FRENCH PEASANTS IN TWO WORLDS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF RURAL EXPERIENCE IN SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURY ACADIA AND THE LOUDUNAIS
GREGORY M. W. KENNEDY
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
GRADUATE PROGRAM IN HISTORY YORK UNIVERSITY TORONTO, ONTARIO
APRIL 2008 Library and Bibliotheque et 1*1 Archives Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition
395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Canada Canada
Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-39018-4 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-39018-4
NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, prefer, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.
The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation. reproduced without the author's permission.
In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne Privacy Act some supporting sur la protection de la vie privee, forms may have been removed quelques formulaires secondaires from this thesis. ont ete enleves de cette these.
While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires in the document page count, aient inclus dans la pagination, their removal does not represent il n'y aura aucun contenu manquant. any loss of content from the thesis. •*• Canada ABSTRACT
This study examines rural societies in Acadia and the Loudunais and their relations to the state, between about 1650 and 1765, in order to compare peasant experience broadly between France and its Atlantic colonies, and specifically between families from western France who migrated to Acadia and those who remained.
Although we know much about political events in these regions, relatively little has been written on the social history of their inhabitants. This approach suggests new ways of interpreting the conditions imposed on peasants and the choices they nevertheless made in pursuit of their self-interest.
The comparison includes three distinct approaches. Part I considers the contexts that shaped rural development, including the natural environment, frontierconditions , and the demands of the state. Part II establishes demographic trends using parish registers in order to consider questions of growth, change and continuity, conformity, and social hierarchy. Part III studies the seigneurial system, the rural economy, and community institutions like the vestry and assembly. These socioeconomic structures, in part imposed on and in part defined by peasants, placed limits on agriculture and trade and the ability of peasants to change their circumstances, and shaped differences in wealth and status among peasant groups.
The general argument is that the Acadians were not greatly different from those they left behind in the Loudunais in their political pragmatism, their social organization, their local hierarchy, or even their demographic success, and that both rural societies occupy points on a common spectrum of French rural experience within a larger Atlantic world - one defined by the shared interests, methods, and perspectives of rural people.
iv Although the contexts for rural development were very different for these rural societies,
Acadian demographic patterns were gradually becoming more like those of the
Loudunais, while socioeconomic structures like the seigneurial system and the village
assembly retained important similarities throughout the period. Peasants in both Acadia
and the Loudunais had a pragmatic perspective, seeking order and security through the
creation and maintenance of a network of social relationships, economic options and
political connections, as well as a common landscape of community and agriculture.
v TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ...iv
Acknowledgements . vi
List of Maps, Pictures, Tables and Figures viii
List of Abbreviations xi
General Introduction 1
Part I - Contexts for Rural Development 1. The Natural Environment 14 2. Frontier Conditions 76 3. The Demands of the State 142 Conclusion to Part 1 174
Part II — Demography Introduction to Sources and Methods 178 4. The Demography of the Loudunais, 1737-1765 182 5. The Demography of Acadia, 1712-1740 218 6. Comparative Analysis and Conclusion to Part II , 257
Part III - Socioeconomic Structures 7. The Seigneurial System 281 8. The Rural Economy and Differences in Wealth 321 9. Community Institutions - Vestry and Assembly..... 392 Conclusion to Part III 435
General Conclusion. 439
Appendix A: Rural budgets 452
Maps 487
