Talk:Madame Montour

Article Improvements

I have been watching this article for awhile and have a couple of comments. I think the flow of the article would be better served if some of the sub headings were rethought. Example: First marriage/second marriage sections seem to be arbitrary; there are no certain records of any formal marriages available but there are recorded comments regarding a number of "marriages of custom". I might add an edit as follows " It is also recorded that from late 1706 for a period, she was the companion of Étienne de Veniard, Sieur de Bourgmont and may have had one child in this relationship." but, where to add it? Secondly, I think that the reference section needs to be cleaned up and placed in the more editable situation in its own section rather than intersperced in the text. Having said all this; it is a good article on its way to becoming better. Cheers! --Stormbay 00:09, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks - I very much agree this is a work in progress (not there has been much work or progress on it lately ;-) ). I think one of the problems is that most sources disagree about exactly what happened in her life. Her parentage, her husbands, the name of her village, even the number and names of her children are all uncertain. Did she have three children or four or five? Was French Margaret her daughter or her niece? Is Montoursville named for her or her son Andrew?

  The article is currently organized semi-chronologically, but there are other ways it could be organized. Maybe Intro, Childhood and Early Life, Career (her services as a translator seem well documented and pretty much agreed on), Family (the latter could include her mates and offspring), and Legacy. Maybe give the best attested or most plausible thing first in each section, then the alternatives (all cited of course). How does this sound? Ruhrfisch 00:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

  • I will do some more digging now that I know that there is a feeling that improvement can be made. I do a lot of editing on material relating to the Dictionary of Canadian Biography and came to this article just to standardize and verify that reference...then I became interested. I will be in touch if I have a good idea..(rare but it could happen :-) Thanks for the quick feedback! --Stormbay 02:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Please make any improvements that are needed. The arrangement is chronological because the sources were chronological as well. I just wish that there was more agreement on what happened in her life. This lack of information is one of the sad results our history. Dincher 04:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 11:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Erronous Title on a page - editing do not allow to correct

• I copied this here from Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:12, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Page: Elizabeth Catherine Montour

Should be: Elisabeth Couc aka Madame Montour

I did some editing to fix errors and omissions in genealogical and familial information about this person and her family. This family is very well known in New France and Quebec history. Some of the corrections come the Biographical Dictionnary of Canada, while others come from official genealogical publications and ressources (records).

BUT, I cannot correct the title, which gives he name incorrectly, because who ever started it was not working with primary sources and probably did not had access to official records here in Quebec.

I there is someone with the necessary access to do the appropriate correction.

P.S.: Elisabeth (is French) and Elizabeth (is English), that person was born in the French colonies and baptised in a French catholic church. And though her baptism has not been found yet, her confirmation was found, as well as most of her siblings baptisms, her first marriage and baptism of at least 2 of her oldest children, all in French catholic churches. The fact that American historians changed her name in various old publications should not matter. But if it is possible to use the English spelling as an alternative for the search engine, that would probably be a good idea. She is also known as Isabelle Couc, Isabelle and Elisabeth being interchangeable in French.

Would probably be a good idea to make a French version for this page, but I am not familiar enough your website and the various functions to do it for the moment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petitefleur qc (talk • contribs) 04:55, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

The title of the page should be the name that the subject is most well known by. The sources cited on the page suggest that the title in use is the most widespread, as does the google hits, which, while not absolute as a determining factor, are several times more numerous under the first name than the second. Redirects can be made for the others. As for making a french version of he page, you can do that at fr.wikipedia.org. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 05:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I am copying this to the article's talk page. I note that the online English-language version of the Dictionary of Canadian Biography entry spells her name "Elizabeth" and says as its second sentence The given name of this woman is not definitely known. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Review

Two & a half years ago, Dincher asked me to take a look at this article. Better late than never! I hope there are still some people watching this.

