Is she a "Fille du Roi"?

Question

Françoise Siméon is claimed "Fille du Roi" on some lists and not mentioned on others. My own evaluation is that she is not but I dont know how to determine the truth; Danielle Liard suggested that I search opinions..

On her profile, under «Research notes», I have listed the sources consulted.

How should she be considered?

Answer 1

She may be recorded as Simon on here.  

https://www.prdh-igd.com/en/les-filles-du-roi

Simeon here.  https://www.francogene.com/gfan/gfan/998/fmr.htm

Simeon here, they all have her marrying the same person.

http://www.leveillee.net/ancestry/fillesduroi4.htm

Archives.

https://archivescanada.accesstomemory.ca/contrat-de-mariage-fait-sous-seing-prive-entre-jean-baptiste-dufault-fils-de-gilles-dufault-et-de-francoise-simon-simeon-et-angelique-emond-fille-de-pierre-emond-et-de-marie-agnes-grondin-ledit-contrat-de-mariage-est-depose-en-letude-d

Good luck

Comments

All those have been seen - under Siméon - Simon - Simionne.

The marriage contract reference is pertaining to her son.

---

Gaston;

What do you want for proof, the one link explains why a person maybe on one list and not on another.  

The marriage of Francoise Simeon  on the list of Fille du Roi is her wedding.  

I wouldn't give up so easily, saying oh it has all been looked at, nothing has everything looked at.

---

Lynn, the Francogène link you have is for the Filles à marier, not Filles du Roy.  

---

Thank you for bringing that to my attention.  

It is difficult as there was no real list per sae, just gleanings from marriages or mentions here and there that people pulled together.  She is sometimes listed as a girl to marry and sometimes as a Filles du Roi, here is another one that lists her https://www.openarch.nl/srt:EFA0FC33-FFF4-4AB7-BE64-1F6B5C28A8D7/en.

As you mention in your comments I would include her because of her date of arrival within the time of the Filles du Roi arriving and being a girl to marry.

---

hmm, that page you link is going to a Dutch site, nothing to do with her or her husbands.

---

Sorry was working on something else, there are all kinds of lists and it depends on what definition one uses.  Here is another list.  https://www.tfcg.ca/filles-du-roi

---

interesting, they use the PRDH list.  Which has a wrong date for the first marriage, https://www.prdh-igd.com/fr/les-filles-du-roi (sigh)

---

It is quite a mix up, some lists consider almost any woman who arrived to be a filles du roi during the dates, some only consider them such if they married soldiers, and some Filles du roi are suspected not to have married or to have married outside the dates given for their arrival.  

I wonder if there is a list in France of women who were sponsered, showing money paid for passage?

---

The money paid for passage would have been ''so much a head'' without a list of actual passengers.  Few records exist that list passengers leaving, most French Admiralty records only list captain, crew, ship surgeon, cargo, and when the captains return they report on the voyage, some list who died at sea, not all.  The arrivals here might have been recorded by the Admiralty for New france, but those records are lost.

Some who consider only the women who married soldiers?  First time I hear of that one.  When ships arrived, there was an influx of men to the city to find wives, lol.  Some girls got sent to Montréal or Trois-Rivières and some to other locations, but there are more marriages which are done in or near Québec city.  Proximity served those men well.  

It is known that some Filles du Roi did not marry, there's at least one who died before being able to marry, found frozen to death.  There are one or two that I am aware of who basically took a look at the situation and went back to France on the next ship.

Answer 2

I've just been looking at Landry, wo does include her.  He puts her arrival date as either 1673 or 1674. If it was 1674, she wouldn't be one, since they stopped arriving in 1673.  But we have few records on who arrived when, French admiralty records usually have crew lists but not passenger lists in this era.  If the records even still exist.

Landry has a table in his 2013 edition that is a calendar of arrivals by numbers, comparing different authors. (pg 10)

For 1673, Invanhoë Caron has 60 arriving, as do Gérald Malchelosse and Gustave Lanctot, Paul-André Leclerc showing 65.  Benjamin Sulte (cited by Malchelosse) shows 48, Archange Godbout (cited by Silvio Dumas) shows 48, Silvio Dumas shows 50, and Yves Landry in his 1992 edition showed 51, and in his 2013 edition 53.

The biggest problem with her and other women who married or settled in Sorel area is that Sorel records for the period are missing in very large part, either due to Iroquois attacks, fires, missionnaries writing things down on looseleaf pages that got lost, etc etc etc.  And many of them don't have marriage contracts either, whether because there was no notary there or other reasons is not known.

PRDH's dates are always based on births when no marriage record or contract is found, and should be read as ''before x date''.  Their list is obviously in error in any case, mixing up with the second husband.

I would personally err on the side of caution and include her, since the evidence one way or the other is inconclusive.  One piece of circumstancial evidence is that the first child known to her, Pierre Coignac, has for godmother Catherine Luco (Lucos), wife of Marin Moreau dit Laporte, Catherine is a fille du roy from 1671 (still in need of profile).  From what I have seen, many FdR created connections between each other.