Guillaume Blanchard born 1590 and Guillaume Blanchard born 1651 are the same person?

Question

There is much confusion and controversy created by SW's [Stephen A. White, see http://stephenwhite.acadian-home.org/] insistence that two people made errors in their depositions that were given in 1767 to establish who was who after the destruction of all the records by the British. There were family trees created from these depositions and although he (SW) disagrees with what was written, the documents must be taken verbatim.

These depositions, given under oath, are legal documents and therefore must be taken for what they say. Two separate depositions say the same thing...Guillaume Blanchard and his wife Huguette Poirier came from France.  His grandson Guillaume and his wife Huguette Goguen are not the same people and and neither are his father Jean Blanchard and his wife Radegonde Lambert.

Who has the authority to change the names on legal documents? If this is really SW's position, can we believe anything he says? Isn't falsifying a legal document a criminal offence?

Comments

No but apparently there was a Jean Blanchard who came to Acadia in 1610 who signed a deposition for someone in 1612. I have ordered a book that may have that information in it but it'll be a couple of weeks from now.

I believe I was confused...it was Jean Lambert who came in 1610!

---

There is a link to the archives that hold these documents but I cant find them. https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:D%C3%A9clarations_de_Belle-%C3%8Ele-en-Mer

---

Wilson's 1984 article can be found (in French) here, starting on page 116:

https://societehistoriqueacadienne.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/1502_total.pdf

---

ummm there are only 90 pages...

---

Ninety pages, but starting on page 40, Bud. Look at the table of contents. You'll see it on page 116.

---

Okay, I used Google Translate to translate the part of the 1984 Wilson article that goes into greater detail about Wilson's case against the accuracy of the depositions. Here's a fairly decent, I think, Google translation of it:

"As for the Blanchard family, the mistake appears in the statement by Jean LeBlanc dit Derico. The declarant correctly states that his wife, Francoise Blanchard, was the daughter of René Blanchard and Anne Landry, but the genealogy of Blanchards from Francoise's grandparents contains errors.

Jean LeBlanc gives, for example as the first name of the paternal grandmother of his wife, Marie, rather than Françoise. In any case, it was at the level of the generation of the great-grandparents of his wife that Jean LeBlanc made the mistake that deceived Rameau.

Of course, Jean did not know, or could not remember, the names of the great-grandparents of his wife, Jean Blanchard and Radegonde Lambert. In the case of Radegonde, at least, it is not surprising that such an unusual name is forgotten.

Nevertheless, it seems that Jean must have had some weak memories of the names Guillaume and Huguette in connection with the descent of the Blanchards. Today, thanks to the censuses of 1678, 1686 and others, we can easily see that Guillaume Blanchard and Huguette Gougeon were the brother and sister-in-law of Françoise Blanchard's grandfather, rather than his father and mother.

It is important to note here that Huguette Gougeon's mother, Jeanne Chebrat, had married Jean Poirier for the first time, and that it would have been quite easy to confuse the family names Poirier and Gougeon because the two were descended from the same mother. Anyway, Jean LeBlanc was badly taken. [not sure what that phrase means; the original says: "Quoi qu'il en soit, Jean LeBlanc était mal pris."] He had the obligation to declare the ancestors of his wife until the first to come from France. He may have convinced himself that his wife's great-grandparents were Guillaume Blanchard and Huguette Poirier, or perhaps it was simply that he could not call on anybody who knew better. than him.

Rameau speaks of the Blanchard family in his eleventh commissary. Having studied the first censuses of Acadie he already knew Jean Blanchard and Radegonde Lambert. He admits the obvious contradiction in Jean LeBlanc's statement and the likelihood that LeBlanc confused the name of Martin Blanchard's brother with his father's name. Curiously, Rameau rejects this interpretation and makes Jean LeBlanc's error an additional genesis of the Blanchard genealogy.

Of course, Rameau did not have access to all the documentation available to us today. It is obvious that he did not know that Huguette Gougeon was the widow Poirier's daughter by her second alliance. but to excuse the fault does not make it a truth. In fact, Jean LeBlanc's statement is wrong, and he gives us no proof of the identity of Jean Blanchard's parents. There is no document to tell us who were the parents of this Acadian ancestor. However, several authors have accepted Rameau's assertion without questioning it."

---

Leblanc's statement was a little fuzzy SO THEY ASKED SOMEONE ELSE.

We all know who hired Stephen White and why, it's called political interference and it has no place here. If you're going to keep playing that card we can fix that. Quite simply the crown lost the right to occupy Acadia because of what they did to the neutral Acadians. They were neutral because they were indigenous and everyone knows it. We can knock the crown right off the throne because of tyranny and that's exactly what this is.

---

''Quoi qu'il en soit, Jean LeBlanc était mal pris."  Translation:  Whatever the case, Jean Leblanc was in a bad position/stuck.

Bud, my dear cousin, please don't apply modern legislation to things centuries old.  The reconstruction of Acadian family lines done after the deportation was done ''to the best of their knowledge''.  

I'd be interested myself in seeing actual evidence of this family's ancestors, since I descend from the tagged Guillaume's brother Martin.  There is a census transcription on there showing them and their parents.  It doesn't cover earlier generations, at least not visibly so.

