ATTENTION Curators, please assist

hehe i make the perfect mistake here

Stewart =STIwart you shoukd read STEwart =E sound
STUart =stuart
as you know E prononced in french =letter I = sound E in english

Apparently Mary Queen of Scots started the whole spelling change thing while she was residing in France (c.1548-1561). Maybe she got tired of French courtiers mispronouncing her name. :-)

its not for that kind of (litle discution) i was thinking
profile renam to stuart ?....as i provide info i wait for other to resolve this

IMHO I would leave it as StEwart before Mary Q of S, and only change it to StUart after her.

Since she preferred the U spelling, she can have it also.

Martin RhNegativ

Before Mary, Queen of Scots, the Stewart Kings of the Scots are known as "Stewart" by The Scots Peerage, which is one of the most important sources for Scottish nobility.

You may read the book online here

https://archive.org/stream/scotspeeragefoun01pauluoft#page/8/mode/2up

We go in Geni as Maven described.

Jim Wile

A hot mess. I've done what I could with hacksaw. Needs genealogy and MPs now.

Hi Martin Polreich

Josef Rajchl has been disconnected from his descendant.

Mike Stangel, I applaud your forthrightness but am surprised that no apology was included about the errors that were made. I consider a program that imitates Geni users a breach of trust. Although you ask for pm for future comments, this one deserves to be made publically before I let it drop. Jim

Thanks for your work, Erica Howton. Untangling that issue without jeopardizing the integrity of others work must have been very time consuming. I appreciate your time!! Jim

Erica Howton Thank you very much.

Could someone please unlink Lydia Donell Harrison from Jeremiah Harrison and Catherine Harrison, (Dir. Ancestor) (Father UNKN Took Last Name of Mother's Hus.)

Their daughter Lydia was married to Rueben Harrison, not Robert Gragg.

Thanks!

Private done.

Thanks Eldon Lester Clark :-)

mylady Howton,Helms

http://www.royal.gov.uk/historyofthemonarchy/scottish%20monarchs%28...

Undeterred, the Scots in 1548 betrothed Mary to the French King Henri II's heir, the Dauphin Francis, and sent her to be brought up at the French Court. It is said that the spelling of the royal family name of Stewart changed to Stuart at that time, to suit French conventional spelling.

http://tudorhistory.org/people/maryQOS/

but its for mary that stuart have been change it do not explain the line of stuart follow after mary renaming

i add the note into the bio
et voila

Hi,
Can I ask for some help in a wrong merge by marriage?

There was a first cousin of my mother, that was merged into another tree trough smart matches. Her profile was public because she died very young: Joaquina Cardoso dos Santos

I requested administration on her profile, which was given, but I still couldn't remove the bad relationship (marriage with a person 100 years older) because of the warning of splitting trees.

I'm not quite sure what happened, but if you need I have the records of her mother who was born in 1908, to verify she coulnd't be married to someone born in 1837.

Thank you for your time,
Carla Lima

Martin - if you are after different branches of the Stuart / Stewarts besides the Royal line, you'll have to look at the individual family. There is not going to be one answer on surname spelling evolution and why.

if they where not family into quebec i wont shearch it but it exist a line of stuart here and i wish to understand the nobility patern

martin

Carla,

If the tree needs to be split, it needs to be split. Just do it in the way which leaves least damage on both sides.

So create another Joaquina married to the 100-year old necrophiliac (presumably he was married to someone of the same name). If he had children by the other ('new") Joaquina, transfer them to her. Wait until the blue match comes up, which they seem very slow to do nowadays. Remove match (so no-one mismerges again). Open the profile of your mother's first cousin. Press "edit profile". Go to "relationships". There will be a box which allows you to remove the necrophiliac. You will still get a red warning that you are going to split the tree. Ignore it. The sky will not fall in. Press "save and close". Breathe a sigh of relief.

Mark

Martin,

Although the pronunciation differences between modern French and modern English words derived from French generally follow recognisable patterns, you cannot assume that the modern English pronunciation is very old. In the seventeenth century, for example, "discussion" {pronounced now "discushon"] in English would have been pronounced "discuss-E-on"]. Plus, in English, you have the great vowel-shift in the fifteenth century, so that a modern spelling of the Preface to Chaucer's Merchant''s Tale will start:

"Weeping and wailing, care and other sorrow
I know enough, on even and the morrow"

when how it was pronounced then was

"Wepping and whiling, car and oother sorwee
Ee k[pronounced]now {rhyming with cow] eenoch, on aven and thee morwee".

It makes some of the changes in family names a bit difficult. Sometines they keep spelling, while changing pronunciation. Sometimes they go the other way. Sometimes they just decide to change to distinguish themselves. I would guess that the shift to "Stuart" was the third. Every nobleman had a steward or stewart, so it was a common family name. Mary decided to distinguish herself from the rest by changing the spelling.

Mark

mr Dickinson, in french we dont use w sound mutch

thank you ,you have help me to understand a little more
its not easy somtimes to understand old thing in modern time

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/scotlandshistory/medievallife/s...

http://www.robertsewell.ca/stewart.html

i work on sewell stuart family in quebec city for a time those are dificult line
martin

We have Vandalism trouble on Geni. Please check out this Discussion: http://www.geni.com/discussions/145201

Naomi 'Amy' Davis? is a FAKE. She doesn't exist. She NEVER existed. She is made-up out of whole cloth, delusions, misunderstandings, misrepresentations, and pigheaded arrogant willful ignorance of the worst sort. The kind that shoves fingers in ears and goes "Lalalala I can't hear you" when people who know what they are talking about try to offer corrections.

