James Bruce in Dysart - JAMES BRUCE IN DYSART

Neil you changed the parents of James Bruce.
The previous parents George Bruce of Carnock b. 1551, d. 1625 and MARGARET PRIMROSE, so you changed it to Euphame Primrose, what are you doing chap?

Neil you changed the parents of James Bruce.
The previous parents George Bruce of Carnock b. 1551, d. 1625 and MARGARET PRIMROSE, so you changed it to Euphame Primrose, what are you doing chap?

Dear Phillip,

So far I have not found any primary evidence which identifies the ancestry of James Bruce in Dysart. If you have primary evidence (or a verifiable source reference) I would be grateful if you would post details in the overview of his profile.

Euphame Primrose was the wife of Sir George Bruce of Carnock. Her name was not Margaret Primrose. This is confirmed by Euphame's testament dative. Details follow:

The Testament Dative of Euphame Primrose

Euphame Primrose died intestate on 13 October 1609. On 31 March 1612 her Testament Dative and Inventory was given up by her widowed husband, Sir George Bruce of Carnock. It was given up in name and behalf of five of their children, that is Alexander Bruce, Robert Bruce, Magdalane Bruce, Elizabeth Bruce and Nicolas Bruce, who were recognised as executors dative to their deceased mother by the Commissary Court of Dunblane. Confirmation was granted to the executors dative on 31 March 1612. [National Records of Scotland, Dunblane Commissary Court, The Testament Dative and Inventory of Euphame Prymrois, spouse to Sir George Bruce of Carnock, knight, reference CC6/5/3]

Images of Testament:

https://www.geni.com/documents/view?doc_id=6000000193687333838

https://www.geni.com/documents/view?doc_id=6000000193686741887

https://www.geni.com/documents/view?doc_id=6000000193686933851

I hope that this information is helpful.

Regards,

Neil

Mate are you stupid? Look at George Bruce of Carnock b. 1551- d.1625 death particulars, it says Margaret Primrose is his wife and not Euphame, so how you can go on Euphame's death particulars only you know!

Look in George Bruce madia, mate carry on with your fraud, we will see!

Just remember these profiles where correct until you came and changed it. Robert Bruce of Blairhall is George Bruce of Carnock NOT CULROSS father. If you can't undersrand this I can't help you, look in the media of George Bruce of CARNOCK, the records are there.

Im seeing you are using myheritage as your sources? Is this your primary sources!

Dear Philip,

(1) Can you provide primary evidence which proves that James Bruce in Dysart is the son of Sir George Bruce of Carnock?

(2) I am not the only one who knows about Euphame Primrose. Her marriage to Sir George Bruce of Carnock is a matter of public record here in Scotland. The Testament Dative of Euphame Primrose, the wife of Sir George Bruce of Carnock, is available on the ScotlandsPeople website. I have posted details of its contents, including images, in the overview of her profile, but you can check them out for yourself via ScotlandsPeople.

(3) If you can provide primary evidence for a marriage with Margaret Primrose then please bring it forward.

(4) I have not used MyHeritage as a source, but I have cited it in a number of occasions, usually to draw attention to conflicting claims.

Regards,

Neil

Sure, James Bruce of Dysart b. 1570, Father George Bruce of Carnock and Margaret Primrose. https://gw.geneanet.org/susanjacques?n=bruce&oc=&p=james.

Niel George Bruce of Carnock wife is Margaret Primrose and George bruce of Culross wife is Euphane. So you are clearly mistaken in the Parents of James Bruce as his mother is Margaret primrose and not Euphame Primrose.

Dear Philip,

I disagree with the proposition being made in the reference you have given me for the ancestry of James Bruce in Dysart (The reference follows).

https://gw.geneanet.org/susanjacques?n=bruce&oc=&am...=....

The pedigree published by Geneanet does not offer evidence which proves the relationship being claimed by Jacques Ramsbottom. It simply cites another family tree posted on the Ancestry website, possibly by the same Jacques Ramsbottom. This is not good enough!

Moreover, no mention of a son named James Bruce living in Dysart is made in the Scots Peerage account of the family of Sir George Bruce of Carnock, or in the testament dative of his wife Euphame Primrose, and I have not found any evidence whatsoever to support the claim that has been made by Jacques Ramsbottom.

The Scots Peerage III: pp. 484-85
https://archive.org/details/scotspeeragefoun03pauluoft/page/n503/mo...

I cannot find any justification for keeping James Bruce in Dysart in the family tree of Sir George Bruce of Carnock and his wife Euphame Primrose.

Sincerely.

Neil

No worries have loaded the records to his profile.
Im going to insist that you change back to how the tree was running before you came along. You have disconnected Robert Bruce of Blairhall as father of George Bruce of Carnock, and have highjacked the profile...carry on mate, we are watching everything that you are doing. Don't know how many times I have to tell you that Euphame Primrose is not according to all the records the mother of James Bruce of Dysart and you just carry on with this. All the records are stating that Margaret Primrose is the Mother of James, the birth, death all are stating this yet you are pushing forward with what seems to be a agenda. But don't let me stop you, just stop pulling my chain.