Documents and Secondary Sources 490
vii LIST OF MAPS
Map 1 - The Loudunais and the Loire (1635) 68 Map2-Aulnay, La Chaussee, Martaize, Cassini Map (1744-1787) 487 Map 3-Acadia before 1755 488 Map 4 - Settlement around Annapolis Royal, 1733 489
LIST OF PICTURES
Picture 1 - Fields around Loudun 69 Picture 2 - Fields near Martaiz6 70 Picture 3 - Belleisle Creek (near Annapolis Royal) 71 Picture 4 - Belleisle Marsh (near Annapolis Royal) 72 Picture 5 - Fields near Grand Pre (Minas) ..73 Picture6-LowtideontheBayofFundyatMinas 74 Picture 7-Former location of Beaubassin 75 Picture 8 - Square Tower at Loudun 136 Picture 9 - Porte du Martray, Loudun 137 Picture 10-ToweratMoncontour 138 Picture 11 - Remains of walls at seigneurial estate of La Bonnetiere (La Chaussee) 139 Picture 12-Fort Anne Flag Bastion (Annapolis Royal) 140 Picture 13-Fort Anne overlooking harbour at Annapolis Royal .141 Picture 14 - Seigneurial estate of La Bonnetiere 320
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 - Adverse weather reported by contemporary observers in Acadia and the Loudunais...32 Table 2 - Population growth in Acadia during the LMM 33 Table 3 - Estimated early modern annual mean temperatures, France, Quebec, and Acadia 40 Table 4 - Punishments authorized for men caught salt-smuggling 98 Table 5 - State machinery in Acadia and the Loudunais in 1700 145 Table 6 - Taille assessments and population of the election of Loudun, 169 8-1788 151 Table 7 - Taille assessments and population within the election of Loudun, 1788 152 Table 8 - Rate of the taille tarifee on rural property and income 156 Table 9 - Average birth intervals of first and second children (Loudunais) 196 Table 10 -Average birth intervals of first and second children (Acadia) 234 Table 11 - Delay between birth and baptism among selected centre families of Annapolis Royal 238 Table 12 - Delay between birth and baptism among selected centre families of Minas... 239 Table 13 - List of seigneurs in and around Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaize, about 1750 283 Table 14-List of seigneurs in Acadia, about 1690 285 Table 15 - Seigneurs and estate managers as lenders in Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaize....306 Table 16 - Estimate of seigneurial revenue from the cens et rentes, 1707 309 Table 17 - Accounts of Annapolis Royal rent-collectors Duon and Robichaud, 1739 310 Table 18 - Total revenue, expenses, and net income of day-worker and ploughman 335 Table 19- Total revenue, expenses, and net income of Landry and Boudrot 375
viii LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 -Taille assessment for the election of Loudun, 1744 150 Figure 2 -Taille assessment for the election of Loudun, 1760 150 Figure3 -Burials in Aulnay, LaChaussee, andMartaize 183 Figure 4 - Age at death in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize 184 Figure 5 - Age at death broken down by five year periods 185 Figure 6-Number of burials each year and average wheat price 191 Figure 7-Number of baptisms 192 Figure 8 -Number of baptisms and burials 193 Figure 9-Number of conceptions by month ....194 Figure 10- Comparison of number of conceptions by month 194 Figure 11 -Number of marriages by year 208 Figure 12-Number of marriages, burials, and baptisms by year 209 Figure 13- Comparison of number of marriages by month 211 Figure 14 - Origins of grooms 213 Figure 15 - Origins of brides 213 Figure 16-Marriage alliances of the centre families 215 Figure 17-Number of burials (Acadia)... 222 Figure 18-Age at death in Annapolis Royal and Minas 223 Figure 19 - Movement of age at death in Annapolis Royal and Minas 224 Figure 20 - Number of baptisms by year in Annapolis Royal and Minas 229 Figure 21 - Comparison of baptisms and burials in Annapolis Royal 231 Figure 22 - Conceptions by month in Annapolis Royal, Minas and Beaubassin 232 Figure 23 - Comparison of conceptions by month in Acadia and Canada 233 Figure 24 - Length of delay between birth and baptism at Annapolis Royal 237 Figure 25- Length of delay between birth and baptism in Minas 238 Figure 26- Length of delay between birth and baptism in Beaubassin 239 Figure 27 - Number of marriages by year in Annapolis Royal, Minas and Beaubassin 244 Figure 28 - Comparison of marriages, baptisms and burials 245 Figure 29-Number of marriages by month 246 Figure 30 - Comparison of monthly marriage patterns 247 Figure 31 -Origins of grooms 248 Figure 32-Origins of brides 248 Figure 33 - Marriage alliances of the Annapolis Royal