---

Yes, we'd be best to leave sleeping dogs lie, too bad Mr White can't do that. I believe we had the answer all along except for the myth that Guilliaume and Louis Blanchard are one in the same. It doesn't equate to Jean  and Radegonde either which is what he is trying to assert. This whole conflict he created would just disappear if we ignore him and rely on the info we already had.

---

I'd like to know more about this. Can you email me? karalee.chr@gmail.com

Thank you so much for your time.

Kara

Answer 1

I'm adding tags to this question so it gets more visibility. Please give it at least one week before acting upon this (also consider that this is vacation time and that not all interested people may be available). Thank you.

Comments

Thank you I R that certainly helped. :)

Answer 2

Hi Bud, I can understand your frustration. I have been on vaca for past 2-3 weeks so will need time to research your question more thoroughly. What I know is this: Although no one is perfect, Stephen White is the best Acadian researcher we have so far. I don't agree that he has "changed" an official document--but he is giving his informed opinion. We can believe what he says because he documents everything he publishes, just as we strive to do. We should of course be careful to document both sides of the issue. Stephen White is approachable and will often respond to emails. Would you be able to contact him laying out your concerns?

Next, although the Declarations of Belle-isle-en-Mer are official documents, there have been errors found in the declarations. Even today, we know that people do not "remember" events accurately. My own mother who researched her family, didn't know the correct spelling of her father's name on his "official" baptism document, for example.

Lastly, the profile for Guillaume Blanchard is project protected and significant changes such as parents must be coordinated with the Acadian Project. However, you are welcome to create a == Discussion == section on the profile and enter your concerns there so they don't get lost. In addition, you can add your research to the  == Research == section.

I hope you can receive a satisfactory response from Mr. White and will post it here--it might prove to be what you are looking for.

Jacqueline Girouard

Acadian Project Leader

Comments

Wow Jacqueline, it sounds like you think we need his permission to even think for ourselves. The 3 people that were involved in making those depositions all said the same thing under oath (and probably had that information recorded in family bibles). I find it odd that roughly 250 years later when we have little else to go on, we can find excuses to disregard the information we have before us.

I know of people who have approached Mr White about this very subject and he remains steadfast in his conclusion that he knows better than the documentation, adding that there is no proof that Guillaume Blanchard and Huguette Poirier ever existed.

I have no desire to contact him or to support the controversies that he has created. But I do have a strong desire to put an end to them.

---

In fact Jacqueline, there is no proof that this Guillaume came from France, yet there's a sticker on the profile that indicates this. Also if his grandfather never existed, why is the second paragraph of this Guilliaume's biography about his grandfather?  Additionally, there was never a Guillaume or a Jean Blanchard aboard the St Jehan, there was a Louis Blanchard from La Rochelle who came by himself to plant vineyards.  

According to Lanctot and several others who have actually seen the depositions, the real story is that Guilliaume Blanchard and his wife Huguette Poirier came from France accompanied by their children Jean (age 25) and Marie with her husband Gerome Guerin and also Huguette's nephew Jean Poirier (age 20). NONE of these names are on the passenger list of the St Jehan!! Also Radegonde did not come from France with Jean according to this and "European haplotype" or not, she WAS the daughter of Jean Lambert and his native wife. Stephen White can argue that one with Dr Dennis Stanford of the Smithsonian Institute if he so desires but this European haplotype thing is also BS.

The profiles of all these people should be cleaned up to reflect the facts at hand and Stephen White's propaganda removed. After all, we have just proven that the Stephen White version is fraudulent. Until then the controversy that this man created will rage on and on.

---

I am directly descended from Guillaume and i would really like to know whats going on.

---

A 400 year old battle that was won by the Acadians 256 years ago.

Answer 3

There are multiple Guillaume Blanchards married within records with different birthdates and different marriages. give me some time today to find verifying records. there are multiple archives to check.  The thing with Acadians is because the territory was faught over so much, the Acadians not only forced out, but moved around alot. baptisms, marraiges aren't always found within Nova Scotia records. a lot are within PEI, places like Quebec may also have records either of them directly or from Acadian docs that have been copied or sent to Quebec from France and England over the decades and Centuries.

I follow some of S.White, and do use his books, but i've stated this before, on other topics here in wikitree, the s.white acadian books DO NOT contain ALL family members, they were written about ACADIANS Only. meaning IF the person in question married someone that was NOT Acadian (meaning birth in France of came from france in records) then they were NOT included within thier own Families in the early Acadian Books.  Because the books are ONLY of Acadian Ancesters.  Therefore if a person married, Native, or English or Scotch or Irish or Basque or anyone who was not an Acadian.. that person and their spouse and children are not listed.