The article has some problems, due to the use of some unreliable sources, from both the web and old books. I know the contributors were having trouble finding sources at the time. Google Books has greatly expanded in the last couple of years, of course, which has enabled me to at least glimpse some modern scholarly sources. That brief review leads me to the following observations:

1. The article has the wrong name. Madame Montour was not named Elizabeth Catherine Montour. Her actual name appears to have been Elizabeth (aka Isabelle) Montour. The current name probably results from the conflation of Elizabeth Montour with Catherine Montour, a relative.
2. The proper name for this page is "Madame Montour", since that's the name she was known by, both by historians and her Anglophone contemporaries, and because of the uncertainty of her actual identity.
3. We cannot be sure who Madame Montour really was. Historian William Hunter put to rest many old legends when he concluded that she was probably Elizabeth Couc, born in 1667. More recently, however, historian Jon Parmenter has argued that "Madame Montour" was certainly not the Elizabeth Couc born in 1667, but was instead her daughter or niece. This explains why we have two possible birthdates nearly two decades apart: these are dates for two different women.
4. Madame Montour was never married to Roland Montour. He was one of her descendants.
5. Beware of using the term "translator" to mean "interpreter". Apparently, a translator works with the written word, whereas an interpreter does it orally. I make the same mistake sometimes.

I'll be happy to make some revisions and add some notes & sources to the article, once it's moved to "Madame Montour". Cheers! —Kevin Myers 05:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks so much for the review! We will move it to Madame Montour (currently a redirect here). If you get a chance, Big Runaway could use a review too! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:42, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks, I made the move, will address the other issues, eventually and thanks for the review! --Dincher (talk) 21:48, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Possible family tree chart

Simplified Montour family tree

Not all marriages and children are shown. The names in green are possibly Madame Montour.

Pierre Couc dit Lafleur (1627–1690)

Marie Miteçamegçkçe (1631–1699)

Madeleine

Louis Couc Montour (c. 1659–1709)

Elizabeth Couc (b. 1667)

Marguerite Couc (b. 1664)

Jean Baptiste Couc (b. 1673)

Daughter (b. c. 1685)

Andrew Montour

"French Margaret"

"Queen Esther"

Michael Montour

John Montour

Nicholas Montour

"Queen Catharine"

This is preliminary. I have a couple of sources to consult before this can be added to any articles. But please comment if it doesn't look right or doesn't make sense. The chart is supposed to convey something potentially confusing: that there are two candidates for "Madame Montour", and thus two candidates for Andrew Montour's mother, as well as three possible candidates for the mother of French Margaret. Make sense? If not, maybe the article text, when updated soon, will help. Another approach would be to have two (or three) different trees, one for each interpretation. Comments? —Kevin Myers 07:43, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all of your work on this so far - I can follow the chart as it is. My concern is that someone less familiar with Madam Montour and her convoluted family tree might have trouble following it, but I guess that also depends on the caption / explanatory text provided. Should I ask some other users who are unfamiliar with the topic to look at this and weigh in? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:08, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but let's wait until after I update the article text this weekend. I think my next update will better clarify things for brand new readers. —Kevin Myers 14:00, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good - I was also wondering if Catharine Montour should also be listed as Queen Catharine? Not sure if Quenn Esther should be included too (probably a sister of (Queen) Catharine). Thanks again, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:22, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I added the "Queens". I think the modern consensus is that Esther was not a sister of Catharine. Back in 1961, Paul Wallace said that it was "doubtful" that Esther was French Margaret's daughter. In her 1996 genealogy, Barbara J. Sivertsen said that Esther was only a Montour by marriage, and not related to Catharine and her kin. So it complicates things a bit to get her on the tree, but it's probably a good idea, since people will want to know how she fits in. —Kevin Myers 16:29, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

You've made some sense out of some pretty confusing family history. Very good work. Dincher (talk) 20:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I've enjoyed working on this, and was surprised to find a smattering of modern scholarly articles about her and Andrew, thanks to a focus on "cultural brokers" or "cultural intermediaries" by certain academic historians in the 1990s. I was hoping that some historian might have also turned his or her gaze upon French Margaret or Catharine Montour, but I haven't found anything of significance yet. —Kevin Myers 16:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

This is really looking great. Thanks for all of your hard work on it, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:36, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Madame Montour. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060921133421/http://www.srbc.net/docs/IndianNamesDataChart.PDF to http://www.srbc.net/docs/IndianNamesDataChart.PDF

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:33, 29 May 2017 (UTC)