Per MedLands, Jean de Valois & Guillaume III de Hainaut didn't have a daughter named Catherine d'Avesnes de Hainault (Jeanne de Valois, Comtesse de Hainault). The first time I saw it here on Geni I was surprised, since in all my reading about Katherine de Roet, only her father was named and even his proper name isn't a certainty, mother was unknown. Curators really should be sure of an entire line - even if only their own - before signing off on Master Profiles.
@Ofir This seems to be your area so I'm tagging you. There does seem to be some conflict in this area.This is the Profile Jance is talking about and I've found another profile for Katherine de Roet:
Katherine Swynford, Duchess of Lancaster
Erica is the curator for Jeanne de Valois.
I work iteratively, partly in hopes that others will help with documenting our ancestors (why should I have all the fun?).
I assigned myself the painful and time consuming task of gathering the duplicates of Jeanne that existed and getting them merged and in more order.
I cannot currently work on "overview" text formatting as I'd like to as my "good" computer is in storage, and on this one, Medlands won't copy and paste.
If you'd do the honors of formatting the overview, I can take care of correcting the family relationships.
Sound like a deal?
Let me know.
Interesting, Janice. As far as I can see, the reference to a 'Catherine d'Avesnes' as mother of Catherine de Roet seems to exist only on online family trees :-)
I checked some French sources. I think the oldest source is the chronicler Froissart in de 14th century - and he only refers to the father for Catherine de Roet - no mother. It seems that Catherine's connection with Paon de Roet is inferred from Paon's epitaph: "Hic jacet Paganus Roet, Miles, Guyenne Rex Armorum, Pater Catherine Ducise Lancastriae".
This evidence for the father for Catherine seems generally accepted. And, indeed, nothing about her mother.
I would recommend that this connection with Catherine d'Avesnes is 'severed' - and replaced by an N.N. mother.
Ofir Friedman, would you agree?