Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
<<Please note, I’m speaking about the Pierre Lejeune who may have married an Unknown Doucet. I’m not referring to the Pierre Lejeune some have claimed to be the father of my Pierre Lejeune and the two sisters Edmée and Catherine. This message is not to be connected in any way to the two sisters, or to the man believed by some to be their father.>>
First I would like to say that the parents, whether father or mother of the Lejeune sisters [Catherine and Edmee]are unknown as were their origins until the mtDNA results arrived for several people tested who descend from Catherine as well as some who were tested to Edmee. Those results tellus that they were European.
Secondly, mtDNA results that we now have tell us that Germain Doucet's first Unknown Spouse was European so that precludes the possibility that their Unknown Doucet daughter who married Pierre Lejeune dit Briard would have been Amerindian. The results for Germain's Unknown Spouse are Haplogroup T2 - European. [2 results in so far]
Of course, we know that Martin Doucet, *SON* of Germain and Unknown Spouse married an Amerindian by the name of Jeanne (Marie) Kagigconiac is well documented. So anyone descending from that line is of Native descent.
As regards JEANNE LEJEUNE dit BRIARD, I do not believe she has been overlooked at all. Her marriage has also been documented when she married Francois Joseph who was of known Native descent. Unfortunately, we do not know who her parents were or her origins just as we do not have the parents of Francois Joseph - that is not to say that they have not been recognized nor documented. To say that is a fallacy and it really incites people into believing they have been purposely overlooked.
I believe that what would be "reckless genealogy" would be to believe what "some have claimed", would be to be "thinking outside of the box" and the like - that is very reckless and it serves no purpose for people who want to know the truth once and for all.
As for Catherine Bugaret - we do not yet know if she was Amerindian though we believe she was from France. Presently, someone's mtDNA is being tested so that before long we will know more about Catherine's origins.
Of course, it is also well documented that Claude Petitpas, *SON* of Claude Petitpas and Catherine Bugaret married an Amerindian named Marie-Thérèse - so without doubt all who descend from this couple are of Native descent.
Finally, let me say that I believe a lot more would be accomplished by working together. Finger pointing solves nothing. Some people sound very knowledgeable but never have facts to back up their suppositions. We see that all over the Internet. Theories are just theories unless they can be proven. Thanks to science, mtDNA will now help us to resolve some of these issues long disputed - mtDNA does not lie but because we know labs can make errors we have been looking for more than one result and that has been happening. We are not naive and we seek the truth. We have thus far received 3 results to Catherine Lejeune and 2 to Edmee and the results are all the same.
Hopefully, some who descend from Jeanne Lejeune dit Briard who married Francois Joseph will be mtDNA tested and it would be one more debate put to rest.
As an aside, I would love to find more Native lineages in my family and I hold my breath every time new mtDNA results arrive. So far I still have only one: Marie Christine Aubois who married Jean Roy dit Laliberte in 1686. ;o)
For anyone who is interested in mtDNA results, some of them can be viewed on my web site at www.acadian-home.org/frames.html
I have been working to posted all of the results going back to Acadia in one place along with the lineages.
Just click on the link at the top entitled mtDNA Proven Origins
Results are posted *only* with permission of those tested and a link is provided back to the DNA group where tested.
More results will be posted after the holidays.
By the way, if you have not been privy to it, Erich Burton put together an excellent comparison and explanation of Haplogroup X - when it is Native and when it is European according to the mutations.
Research on my end has made it clear that X2a is Native and X2b is European - the deciding factor is whether or not mutation 226 exists. It is always present in X2b and never present in X2a. Presently I am putting a page together that will explain the Haplogroups in easy to understand language.
Merry Christmas Cousins! ~ Lucie
Lucie LeBlanc Consentino
Acadian Ancestral Home
www.acadian-home.org
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/lejeune/messages/791.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|