An article on Stamouers.com posits that Francois Viljoen may have not been born in France, but Belgium
http://www.stamouers.com/stamouers/surnames-v-z/583-viljoen-francois
That's interesting.
I wonder what the 1671 arrival assumption was based on to start with?
35 km from the closest Claremont to Mazeijck isn't a small distance out.
On the Overview, we have "Sy van was Vignon of Signon gespel (voor 1678); later verander dit na Villion, en uiteindelik na Viljon en die hedendaagse Viljoen" so surname spelling is also an issue in eliminating the fact that this isn't just another man with a similar name.
That being said - this is definitely quite convincing.
Sharon Doubell FRANCOIS VILJOEN AND CORNELIA CAMPENAAR
1. Generally held assumptions regarding Francois Viljoen’s European background
For many years South African genealogists had generally accepted the following regarding Francois Viljoen:
1. That he originated from one of the many towns with the name of Clermont in France;
2. That he was a French Huguenot refugee and the first of such to permanently settle at the Cape and
3. That he arrived here in 1671.
Francois was indeed described as being from a place called Clermont when he married Cornelia Campenaar at the Cape on 17/5/1676.
The entry reads as follows:
Den 17 dito (Maij): Francois Signon j.m. van Clermont, vrijburger alhier, met Cornelia Campenaar j.d. van Middelburgh.
The generally held view regarding his French origin and Huguenot status might have been derived from the above mentioned entry, assuming that the Clermont referred to was one of the many Clermonts in France and also assuming that all French people who left France during the 17th century had done so due to religious pressure.
Up till now this specific Clermont had not yet been identified.
As far as could be established, no factual records exist regarding him being a Huguenot.
Compiled by Dr SB (Rassie) Rascher
A comprehensive researched article on Francois Viljoen appears on the Webpage...
http://www.stamouers.com/stamouers/surnames-v-z
Francois Vilion van Mazeijck voor soldaat ende
Camer Amsterdam anno 1672 pr. 't Huijs te Velsen
aangelant, en 1673 den 18 Augustij als wagenmaker
vrij geworden
http://www.eggsa.org/sarecords/index.php/muster-rolls/muster-rolls-...
The distances between Maaseik and the different Clermonts in Belgium vary from approximately 35 – 130 KM
Interesting article about the progenitor. Had a look in my atlas. Two times Clermont is found in Belgium - in the municipal areas of Liege and of Namur and one time Clermont-sous-Huy also in the municipal area of Liege. Both Liege and Namur are in the Francophone part of Belgium. Clermont is found seven times in France; only twice as Clermont and the other times in conjunction with another term such as Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-de-Beauregard, etc. So in all instances, a Francophone setting. Never in a Dutch language setting. So I would tend to pose that any speculation about him being Dutch would be most unlikely.
About his religious background, what we can say is that he married in a Protestant church and had his children baptised in a Protestant church. All the possible Clermont places in France and Belgium were still very much under Roman Catholic influence during the period he lived there. So it is quite possible that he was Roman Catholic originally who became a Protestant later on.
Now: did he flee from Europe on religious grounds? Protestants were seriously persecuted in France during different periods. One of those periods was between the 1620's and 1680's, ending in the Edict of Fantainebleu of 1685 which ended all legal recognition of Protestants in France and which led to very serious persecution. The main wave of religious refugees was after 1685, but many fled from France before that already. Now we know Francois came to SA in 1672 - that is after Protestants have been persecuted for more than fifty years already.
One of my hobbies is birdwatching. We have a saying: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and flies like a duck, it must be a duck :-).
'n Groot aantal van die hugenote wat aan die Kaap geland het is reeds as Vlaamse Hugenote geidentifiseer in 'n publikase van C.A.M. de Vleeschauwer genaamd "Die Vlaamse Hugenote" (http://www.taaloord.co.za/Vlaamse_Hugenote_FINAAL.pdf). Francois Viljoen word nie onder hulle vermeld nie en alhoewel die meeste van Frans-Vlaandere afkomstig was, was daar 'n aantal wat van Vlaandere na die Kaap gekom het, ondermeer Louis de Peronne (Nazareth) en Hercule des Pres (Kortrijk). Jacques de Savoye was van Ath in Wallonië. Francois Viljoen word nie vermeld nie.
If I'm following correctly - and I haven't looked too closely - so yell if I'm making stupid assumptions here.
The point is that if 'Francois Vilion van Mazeijck' is the same as Francois Viljoen SV/PROG - then he may not be a French Huguenot at all, but a Belgian Protestant soldier in the VOC's Chamber of Amsterdam.
Hi everyone, I just want to get my two cents in on this debate. I find the new findings on the stamvader both fascinating and quite plausible. This is one of the first credible sources to have been advanced, other than his marriage, as to his origins.
One must also remember that Maaseik and the rest of Leige, including Clermont-sur-Berwinne and Clermont-sous-Huy were part of the same country, namely the Prince-Bishopric of the Liege at the time this François lived in the region.
As for religion Chris Steyn, I agree that it is perfectly possible that he may have been catholic prior to coming to the Cape, people need to remember that per company policy, the only religion that was allowed at the Cape was Dutch Reformed, any individual who lived at the Cape at the time would have had little choice of religion, regardless of their prior belief. I think this misunderstanding greatly hampers research into many individuals when people restrict themselves to searching for protestant individuals. Unless specific evidence comes to light to support the view that an individual was a protestant before coming to the Cape, or even the Netherlands, we should not assume that it is definitely the case. Evidence in the form of declarations given by hugenots to churches in the Netherlands is an example of the type of evidence that would be required.
Francois Viljoen in Boucher
A Cape settler whose original home continues to elude certain identification may possibly have come from Dauphine. Francois Villion reached the Cape in 1671. He was from Cleimont, a French place-name of frequent occurrence. However the surname appears among refugees from this region in the United Provinces and Switzerland. Was Francois Villion perhaps from Clermont in the Terres froides north of Grenoble, or from Monestier-de-Clermont south of the provincial capital? • M. Boucher.M (1981). French speakers at the Cape: The European Background. Pretoria, UNISA: Ch 7: Cape Settlers III: from South-Eastern France and Adjoining Territories p182
http://huguenots-france.org/france/refuge/afrique_sud/embarques.htm situates his province of origin as Grenoble Dauphine.
But the Walloons are very much under-researched in my opinion - given that Afrikaans is so obviously 'Flemish'
https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/England_History_of_Huguenots,_...
Re Duncan's post
F Viljoen a protestant that felt less threatened by settling at the Cape but does that make him a Huguenot?
Could even have been French origin but he moved to Wallonia in the first wave of Protestants fleeing France.
I also believe the term "French Huguenots " often include other Protestants originating from other countries not necessarily French.
Daniel Malan the Waldensian from Italy, his mother a Jourdan but could have been French fleeing to the protected Piedmontese valleys to escape persecution in France.