OK, we've been over this before, but I will summarize a few points already made:
Bud quotes international law to say everybody here before 1763 is qualifiable as indigenous. Including French immigrants prior to that date. Mixing apples and oranges here. What international law may or may not say is rather irrelevant to genealogy, where we are looking at blood-lines, ie who was ancestor to whom etc. So if a person's ancestors are from France, then it is a French blood-line. If they are Iroquois, or Ojibwai, or Cree, or MicMac, or whatever other lineage avers, then they are classified with the general appellation ''Native'' or ''Aboriginal''. Same holds true in Australia for that matter, who also have people termed ''Aboriginals''. And for that matter, how old is this ''international law''? May seem a quibble to ask that, but laws are made by men, and change over time.
So, case in point that started this whole discussion in the first place, the couple Noël Langlois and his wife Françoise Grenier/Garnier (tagged in question):
In ''Catalogue des immigrants 1632-1662'': pg 31 and 38; Marcel Trudel, Éd Hurtubise HMH 1983 ISBN 2-89045-579-3 we find the following data (my translation):
1- 1634, ships arrived end of May beginning of June, 4 ships, a smaller boat, and an English ship captured by the fleet along the way. There are about 100 immigrants, of which only 42 are identified.
2- Noël Langlois and Françoise Garnier are both tagged as having uncertain date of arrival. They marry on 25 July 1634 in Québec.
Gervais Carpin in his book ''Le réseau du Canada: Étude du mode migratoire de la France vers la Nouvelle-France (1628-1662), Éd: Septentrion - 2001 - ISBN 2-89448-197-7 does not list name of passengers of ships except those from Perche, of which he made a particular study. He does state however that there were 12 ships sent to New France that year of 1634, of which only 9 are identified, 5 going to Acadie and Cap-Breton, 4 to the St-Lawrence valley, so there are 3 unidentified.
As far as the statement made by Bud that
--''France kept records well before it's people migrated here. The lack of such a document is really indicative that she was not from France.''
Huh? Well, you can ask Isabelle about the Paris archives, some of which went up in smoke, so trying to track people there is a nightmare. And considering how often there has been war ravaging the country over the centuries, it's rather a miracle that so many records do survive to now. But if you try and find church records before the 1600s or so, they become scarcer and scarcer, and marriages mostly don't name parents, so things come to a dead stop unless one can find other documentation.
And since the Notre-Dame records burned in 1640, and were reconstructed from memory by the clergy at the time, the marriage of Noël and Françoise does not list parent names (nor do any other reconstructions in the batch). So we can't even look for records of parents in France in the first place, since we don't know who they were. The conclusion that ''the lack of such a document is clearly indicative that she was not from France'' is the biggest jump to conclusions I have seen in a long time.
Would be nice to find some women among our Wikitreers who descended from Françoise on a strictly matrilineal line, to possibly get MtDNA done. That would help put this to rest one way or another hopefully.