quatuor 251 Figure 34 - Marriage alliances of the Beaubassin triad (Poirier, Cormier, Bourgeois) 252 Figure 3 5 - Marriage alliances of the Minas triad (Leblanc, Landry, Hebert) 252 Figure 36 - Number of baptisms, burials, and marriages in Aulnay, La Chaussee andMartaize 258 Figure 37 - Seasonal pattern of conceptions .....266 Figure 38- Seasonal pattern of marriages 267 Figure 39 - Artisans in Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaize, 1737-1765 330 Figure 40 - Socio-economic hierarchy in Aulnay, LaChaussee and Martaize, 1737-1765 331 Figure 41 - Day-Worker Annual Expenses 336 Figure 42 - Ploughman Annual Expenses 337 Figure 43 - Revenue and Expenses in the Loudunais, 1762-65 340 Figure 44 - Net Income in the Loudunais, 1762-65 340 Figure 45 - Day-Worker and Ploughman Expenses, 1762 341 Figure 46 - Day-worker and Ploughman Expenses, 1763 343
ix LIST OF FIGURES (continued)
Figure 47 - Day-worker and Ploughman Expenses, 1764 345 Figure 48 - Day-worker and Ploughman Expenses, 1765 346 Figure 49-Number of loans in the Loudunais, 1738-1746 and 1754-58 350 Figure 50—Number of quittances in the Loudunais, 1738-46 and 1754-58 351 Figure51 - Value of loans and quittances in the Loudunais, 1738-46,1754-58 352 Figure 52 - Overall indebtedness in the Loudunais, 1738-46, 1754-58 353 Figure 53 - Indebtedness by group in the Loudunais, 1738-46,1754-58 354 Figure 54 - Loaners by group and number of loans in the Loudunais, 1737-47, 1753-59 354 Figure 55 - Loaners by group and value of loans in the Loudunais, 1737-47,1753-59 355 Figure 56 - Number of loans and quittances by month in the Loudunais, 1737-47, 1753-59 356 Figure 57-Value of loans and quittances by month in the Loudunais, 1737-47, 1753-59 356 Figure 58 - Number of loans by month and class in the Loudunais, 1737-47, 1753-59 357 Figure 59 - Creditors in the Loudunais by the number of loans supplied, 1737-47, 1753-59 358 Figure 60 - Creditors in the Loudunais by the amount of money supplied, 1737-47, 1753-59...358 Figure 61 - Land and livestock value by household in Acadia, 1707 (in lc) 371 Figure 62 - Germain Landry's Revenue, 1707 376 Figure 63 - Francois Boudrot's Revenue, 1707 376 Figure 64 - Expenses of Germain Landry, 1707 ,...377 Figure 65 - Expenses of Francois Boudrot, 1707.. , 377 Figure 66 - Land cultivated in Acadia by each household, 1707 379 Figure 67 - Vestry expenses in Saint-Clair, 1672-1691 400
x LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Source Material AN: Archives Nationales de France AD C-M: Archives Departementales de Charente-Maritime AD I-L: Archives Departementales d'Indre-et-Loire AD V: Archives Departementales de la Vienne BNF: Bibliotheque Nationale de France Collection de manuscrits: Collection de manuscrits contenant lettres, memoires, et autres documents historiques documents relatifs a Vhistoire de la Nouvelle-France recueilles aux archives de la province de Quebec, ou copies a I'Stranger. DCB: Dictionary of Canadian Biography FHS: French Historical Studies Memoires de commissaires: Memoires des commissaires du roi et de ceux de Sa Majeste britannique sur les possessions & les droits respectifs des deux couronnes en Amerique; avec les actes publics & pieces justificatives. LAC: Library and Archives of Canada SHA: La Societe Historique Acadienne
Currency d: deniers, there were twelve deniers in a sol, and 240 deniers in a livre. It: livres tournois, currency of account in France. It: livres colonial, currency of account in Acadia and New France, worth XA less than It. s: sous, singular sol or sou, there were twenty sous in a livre.
Weights and Measures1 a: acre, English unit of land measurement equivalent to .4047 ha. arp: arpent, unit of land measurement equivalent to .3419 ha in Acadia and New France. b: boissele'e, unit of land measurement equivalent to 3.2 ha in the district of Moncontour. bx: boisseaux, unit of volume equivalent ta 10.9 litres in the Loudunais. ha: hectare, modem unit of land measurement equivalent to 10 000 square metres. hi: hectolitre, modern unit of volume equivalent to 100 litres. km: kilometre, modern unit of distance equivalent to 1 000 metres. lb: livre, the French pound was equivalent to 1.079 English pounds or 489.5 grams. I have used the symbol lb to denote French pounds to avoid confusion with currency (livres tournois and livres colonial). m: minot, unit of volume equivalent to three bx or 32.7 litres in the Loudunais. sp: setier, unit of volume equivalent to twelve bx or 130.8 litres in the Loudunais.