The problem with the Belle Isle Depositions is these are Depositions of People trying to PROVE their own Heritage to Acadia and France, & these depositions include people talking about relatives they may not have even known (because they may have been 2 generations before them, and long dead from illness or diseases.  No different than ppl today how will assume that gr.gramma or gr.grampa came from scotland and turned out gr.grampa was french.

see where the misconceptions can cause conflicting evidence.  Belle isle docs were considered legal yes..but that doesn't necessarily make them correct. these ppl had reasons for making info sound as plausible as possible. this could affect their ability to recieve land grants, or even be able to go home to Acadia at some point if this is where they thought of home as.   I will see what I can pull up on the Guilliame Blanchards.  more than one of them are in my direct line ancestors, that I haven't reconnected yet in my own trees offline since loss of my 56,000 genealogical datas.   I've been working on Acadians since 1998, so know most of these names marriages and ppl pretty well.

Comments

His assessment of the meaning of "Acadians" is also pretty twisted. It was named Arcadia long before French settlers ever came here which means that even the Mi'Kmaq are Acadians. I think what he meant to say is that he excludes Native Americans and Metis. That's a pretty racist view don't you think? So the inclusion if our Guilliaume Blanchard must mean that he was not Metis right? WRONG! The man is nothing more than a propaganda machine.

---

So, SW says Métis are not Acadians? Well, he better come to Cape Breton and tell a WHOLE lot of people to take down their flags! I don’t think there is an Acadian on the island who doesn’t have a Mi’Kmaq ancestor. No Pure French here. We are all proudly mixed. It does sound a bit racist, doesn’t it?

Answer 4

Here is 1. Guillaume Blanchard to start with:

<!--[if gte mso 9]>1111<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]>MicrosoftInternetExplorer402DocumentNotSpecified7.8 磅Normal0<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]> <![endif]-->

http://archive.org/stream/HistoireDesCanadiens-franais4/canada_francais_#4page/n187/mode/2up

 

HISTOIRE DES CANADIENS-FRANCAIS

Recensement nominal de l’Acadie envoye’ eu 1671, par M. de Grandfontain et de’pose’ aux

Archives du ministere des colonies a Paris (ei-devaunt au ministere de la marine)

Port-Royal- starts with Jacob Bourgeois, chirurgien 50

 -Jean Gaudet, 96

Denis Gudet 46

Roger Kuessy, 25

Mechel de Foret, 33

Veuve Etienne Hebert, 38

Antoine Babin, 45

Olivier Daigre, 28

Antoine Hebert, tonnelier, 50

Jean Blanchard, 60: femme Radegonde Lambert” enfants: Martin, 24, Madeleine, 28,

Anne, 26, Guillaume, 21, Bernard, 18, Marie, 15; b.c., 12, br., 9, ar. V., 5.

 

*Guillaume age 21 at time of 1671 recensement gives us an approx birth of 1650, son of

Jean Blanchard and Radegonde Lambert

*Note- these profiles should be ppp protected, because internet ppl are randomly creating connections of Radegonde Lambert as connected to Chief Membertou- Radegonde Lambert line has not come back thru mtdna results as native, to date it has come back as xb2, while xb1 is connected

To native possibilities, xb2 has not been connected as of yet.  There are continual battles over Radegonde Lambert on genealogical sites trying to find anyway to make her native, thus ppp on these families and descendants maybe needed.  Optional bio subjective section may also be needed to include continual mtdna results and other info docs that may surface.

*btw please noone take what I am saying about the internet genealogies connecting Radegonde to Membertou personally as some kind of "against native ancestry".  If I find ANY Proof that substantiates Probable Native I will put it up, but I won't add to already inflated/conflated without proof ancestries.  It just doesn't help when trying to connect the real families and children to each other.

*Note again- If Jean Lamberts age is correct of 60 in 1671, then we have a man born about 1611, making Radegonde possibly born anytime from around his approx. birth year (maybe even earlier! to possibly around 16  ) 1643 would be apprx birth year of Radegondes daughter Madeleine age 28, so mom had to have been at least over age 12( so any birthyear prior to 1631 maybe viable for Radegonde.  (and please don't tell me age 12 is not possible, I've already found marraiges of men in 20s-40s marrying girls age 12, 14, 15, etc. over the years.  Different times, girls were marraige material once they reached or just b4 they reached "maturity physically". some were even married prior to maturity with stipulations to not consemate until maturity was confirmed. So is plausible & possible that Jean Blanchard arrived in his 30's and married  Radegonde while a preteen or teen and that she was most likely native, ESPecially if she was NOT found aboard an arriving ship, and no docs of birth or mrg. certs are found for her. but I will keep looking - for her infos as well as Guillaume Blanchards and Poirier and Gougeon/Gougou

Comments

  Pg 3 Between Barbe Baiols veuve de Savinien de Bourpon, 8 enfants & 2 lines down is Pierre Commeaux, tonnelier, 75

 Inbetween the above 2 we have

 Antoine Gougeon, 45; femme, Jeanne Chebrat, enfant: 1 fille , (Note- no age for this child, no name etc, this does not mean this is and Infant, just means is a child of Antoine Gougeon and Jeanne Chebrat, the use of  term-“enfant” in the archives when discussing ‘guardianship” of minors, was constant. And is also found in the rescensements for any children of a couple, including those who may have been 10 to 20 years of age.