She is a forced fusion of two completely different women:
1) Anne Charlton (possibly born a Barlowe, married Anthony Huffe, married Anthony West, MARRIED - was NOT the "daughter" of - Capt. Stephen Charlton; daughter Katherine Barlow married (second husband) a Charles Scarburgh who was some kind of cousin to Col. Edmund Scarburgh, Jr.; son Lt. Col. John West, of Accomack County married the Col's daughter Matilda Scarburgh.

2) Mary Scarburgh, ONLY known wife of Col. Edmund Scarburgh (see above); her daughter Matilda married Anne's son John.

Al of this is *heavily, extensively* documented, and I tried to tell him so. I tried to point out where he had gone wrong - specifically, misreading a MAternal grandfather as a PAternal one (and vice versa). But he kept blathering on about "Oh, she was really Mary Anne Charlton yada yada yada" and spinning fiction after fiction based on the flimsiest and shallowest of superficial half-knowledge.

That is NOT how genealogy should be done.

(No Name)

One of the Geni Curators, Terry Jackson, has recently updated and merged profiles for Todd Allen Bussert and several others in our family tree. I see now that there are several managers listed. Our manager, Dillon Bussert, is doing a wonderful job. I see no need for a curator to try to enlarge our tree. There are a number of us in our tree who do not want tree merges which would connect our tree to others that we do not know. If we want to add people, we can easily contact Dillon to add people. I am very happy getting messages about my tree birthdays and anniversaries without including connections to another tree. I am very concerned about privacy.

How do we go about removing any and all tree merges?
Thank you,
Priscilla Fanning

Read this: https://www.geni.com/worldfamilytree/learn-more

Priscilla: The activity you saw from Terry Jackson is part of the large effort that Geni is encouraging to connect "old fragments" into the World Family Tree. It was *not* any attempt to intrude on your family privacy, but simply an part of the on-going effort to eliminate duplicate profiles.

In particular, the profile for (No Name) was also added by a Jason Cain back in 2007. It is Jason's "fragment" that was clearly a duplicate, and it was on a list that Geni has provided to the curators of possible duplicates. Terry just happened to work on that particular one, determined that it was indeed contained duplicates, and merged it.

There was a bit of 'cleanup' in merging parts of that "fragment" which I just took care of.

If there are any resulting inaccuracies that Dillon cannot take care of, please let us know (either here or in a Private Message, as you prefer, for the sake of privacy about details of living persons).

We do thank you for your families connections and contributions to the Geni World Tree ... a shared resource.

@Todd Allen Bussert

Thank you for your quick replies. I guess what you at Geni need to know is that, speaking for myself at least, I am not interested in being a part of the World Family Tree. We are simply interested in letting our family know who others are in our family and keeping in touch with each other. Is that no longer possible at Geni??

If there are duplicates of people on Geni, so be it. I have several family trees in my computer. All of them include me and my children and grandchildren. Not a problem. My 3xgreatgrandfather on one side of the family does not need to be connected to my 4xgreatgrandfather on another side of the family.

I checked just now on Todd's information. Can the mention of Jason Cain be removed? To me that means that there was a merge which was not at all necessary for our tree. That would also be the same request for the other merged profiles which were done at that time.

Thank you,
Priscilla Fanning

Jason Cain is actually more closely related than you or Dillon, so there is no reason to remove him - especially since Jason added that profile to Geni earlier.

Please keep in mind that Geni is a 'shared' world family tree; that includes with nearby relatives.

Sure, you can keep multiple copies on your computer, or on other places on the Internet (such as MyHeritage, where you can *solely* manage just those profiles you are interested in). That's not Geni, though.

If your concern is about getting notifications of 'distant' relatives, you can manage that by reducing the 'scope' of your "Family Group" setting ... see what they are at this link: https://www.geni.com/account_settings/family/

Just as a reminder, you can also 'manage' the "scope" of what you view in Tree View with the "Preferences" tab at the bottom of the Tree View (such as viewing only direct ancestors, limiting the number of generations shows, and a host of other options).

Geni had said those with Separate Trees would not be merged into the World Tree unless someone on the Separate Tree agreed - and I think Priscilla is asking - is that no longer the case?

Apparently, per Mike's comment on Previous Page, such merges are now being made, and Mike says the response to the merges has been "overwhelmingly positive" - but he did not say - what will happen if merges are made on the Assumption that folks would like to connected, but it turns out for that Separate Tree the folks do not want to be connected.

Shouldn't they be returned to being a separate Tree?
And - wouldn't it be Curators who would do this? I would assume so. And if so, then this would be the appropriate place for Priscilla to post her request to be returned to a separate Tree.

Dan Cornett states "Jason Cain is actually more closely related than you or Dillon, so there is no reason to remove him - especially since Jason added that profile to Geni earlier." - I do not understand why Dan makes that statement, as if Jason Cain is somehow wanting this merge. -- BUT "Jason Cain" did not request the merge -- rather "it was on a list that Geni has provided to the curators of possible duplicates".