Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
The New Schenectady Massacre Fable: No Substance
Rae: Thank you for sharing a great deal of useful information about the Mercereau, Latourrette and related families. There are some very important corrections to your information that I would like to suggest, so that some of the major errors made by various genealogists in the past can be corrected. It seems to me that it is finally time to put some of these tales, without foundation, to rest.
However, first, let me comment on the story in your information that, rather than Marie Mercereau and Jean Latourrette being at the Schenectady Massacre on the night of February 8, 1690, it was her older sister Elizabeth Mercereau, her husband Pierre Masse and their children. The story is essentially the same as has been cited, as noted in my response of March 21, 2006, in various publications before with the focus on Marie, the younger sister, and Jean Latourrette. The one exception is the entry about a son of Elizabeth and Pierre, named Elie, being killed in the massacre. The entry reads as follows:
Elie: b before 1/25/1682, d 2/8/1690, Schenectady Massacre, NY Age 18
I have looked again at the lists of victims, both killed and captured, at the massacre, and do not find the names of Mercereau, Latourrette or Masse. Moreover, these names do not appear on the several lists of people receiving supplies as refugees from the massacre. See, for example, “The Story of the Schenectady Massacre,” January 11, 1940, Albany, NY. Also, I noted in my original posting, dated November 4, 2005, that I had this story researched by the archivist at Schenectady who found it had no substance. There is no evidence of these names or of a woman who was scalped and lived.
The only documentation given in the version of the story you shared with me is the alleged death of Elie, the son of Elizabeth and Pierre Peiret at the massacre. However, this does not support the story they were at Schenectady because Elie Masse is alive and a signatory witness to the marriage of Daniel Mercereau and Suzanne Marie Doucinet three years later in August of 1693. Both Elie and his father Pierre sign as witness to the marriage celebrated by Pastor Peiret in the French Church in New York. (See the Church “Registers,” p. 31)
So again, there is only a tale without documentation. We need to label it as such or, at least, note great skepticism about the tale as George E. Sawyer does in his genealogy of the Mercereau family in
file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/User/My%20Documents/MERCEREAU%20family%20information.htm
Striking Inconsistencies in the Documentation
I know your inherited this documentation, but I am always amazed at the gross inconsistencies found in many genealogical charts. It appears these genealogists frequently did not check their entries for consistency and historical context.
In the document labeled “Jean 2< Joshue” the following is noted: Elizabeth b 1660 and married 4/29/1681 to Pierre Masse. Then it notes “Elie b before 1/25/1682 and d 2/8/1690 Schenectady Massacre NY. Age 18”
The person making this entry never thought that if the age is 18, it would mean that Elizabeth was about 11 or 12 at the time of birth and that he was conceived long before the marriage in 1681. Most family genealogies have Elie’s birth on 1/25/1682 which is just about 9 months after her marriage with Pierre Masse. See Sawyer, noted above.
Under the document with the heading “Joshua b 1608” (etc), it is alleged that both Elie and the father Pierre are killed at the Feb 8, 1690 massacre. Yet both Pierre’s and Elie’s signatures are recorded in the French Church “Registers” in 1693 (Pierre four times on pp. 29, 30 and 31 and Elie once on p. 31) and Pierre is still having children with Elizabeth after this date.
Turning to two other tales
that have been perpetrated on the ancestors of Jean Latourrette, I note you need to correct the location of Osse-en-Aspe, which is the current name for Osse, Bearn. We need to do this to stop the senseless search for a non-existent Latourrette castle in other villages across France with similar names. What you cite as the location is a village named Osses, which people have searched for the castle -- one even claiming to have found it!! The reason why the modern French postal service uses Osse-en-Aspe is to distinguish it from several villages with similar names. See my posting dated September 22, 2005:
http://genforum.genealogy.com/latourette/messages/287.html
Also, you note that Mr. Frederic Pauzat appears to have confirmed this location, but all he was confirming is the current name of the village of Osse in Bearn is Osse-en-Aspe. See his posting confirming my description of the location of Osse, Bearn (now Osse-en-Aspe):
http://genforum.genealogy.com/latourette/messages/297.html ,
dated November 3, 2005.
Also, we need to address the fable of Jean Latourrette’s marriage in France, which is related to another, completely undocumented fable of a count. See my posting about the only marriage in NYC on July 13, 1693:
http://genforum.genealogy.com/latourette/messages/288.html
Here is a case where there was genealogical fraud by someone who doctored the original marriage record (found on pages 29-30 of the church “Registers”) in the magazine “Huguenot” (a publication of a few years in the early 1930’s) to make it look like a confirming marriage. The same person looked at a map of France and found Osses and assumed it was Osse or now Osse-en-Bearn, misleading generations of American ancestors of Jean Latourrette.
Finally, the fraud about the marriage continues, as I still find the birth of Marie, the daughter of Jean Latourrette and Marie Mercereau, sometimes listed as September 23, 1694 rather than September 23, 1693 with a date of baptism of December 6, 1693 (If anyone would consult the “Registers” of the NY French Church they would find the date is 1693 – see page 33)
Eventually, I plan to write a full expose on the count fable, suggesting who perpetrated it and why. Unfortunately, people continue to repeat the fable, twisting facts to fit the tale rather than abandoning what cannot be documented.
Thanks for sharing this information. Much of it is very useful.
John
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:No followups yet |
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/latourette/messages/312.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|