 This in 1671 just proves there is at least one known Daughter of a Gougeon ( which I’ve seen as Gougou/ Gouguen/ and other spellings, I’ll continue searching records and add what I find in this discussion for additional Guillaumes and possible Hugette Poirier in archives I’ve seen the spelling as Poilier, Poyer, Poiyer and others.

---

Yes, our old friend Radegonde Lambert who was also disconnected from her parents because her mother was Native American and a descendant of Membertou. 

X2b and many other European haplotypes have been among the Native American population since the ice age and  Dr. Dennis Stanford, Head of the Archaeology Division of the Smithsonian Institution proved it when he found Solutrean artifacts in America that predated the younger dryas period some 13, 000 years ago. His findings were however disregarded with the argument that there is no proof that the Solutreans were capable of crossing the ocean. The artifacts which were proven to have originated in today's France, they didn't walk across the ocean by themselves! European haplotypes indeed!

X2b-T226C may have originated in Europe but is exceedingly rare on that continent today, it is however not rare in America.  Want proof...here ya go....  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY01NjND1jc&t=2456s

---

Guillaume Blanchard 1651 is also being portrayed as the first Blanchard to have come to Acadia we all know that this isn't true. We also know that a Jean Blanchard signed a deposition in 1612 in Acadia right around the time that our Jean was born...hmmmm. Someone is definitely trying to throw up a smokescreen and it isn't the descendants of our Native American ancestors!

---

Bud, I surely do hope you aren't accusing me of throwing a smokescreen.  Because my only interest is in finding the truths in genealogy connections.  I have no alterior motive at all. the side-ways slant, I assume is directed toward S.W.?  (the way I see it, SW being seen as the only Authority is just foolish, the guy although good at what he does, also makes money off the books he sells, sooo conflict of interest.  and he has stated himself that while working on the Bergeron Famille Acadians, it was determined that reliquishing the idea that they were not connected at 1 or 2 generations back to natives, allowed him to add something like an addition 7-800 names and families (something not done in the collections prior-and admitted by him- & LLC confirmed.. SW was hired ONLY TO CREATE ACADIAN Books of Actual ACADIANS)..  Not everyone is against finding the Native Connections, there are teams of ppl in the Acadian Project and in the First Peoples, and the Native American Projects workin their tales off VOLUNTARILY to help piece together these families with their correct Ancestors, Descendants, and to try to give their bios life with honor. If you think theres a smokescreen than you should help find the records to correct it, just sayin.

By the way..Guillaume Blanchard 1651 Is not Being Portrayed as the 1st at least not by Me.  He Just happens to be the FIRST 1 I was able to locate on a record, to BEGIN to help sort out the profile messes.  But hey, I can walk away, and not look for any of the records. You asked for help, I agreed with you about Belle Isle depositions, and about other grievences involving SW (and LLC as well). But I'm just trying to find the evidence of their existances. ALL of them. so again, I hope the smokescreen comment wasn't directed at me.

---

Of course it wasn't directed at you or anyone else that has commented on this thread. Although I'm quite blunt it's not meant to be offensive.

---

here's something you may find interesting, the name Gougou referenced w/Champlain

" ile de   Miscou  était  jadis  Imitée  par  un  monstre  épouvantable,  à  qui   les  sauvages  de   la  côte   avaient   donné    le  nom  de  Gougou.     Ces   grands   enfants   de   la   nature    faisaient   des  us  et  coutumes   de  ce  fils  de   l'enfer,  un   tableau    sj    effrayant,   que  Champlain  jugea  à  propos  de  noter   dans   ses Voyages, ce  que  les  Indiens  lui  en  avaient   rapporté

google basic translation-

    The island of Miscou was formerly imitated by a frightful monster, to whom the savages of the coast had given the name of Gougou. These great children of nature made the habits and customs of this son of hell, a scary picture, which Champlain thought fit to note in his Travels, what the Indians had brought him.

source-

Promenades dans le Golfe Saint-Laurent : Nouvelle-Écosse, Île du Prince-Édouard, Nouveau-Brunswick, la Baie des Chaleurs, la Gaspésie / Faucher de Saint-Maurice

electronic page 119 of 242

http://numerique.banq.qc.ca/patrimoine/details/52327/2023445?docref=5Ep7L1MpK_oQFA26WVXaxg&docsearchtext=Gougou%20sauvages

---

As far as the misrepresentation comment goes there are things on the profile of this Guillaume that belongs on his grandfathers profile including the first ancestor statement and also the false parentage statement that should also be removed. We know who this Guillaumes parents are.

Answer 5

<!--[if gte mso 9]>1111<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]>MicrosoftInternetExplorer402DocumentNotSpecified7.8 磅Normal0<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]> <![endif]-->

1701

A Port Royal

Blanchard, Guillaume, 52 years, et Goujon, Huguette, 46 ans,

Enfants:

RENE, 23 ans

ANTOINE, 22 ans

JEAN, 14 ans

ISABELLE, 12 ans

GUILLIAME, 12 ans  (hmmm Isabelle and this Guilliame = twins maybe)

Madeleine, 9 ans

PIERRE, 6 ans

CHARLES, 3 ans

 

1701

DANS LA BAIE DE COBEGUIT

BLANCHARD, MARTIN

 

1701

COLONIE DES MINES

RIVIERE ST. ANTOINE

 

BLANCHARD, RENE’ et sa femme, nouvellement maries.   

