Talk:Charlotte de Sauve

Did you see there's a color version of the picture in the commons? - PKM (talk)

Thank you, PKM, I've changed it. The colour version looks much better. Thanks again.--jeanne (talk) 07:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome! - PKM (talk) 03:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

The English Wikipedia article on Charlotte's first husband is entitled Simon Fizes, baron de Sauves, however French Wikipedia writes his name as Simon de Fizes, Barone de Sauve. After doing a Google search, Simon de Fizes, Baron de Sauve kept coming up. In this article, I have pipelinked the name Simon de Fizes, Baron de Sauve.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 12:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I have seen in Google searches that Charlotte bore Henry of Navarre an illegitimate daughter by the name of Jeanne Huguette de Beaune de Semblançay sometime after 1572. I find it odd that the child would bear her mother's maiden name and not the surname of Charlotte's husband. Do any editors have more information on this? I hesitate to add it to the article unless it can be reliably sourced.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 19:09, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Could there be a mistake in the year of the birth of Jeanne Huguette? If born after the death of Charlotte's first husband (1577) & before her marriage to La Trémoille (1584), it may explain her being given her mother's maiden name.

Jeanne Huguette de Beaune Semblancay married a certain Guillaume de La Vernée.

--Frania W. (talk) 14:00, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

No, they all say 1572 and give Henry of Navarre as her father. I'm sceptical about it myself as none of the other Wikipedia articles (French, Italian, German) mention this daughter. It's possible that Jeanne was the daughter of a distant cousin, and genealogists are confusing her with being Charlotte's child.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:56, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I really would hold including Jeanne Huguette de Beaune de Semblançay as an illegitimate daughter of Henri IV until we have solid proof. François Bayrou in his book Henri IV, le roi libre mentions Charlotte's involvement with Henri de Navarre and François d'Alençon (his brother-in-law) at the same time, while Henri IV had to stay at the court of Catherine de Médicis after the Saint Barthélémy massacre. So far, I have found no mention of a child being born to Charlotte as the result of her affair with both gentlemen.

--Frania W. (talk) 18:00, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Neither have I; therefore, I shall not even mention her in the article. It's unlikely she was the child of Charlotte and Henri, but rather a distant cousin of the former. Had a child been born of their affair, historians would have mentioned it already, as it surely would have been documented!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Back to your original question, if Jeanne Huguette was Charlotte's daughter, why was she a "de Beaune de Semblançay". Je ne comprends pas.

For what it's worth: [1]

--Frania W. (talk) 20:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

The family was quite extensive. I would have to say Jeanne was most likely a cousin, not a daughter of Charlotte. It would have been noted had she fallen pregnant in 1572, and Marguerite (Henri's consort) would have surely commented on it in her memoirs.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:17, 11 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

In a January 1576 letter addressed À mon cousin monsieur de Miossens, Henri IV mentions his "maistresse". A footnote on Charlotte de Sauve makes no mention of a child the two would have had together.

P.S. And if, after all, Jeanne Huguette was a child Charlotte had with her... husband? Since Charlotte was the only child of her parents, someone had to carry on the name and Jeanne Huguette would have been the only heir to the de Beaune de Semblançay.

--Frania W. (talk) 13:04, 11 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

She would be still known as de Fizes; besides, Charlotte's pregnancy would have been documented. I just find the lack of contemporary documentation proof against the child being hers. Anyway, Charlotte had many male cousins who had the name-I think Jeanne was a daughter of one of these.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)Reply