Hi Ashley, ok so I'm lacking citations?, have the citations and will load with the records in the future. Thank you

Ok got it, going to try Ashley, there is quite a lot of records giving James and Margaret as the children of George and Margaret, going to look for a good source in the citations.

Not sure how to link, going to load a record that has a source in the citation, will appreciate your take.

Ashley on Ancestry the give Margaret primrose Blacklock as the mother of James, source any good?

Before we go any further with our discussion we should perhaps agree that the subject of this particular discussion is the ancestry of James Bruce in Dysart.

Do you agree?

Dear Ashley,

The subject of this discussion is a man named James Bruce. I have noticed this name, as the father of children, in only three baptisms registered at Dysart in the period before 1600. (1) For a male child, name not known, whose baptism was registered on 4 December 1586. (2) For a female child named Elspot Bruce whose baptism was registered on 27 February 1591. (3) For a male child named William Bruce whose baptism was registered on 27 May 1594.

Philip Paul Bruce, following a pedigree published by Geneanet, believes that James Bruce was born in 1570, and that he was the son of Sir George Bruce of Carnock and Lady Margaret Euphame Primrose, but a baptismal record cannot be found for him, and he is not mentioned in the Scots Peerage account of the family, or in the testament dative and inventory of Sir George Bruce of Carnock’s wife, Euphame Primrose.

Geneanet:
https://gw.geneanet.org/susanjacques?n=bruce&amp&amp&oc...

I have looked at all three baptismal records, and although they are difficult to read it might reasonably be said that the father of each of these children was a resident of the burgh of Dysart in Fife, This is particularly clear in the baptismal record of William Bruce which opens as follows: "The xxvij day of May 1594. That William Bruce unlawful sone to [ Maisr] James Bruce In Dysart begotten in fornication wt Euffame Andersone [ baptised ] tht day ….. ."

National Records of Scotland, Dysart Baptisms, reference OPR.426/1
Image of Baptismal Record:
https://www.geni.com/documents/view?doc_id=6000000194292057825

I was following this record when I identified this man as "James Bruce in Dysart". He was probably a lawyer, and should perhaps have been designated as "Master James Bruce" (Master or Mr. being the title used by men who have graduated with the degree of Master of Arts) but I am less confident about his employment status.

In answer to your question about styles. In Scotland landowners usually add the name of their property to their surname. For example, If James Bruce was the heritable proprietor of Dysart he would have been styled "James Bruce of Dysart." If he was simply a resident of that place he would have been identified as "James Bruce in Dysart." If he was just a temporary resident, he would have been identified as "James Bruce at Dysart".

Sincerely,

Neil

Hmmm in the transcript you provided I'm not seeing what you are saying, can you share where you get your information from as I'm not seeing anything. On that I'm just using geneanet you are mistaken, go and look at the records snd there are more coming as WikiTree are running this line and they are using findmypast as there source. On Ancestry they also run James Bruce as son of George Bruce and Margaret Primrose Blacklock.
On the issue of the mother of James Bruce , Geni had Margaret primrose as the mother and I never edited that, it was done by Geni. Then you Niel come along and changed the profile to Euphane and then you keep harping on about her will and Testament not giving James as her son! which is getting rather tiresome as I've shard the Transcripts of the different George Bruce's death Inscriptions where it clearly state's that George Bruce of Carnock died 1625 and he was married to Margaret Primrose and he was buried in Carnock church yard. The second George Bruce was born in Carnock and died in Culross and buried in Culross Abbey 1612 and his wife is Euphane Primrose and the record stipulates his children and this George Bruce of Culross is not George Bruce of Carnock. So with this false genealogy that Niel is involved in he has the ordacity to say on James Bruce profile that I am running faulse genealogy! He has a Transcript of a James Bruce where he is saying this record is of James Bruce baptism and he gives the date 13-08-1595, yet when I lookedcat the baptism Transcript it is of a James Bruce baptized 3/9/1594! talk about false genealogy. So all over the place he is suggesting that my family must be disconnected snd I've been loading up the records like crazy because there is this org with his blundering accusations as stated above.
I implore that this issue gets looked into as there is blatant false genealogy going on around the Bruce ancestry, the current tree that is being run for the Clackmannan line dont even carry the Clackmannan Coat of arms in there crest! The Clackmannan crest have a moon, yet from David 7th they have the Airth lineage running which cant be correct, the Airth crest carry the star and can be seen on every profile. Clearly incorrect genealogy being run.

Why are you worried when we talk about Margaret primrose ?

Philip,

You say:

"Hmmm in the transcript you provided I'm not seeing what you are saying, can you share where you get your information from as I'm not seeing anything."

Can I ask. Which transcript are you talking about. Please let me known and I will answer your question.

On the profile of James Bruce b. 1594, will go and have a look again and will get back to you.
On the issue of you wanting to disconnect Thomas Bruce because you can't find mention of James as father ( besides wanting to disconnect my whole tree if you get a chance )
1619 James Bruce in entry for Thomas Bruce, Scotland birth and Baptism, 1564-1950 https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:xy2-ylz

https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:xy2-ylz