 

(this is all found on book page 438)  (these are obviously transcribed copies as they are typed)

I do have an idea of exactly where to find the originals, but they are not (search doc available yet, so finding the docs requires literally looking thru a 1000+ pages manually until these recensements are found. Doesn’t take too long usually a matter of a hour or 2. but will locate actually registers that are available, even if they only ones are secondary sources.  At least a transcribed copy of the originals maybe more valid than “changed 250+ yrs later depositions”.

Source-

Genealogie acadienne- Placide Gaudet

“BI” - “BOURG”

 Library and Archives, Canada, Public Archives, Canada, in conjuction with -Heritage/Canadiana.ca

http://heritage.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.lac_reel_c2238/625?r=0&s=3

*Note- Placide Gaudets Notes and books have been shown to have a multitude of errors, BUT at no point since I began research in 1998, have I seen anyone prove that Everything in the books in wrong. So the books do have value in finding many who may or may not be listed in SW's books or others registers & collections. Sometimes 1 name found in a book like this, maybe the only evidence to help find ones that are missing from other books, registers, etc. They are a useful tool to consider doing more research before assuming that just one "expert" is the only authority. 

<!--[if gte mso 9]>1111<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]>MicrosoftInternetExplorer402DocumentNotSpecified7.8 磅Normal0<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]> <![endif]-->

http://heritage.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.lac_reel_c2238/5?r=0&s=3

On bk pg 5 is the following Note-

Genealogies des Familles Acadiens

Par Placide Gaudet

N. B.  A remarquer que les notes ecrites a la main sent conforms a des corrections

Suggerees par le reverend pere Archange Godbout, o.f.m.

 

Translation (basic)- N. Note that handwritten notes are consistent with corrections Suggested by Reverend Father Archangel Godbout, o.f.m.

*Note- Guillaume Blanchard m. Huguette Goujon

age 52 for this Guillaume in 1701 would be birth year of about  1649.

I wish still had my crashed computer memory drive, because years ago, I came across a Thesis written in Canada for a PHD, the Thesis was about Acadians, and Native populations and the intermarraiges of them. within this Thesis the person pulled all kinds of docs and records, including things to do with Champlain, and others who were 1st to Nova Scotia NF, Labrdr, Que. etc, their Thesis included a document that they referred to as the 1st Unofficial Census of Canada. this was done in I think like late 1500's but could've been mid 1500s. I just don't remember the date I used that actually brought this Thesis up.

Anyway, on this 1st Unofficial Census there was full ACCountings of all the "Islands, "sauvage" & "esquimauz" per island with a full accounting of the families by names.  Thes names included Gougou, Hache, Galan/Galand, and others. It blew me away to see all these families, their names, and their children. BUT I can't find the Thesis, and have no Idea what year it was written or who wrote it. BUT their docs were ALLLL Sourced to Archives.  So do I think Huegette Goujon was native, yes..but can I prove it...not yet..just means I haven't found what I know exists yet. lol

Comments

Thanks for all your help Arora I have copies of most of the earlier census transcriptions although they aren't available to me at the moment. Contrary to what you may think, I'm no newbie at this but you do have 3 or 4 years on me.

---

You can search through Canadian theses through this Search link http://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/services/theses/Pages/search.aspx

If you don't know author or title then you can try a keyword search.  It might pick up the thesis you are looking for?

---

THANK YOU JOHN ATKINSON!! that is a link that I've apparently missed in bac-lac.  

Answer 6

I just found in Archives 5 pages of Death Certificate of one

Guillaume Blanchard, dec.1731 here are the links to the 5 documents, my french isn't great, so may have to get someone in here that can read these to decipher any info that may hint to or tell which Guillaume Blanchard this is.

http://data2.archives.ca/e/e056/e001399304.jpg

http://data2.archives.ca/e/e056/e001399305.jpg

http://data2.archives.ca/e/e056/e001399306.jpg

http://data2.archives.ca/e/e056/e001399307.jpg

http://data2.archives.ca/e/e056/e001399308.jpg

Comments

What's aggressive about it? We are only interested in the truth and that is not what Stephen White is offering us.

---

lol, what aggression. I just stated facts of what I have seen. I'm not using caps yelling at anyone, not calling anyone names, stating the facts of what i've witnessed on the many Acadian profiles that i've been on over the last week at least.  this is excluding all the ones I've already added sources to over the last few years, without saying a word.  It is a colaboration, but it seems to me, that the minute anyone disagrees with SW on anything sometimes some people just become automatically defensive and agressive toward anyone that doesn't agree. (lemme guess, some follow the lead of LLC? not a question..just a guess, no offense intended just a genealogical reactive reaction observation by tones presented back with the whole burning bridges comment. lol). I didn't say I was taking over all the profiles of the Guillaume Blanchards, all I've said is I offered to help Bud who is trying to correct one of these Guillaume Blanchards, to find the records that do exists and place them in here.  This way they are able to be takin to the rightful profiles by anyone, either pms or project members or project leaders.  how much more collaborative can I be.  I'm sorry but my time on wiki tree is very limited, so although I am a member of multiple projects, I usually find and either just edit and drop into profiles lacking sources, or drop info w/source links to the project leaders. Since this discussion about Guillaume Blanchard is here, it seems to me to be the right place to drop the source archive record links that I do find.

