish origins and early family relationships of the early settlers of the Açores.
Hope this helps? :-)

Thank you, George J. Homs! The problem is: how to avoid the wrong data of Genealogia Paulistana if everyone use it here?

Private User, veja aqui.

Lúcia Pilla Ok, vou acompanhar.

Nivea Nunes Dias e Diego de Moraes Moreira (C), leiam isso, por favor.

Lucia, there's no clear-cut way to avoid this, of course. Yesterday, I had to merge a full duplicate line of Portuguese kings added by someone who actually introduced many Leme - and this is what created new merge problems. It would be wonderful if (new) users on Geni would understand that all the major lines of European royalty already exist on Geni, and that there is no need to duplicate (just a need to improve and expand). About the Paulistana and the Leme, the only way to do it seems to be to make master profiles everywhere and add curator notes (which you have been doing).
One thing that could be done, is that I would write an English "memo" about this Leme issue, and that we would share it with every single Geni user who has ever added a Leme profile (in the 1400-1550 timeframe? Perhaps it can be done by opening a Lem discussion and copying all those concerned? At least we would make sure that any profile manager involved has been informed about these sources?
André Claeys, in his research, gives clear references about where the Paulistana has confused people, so this shouldn't b too difficult to do.
Tell me what you think, and I can try to condense it into a one-page memo?

Ahum, one page probably won't work. As these Açores families are so interwined, we need to give some explanation about all these families - including a word about the various name variations and how they happened. One thing that comes to mind is the "da Silveira" issue - or the "Casamaca" issue. In those families, too, the Paulistana has erred by making wrong and undocumented conclusions about the origins of these names.
By the way, André Claeys is not negative about the Paulistana, on the contrary. He only points out that the Paulistana is based exclusively on analysis of the Açores/Lisboa sources, but has never connected these sources with the Bruges sources. It is the Bruges sources that show who went to Lisboa and to the Açores, and how these families were connected.

I think that we could pick up each problem present in GP and write a Curator note at the profile that must be at odds with GP and lock the profile. Could you bring an example?

Very good debate, fellows!

I'm enjoying and learning very much!

[[6000000009895495819] Hello George J. Homs. - ] Mr. André Claeys is not the only source who was searching all the archives you mentionned. He is in contact with the Lem family association which is searching since more than 40 years different archives in Bruges, France, Lisbon, Açores, Brazil and over the world and are seriously checking datas step by step , They continued the work of one of their ancestors started in 1935. They published a book in 1993 "Genealogia Lemniana"..... ( By the way, There might be another Martim Lem IIIb, born in 1450, son of Martim Lem I and Leonor Rodrigues....halfbrother of Martim Lem II, they are working on it.)

http://www.lemfamilyassociation.com/#
(Ruud and Wil Lem)

Learning..

Thanks, Tiffany. I'll try and see whether there are discrepencies with what the Lem family association has worked out. Do you have an idea about whether the Lem family association indeed concords with the statement that the Paulistana is not correct about these early Lem connections?

There are a lot of histiorians who have doubts about statements in GP. This does not mean that GP is simply not correct ! But it was written in 18th century, hundreds of years after people came to Brazil. A lot of documents and primary sources have disappeard or fire destroyed them. You know perhaps that Lisboa was partly destroyed by an earthquake and following fire what destroyed the archives. as it happened in other archives also "Flandres". - So how much has been lost forever? Unless some copies turn up somewhere!
their connection comes from later genealogists and historians who did not give their sources.
For example: The first one who was talking about Joanna de Barroso (1st wife of Martim Lem I) and Charles Lem was Manuel de Soeiro in 1625. Almost 200 after they have lived.....

Then historians of the various periods copied the work of others (as we still do today) and doing so, they just copied errors or facts and names were mixed up. The question was and is still: WHO has the right text ?
Then there is also the language problem and translations.(dutch, portugues, french) and the surname problems....Try to contact Ruud Lem, he can give you a lot of information about their work. It is a very slow process verifying all the information of centuries and trying to put a serious chronoligal work together. There are many discussions.
André Claeys is over 80 and ill. His book will be published this year.
Abraços tiffany

Private User dê uma olhada aqui.

Private User por favor, acompanhe este Debate sobre a família Leme.

I created a project here: http://www.geni.com/projects/Genealogia-Paulistana/15402 that could be a way to put in evidence the problems. May be George J. Homs can deal with the Leme family and put notes in English at the project and I do the Portuguese version. What do you think about?