As for SW. I have the bulletin copied, in fact it is sitting in an open window on my computer right now, where he discussed changing conclusions of no native to native margs while creating the Bergeron Familles.  I can drop the whole bulletin which includes translations in here if you like, so you will see this was not meant as aggressive or as a slur against him. In fact I also stated, that SW was Hired to create books of ONLY Acadians.  Does this make him biased or anything else, nope ...he was hired. BUT it is a fact he has books, and those books can be bought about family genealogies, I didn't say anyone had to agree with me, I just see it as a conflict of interest when working with 250 year old records.  I don't think any record should be tampered with, unless the person the record is about is alive to dispute it themselves.  Besides I never did like bridges, "burning them" was never my concern and never will be...I find what i need usually without requesting much help, just as I fix things in RL without calling an electrician, plumber, or lawyer. lol. I don't swing in the direction of the masses, I follow my nose and the direction of the archive documents. its easier than trying to please ppl.

btw, typing can lead to a lot of misconceptions very easily, if one chooses to let it.  my observations of profiles was in no way meant as denigrating, or "putting down" of profiles at all. It was a simple factual observation of the continual use of 2ndary sources as the only sources on the profiles.  The wikitree Honor Code that each of us signed was to find the Primary Sources, otherwise, our sources and this site has very little difference to any other genealogical "family data" site where ppl are using 2ndary and others personal genealogies. My point had to do with finding the readily available sources within the "reliable" sources like the Archives which are very easy to use and look up the names in. No different from using Drouin, Except by going to the Archives, you can see the source and link to it. with Drouin you Can but others that don't have the funds to pay to see..thats not much different than using pay-Ancestry records.. if they can't be seen, what good are they to others looking to see the records that Verify Connections?

I can very easily go to Tanguay and fill in a lot of families over night, but Although Tanguay is a great resource to start with, just as SW is as well...Neither is showing you the record first hand.  The Archives do in most cases. 

I'm not going to defend my words further. Anyone who wants to see the Bulletin about the Acadian Books and my remarks is welcome to privately email me, and I will send them the copy that is in both french and transciptions are within the paragraphs, and signature of who wrote it and did the research is at the bottom.  I don't say things I can't back up without evidence. But because He's living, and this is not a "slur" it is facts, i will send privately to those who want to see for themselves.

ok going back to Blanchards and (other issues I was asked to help with). Bud as I find records, I'll get up with you privately.  give me a few days, I've been pretty RL busy. I'm closing my part of convo in here, anything else I'll send to you privately, so as not to be accused of anything else.  This is why I stayed out of Projects on other sites...its masses vs facts. I'm removing myself from all projects.  I don't need the status quo bridge ........whatever.

---

Why is the fact that someone was hired to conduct research make their work a conflict of interest?

I do not see SW doing any tampering with old records but analyzing them and making cases for an alternative interpretation based on other sources and analysis of evidence. That is genealogical research.

If you want to bash his work, his analysis, that's one thing-- point out where his analysis is wrong. (For example, where does SW claim that there was no death record for Guillaume Blanchard?) 

But what I see going on here are character attacks on the researcher because one doesn't like his conclusions. 

---

lol, I can pull records on all of it, this is not character assination at all. you read what SW has to say about Huguette Porier  and 250 year old records any way you want, I have the same right> to see and hear and read what he is saying in which ever manner I believe I should interpret it.  It still doesn't change the facts, that SW as a Source is still a Secondary Source...Honor Code says we are to dilegently try to find the Primary Sources.  SW is taking one of those primary sources and stating..what we are reading, is not really what was meant...excuse me, is he over 250 years old? how would he know what the persons speaking 250 years ago meant?  BTW he also emphatically said for years that Jeanne (Briart/d) dite Lejeune wasn't Native...Neither was Germain Doucet 1641, Neither was Gallant/Hache...facts change as documents are found that is genealogy, assuming something is factual without the actual records to back it up, is not..genealogy without archival records is mythology.  A conclusion is one persons perception opinion of what they deam the evidence shows..this doesn not make that conclusion fact, it is still one person's opinion.  Science is based on conclusions of evidence...one year coffee is bad for you, the next year coffee actually is known to stimulate the heart back into normal rhythm..my how facts change.  no worries Jillaine & Stephanie, I'm leaving this discussion and all the projects. My help goes to where its wanted. I know all my ancestors back to about the 1400s, so bridges burned..i lit the matches myself.

---

Arora, I'm simply asking you and Bud to focus your critique on his analysis of the sources. SW makes a *case* for why he thinks the original record is inaccurate. 

Just because a source is original doesn't make it necessarily accurate.  And SW has pointed out why he thinks this particular original record was inaccurate.

And by the way: here's what the WikiTree Honor Code says about sources:

"We cite sources. Without sources we can't objectively resolve conflicting information."

Neither the honor code nor the source help page it links to says anything about original vs secondary sources.

---

Accurate or not we're stuck with what the record actually says, not someone's opinion that it is wrong 250 years later. Isn't that what genealogy is all about...going by the records? You people act as if Stephen White is a god or something he is far from that. There are several genealogists he has thrown under the bus who are not politically motivated and their work isn't trash, it's based on facts gleaned from records they have actually seen.

---

Arora, I apologize for my own aggressive tone. You have shown here and elsewhere that you are a helpful collaborator, and I do appreciate that. I wouldn't have said anything, but there was a comment about the honor code and project profiles that aren't adequately sourced. I know that the Acadia Project has been served well by a leader who was left it and another project to run with no help for about two years. She worked on profiles almost every day. (That situation has improved somewhat in the last 9 months.) All I was trying to say to you was maybe add some sources or a template when you see a profile in need of work instead of calling someone out.

You probably already do that, and you probably didn't mean to call anyone out, but that was my interpretation of what I read. Just as I didn't mean to attack you, but that was your interpretation of what you read. And my words, however they are interpreted, are my responsibility, so I do apologize sincerely for hurting you.

Bud, apologies to you, too. I don't have a dog in the fight about Stephen White. I know he's a well-respected genealogist, and that his books are secondary sources. He's surely made mistakes. I don't own and have never used any of his books, but I would if that's what was available to me. This is a wiki, so I would hope someone would add to/improve my work.  I stand by my statement that whenever you have a better source, you should just add it, and maybe some words to explain it, to the profile.

But no matter how good the source, family members should not have been disconnected without discussion with the profile managers. You mentioned parents or children that were removed based on White. I think the solution is to contact the project, state your case, present your evidence, and ask for profile protection status after the family members are reconnected.

Again, I do apologize for non-productive, inflammatory statements and I hope we can get past this.

---

Jillian you want answers again that i never gave you before do a search for here believe what you want.

Report sector genealogy 
Bulletin Contact-Acadie , n ^o 34 Contact Acadia Bulletin, ^No. 34

Le Dictionnaire généalogique des familles acadiennes Genealogical Dictionary of Acadian families

translation says- and I quote- "

After dismissing the limitation that we have imposed elsewhere that we are not descendants of native or natives of Acadia further than the generation of their grandchildren, we were able to add more than 260 families in our book. "

next section translation says & I quote "

We believe that inclusion of these descendants of the Acadians of South River eventually prove useful for demographers who would study the full range of experience of the descendants of the Acadians in what is now Quebec"

next section and I quote ".

We have also compiled the additions and corrections to the first part of the dictionary pedigree in order to display an update on the website of the Center for Acadian Studies."

next section is a thank you to  a living person for their help with all of this so will leave it out.

next section after- translation quoted again "

 Other information that we can join the list of additions and corrections do abound. Nous en trouvons assez fréquemment. "We are quite frequently". (then more French after which is translation- quote "Among the additions that will be on the list soon, we would like to mention as an example, the following about the origin of Michel Haché Gallant said."

This part I don't agree with because I am from Alaska, and I do know Elders of the Inuit, Athabaskan, Inuipaiq, and others and they will tell you -the top of the world People have traveled the snow and ice for centuries, and there are documents in the archives of letters sent to France involving said "Esquimauz" from NF, and Labrador, and traveling, hunting down all the way toward NS and into St. Lawrence near Quebec during the 1600s and 1700s. (No I will not go find those records just to prove another point, anyone who wants to see them can go hunt them down in the Archives of Library and Archives Canada and BAnQ or within Heritage/Canadiana.- done with this proving to anyone that I can back up what I say I've seen read or learned through genealogical Serious Research of Archival Documents.)

back to next section about Michel Hache- translated quote- "

We were of course aware of the possibility of fire Patrice Gallant father that his first ancestor in Acadia, Michel Haché or Larcher, was the son of a man named Pierre Larcher and a Native American, but we did not know the source of his belief that his ancestor was indeed a Métis. (*more french) We have finally discovered what we believe was responsible for his belief.(*more french) These are some notes that Placide Gaudet has taken in 1884 by talking with descendants of the Pre-Gautreau d'en High (NB).(*more french) It is obvious that they knew that their grandmother Anne Belliveau, wife of Paul Gautrot, was the daughter of a Métis, even if they did not know the name of the latter. Gaudet lui-même m’a appris plus tard que la mère d’Anne Belliveau était Louise Haché, (* more french) Gaudet himself told me later that the mother of Anne Belliveau was Louise Haché, then we are absolutely assured that we faithfully passed this tradition on the blending of this family(*more french) Aboriginal blood in the veins of Louise Haché had to come from his father Michel, as his mother Anne Cormier had no connection with the Amerindians. (*more french) In the census of 1686, Michel Haché listed as among the domestic lord Michel Le Neuf de La Vallière to Beaubassin. (*more french) This link with La Vallière led Gallant father in the act of baptism of a boy named Michel registered on 24 April 1668 in Three Rivers, where the nine had another lordship. D’après l’acte, ce garçon est né en Acadie d’un père français et d’une mère esquimaude. According to the act, this boy was born in Acadia a French father and a mother Eskimo. (* more french), According to Father Gallant is his ancestor, whose mother had been a woman from the tribe of the Montagnais who were known to the French as "small Eskimos." Jesuit Relations (vol. XLV, p. 68) refers to a woman such as the Montagnais Mi'kmaq taken prisoner in Cape Breton before the 16 October 1659.(*more french) It may be that it or another prisoner montagnaise became the mother of the child named in Trois-Rivieres.(*more french & where I don't agree based on what I know of Inuit, Innu, Athabaskan Nations from Elders of Alaska - & the Mtdna Results of  "Finding Ann Marie participant" which actually point to these Native Peoples).We wish to thank .**** (living) for having mentioned the letter and the fact that the mountains were known to the seventeenth century as small Eskimos. (finding Ann Marie descendant mtdna results from Acadian Ancestors forward actually results show Innu/Inuit not lookin at results.. quote me again- She talks about not looking anything like the Alaska natives in her writings after results came back.. her results alone show us the Inuit/Innu/Inuipiaq presense (by many called Esquimauz) were present in the Acadian Regions)  leaves more questions than answeres form what I can see.
(* more french then Bulletin goes on with more info and more translations by someone Not S.W. who actually wrote the French version of the Bulletin.) We regret to announce that we have put the publication of the first two volumes (A to B) of the second part of the dictionary pedigree.

Jillian as for the proof of where S White says no record of Death for Guillaume Blanchard has been found.. gee off the top of my head while working on finding records for Blanchard and Multiple other profiles that I was personally asked to assist with finding actual documents to straighten out many profiles filled with false informations...I came across the S.White record, at the time it was not what i though I needed since my interest includes looking for myself to see if digging will find records rather than taking any 1 persons word that no record exists..thus I found 5 pgs to a death cert shortly about an hour later. DID I think that I would need to prove that someone said there wasn't a death record, therefore saving the few words within that other doc.. nope as i said i was interested in proof of actual docs that prove existance birth mrrg death life occupations etc.  the words exist and most likely can  be found within multiple books that include Guillaume Blanchards within the genealogical compendiums or dictionaires of SW. 

As for your little "lets pull the Honor Code and quote it"..funny since you are also pre-1700 certified and you should at least Acknowledge the Importance of Primary sources..but considering all our past confrontations on this same set of issues I'm not surprised by this action of just trying to make me look foolish using the Honor Code.. so kudo to you.. you right its not in the Honor Code but you did TEST on it for pre-1700 cert..which without that knowledge one may not get certified..Because Primary vs 2ndary does make a difference & u know it as well as I do.

btw Jillian.. I mean everything i said last night. I've already requested my removal from ALL PROJECTS thru the leaders of each.  I will help now( and this time i really do mean it.. )only thru private mssgs from personal ppl asking for help looking for actual primary sources. I won't discuss anything in G2g anymore, I could care less about badges, projects, status or if I get 1000 thumbs down and never move or even end up losing  my pilot status.. I don't care. my concern is sourcing with actual documents. So you and Stephanie want to get feathers in a ruffle over things said in a discussion involving a profile that Bud is working on fixing, and SW and his determinations and influence will or can affect this said profile and all of its Ancestry and Descendants-then come on G2g jump into said discussion and make accusations of bashing, defamation, denagrating, etc etc etc and you wanna pull the wheres the "proof cards on me".  heres my question to you....How many profiles are you a pm on that have SW, LLC, Drouin, Ancestry, as your only your sources? to the ones that do I say...Show me the proofs. 

now i've sent my requests to be removed from projects and process of removal has begun from all.  Anyone who wants my help with ACTUAL Archive Documents, can contact me in a priv. messg. my activity settings will be closed off, i will  no longer drop sources onto profiles thru editing, and i will longer leave comments with actual primary sources. i will no longer be a part of Sourcerors either...

done with the bangin head against walls.

Arora

---

Stephanie thank you for your appology, as to contacting any project about anything, as I've said, I've removed myself from them, and am done with all projects, unless privately messg'd to help with something specific.

Bud I'm done in here with this it has sent our discussion completely away from my search results discussions, so will get back to you privately with links and infos

---

The problem here is that the profile discussed is a descendant of Radegonde Lambert that's why Stephen White is intent on destroying the connections as he did with Radegonde's parents. The Solutrean Hypothesis has been been proven and I have provided a link to a video lecture given by Dr Dennis Stanford of the Smithsonian Institute on the matter above. His findings are however being suppressed because it proves that there are European haplotypes in the native American American population well before any European migrations. Yes from both sides of the continent! This means that Stephen White is also wrong about Radegonde being European. I also stand by my statement that changing a legal document for any reason is fraud. Does Stephen White own Wikkitree? Well it sure seems like it! And just look at all the spam on the profiles of the Blanchards and Lamberts, it's disgusting and an attack on our deceased ancestors that's not what Wikkitree is supposed to be about is it? By the way, they have also locked the profiles so we can't change them.

Thank you for the apology, I am still pondering whether or not I'm going to do the same thing as Arora.