' AD V 8 C 110, Recueil de tables pour faciliter la comparaison des poids et mesures du nouveau systeme avec les poids et mesures ci-devant en usage a Paris (Poitiers, 1807); Almanacb de rarrondissement de Loudun. 1861 (Loudun, 1861) 33; Paul Raveau, I/agriculture et les classes paysannes: la transformation de la proprtete dans le Haut-Pojtou au XVf siecle (Paris, 1978 (1926)) 127-140; Marina Dinet, "Culture mateYielle et vie quotidienne a Loudun et ses campagnes (1642-1691)" (m&noire de maftrise, University de Poitiers, 1997); Pierre Charbonnier et Abel Poitrineau, Les anciennes measures locales du Centre-Quest d'apres les Tables de conversion (Paris, 2001) 223. xi INTRODUCTION
Why This Comparison?
For a long time,Acadia n history was a well-defined, if rather undeveloped, narrative that received little attention from Canadian scholars. Most people accepted that the Acadians were prosperous, independent farmers with large families and a distinct, egalitarian identity. They got along well with the Mi'kmaq, worked cooperatively on dykes to farm the extremely fertile marshlands, and remained faithful to their religious beliefs. These happy people paid no taxes, had no seigneurs and few officials, and made ample use of the natural abundance around them. They enjoyed a veritable Golden Age of demographic and agricultural expansion. Though they were peace-loving and tried to remain neutral, they were caught up in the imperial struggle in the region, and were eventually deported by British military authorities because they would not swear an unconditional oath of allegiance that might oblige them to take up arms against the
French or their aboriginal friends. They then experienced a great deal of suffering and were dispersed throughout the Atlantic world. Eventually, many Acadians returned to
Nova Scotia or settled in Louisiana. Throughout their ordeal they held tightly to their culture and identity.
In recent years, Acadian history has received considerable attention from scholars.
Two large monographs and two major collections of essays have come out over the last four years alone.1 Genealogists have also been hard at work, producing resources that
1 John G. Reid, et al., The 'Conquest* of Acadia. 1710: Imperial. Colonial and Aboriginal Constructions (Toronto, 2004); John Mack Faragher, A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of the French Acadians from their American Homeland (New York, 2005); N. E. S. Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian: A Norm American Border People. 1604-1755 (Montreal & Kingston, 2005); Ronnie-Gilles Leblanc, ed., Du Grand Derangement a la Deportation: nouvelles perspectives historiques (Moncton, 2005). 1 help both historians and those simply tracing their ancestors. Acadian history has even been in the news, most notably in the British monarchy's 2003 acknowledgement of the expulsion and its tragic consequences. July 28 is now an official day to commemorate this event and the Acadian people.3 The results of this research and public attention to
Acadian history have been some substantial revisions of the previous narrative. For example, we know that the French were just as demanding and cruel with the Acadians as the British, particularly between 1740 and 1755, and we know a lot more about the larger period of the Grand Derangement, from 1750 to at least 1763. Historians have long been aware of Acadia's links with New England and its experience as a borderland, but recent works have expanded this understanding by underlining the complicated and changing relationships and tensions between French, British, and aboriginal people from the founding of the colony into the mid-eighteenth century.4 Far from being a bucolic paradise, the Acadians lived in a world full of disruptions and tensions. Far from living in simple equality, Acadian communities were cut across by divisions of social hierarchy and relative wealth and influence.5
These efforts invite further study. We still know relatively little about how
Acadian communities developed, how they were organized, or their economic and social
2 Stephen A. White, Dictlonnaire gen&ilogique des familiesacadienne s 2 Vols (Moncton, 1999). 3 "Queen acknowledges Acadian Deportation" 4 Dec 2003, CBC News, http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2003/12/03/acadiansj031203.html * J. B. Brebner, New England's Outpost: Acadia before the Conquest of Canada (New York, 1927); George A. Rawlyk, Nova Scotia's Massachusetts: A Study of Massachusetts-Nova Scotia Relations 1630 to 1784 (Montreal, 1973); John G. Reid, Acadia. Maine, and New Scotland: Marginal Colonies in the Seventeenth Century (Toronto, 1981); A. J. B. Johnston, "Borderland Worries: Loyalty Oaths in Acadie/Nova Scotia, 1654-1755" French Colonial History 4 (2003): 31-48; David R. Jones, "From Frontier to Borderland: The Acadian Community in a Comparative Context, 1605-1710" Royal Nova Scotia Historical Society Journal Vol 7 (2004): 15-37. 5 Maurice Basque, Des hommes de pouvoir: histoire d'Otho Robichaud et de sa famille. notables acadiens de Port Royal et de N^guac (N^guac, 1996); Jacques Vanderlinden, Se marier en Acadie francaise. XVIf et XVIIf siecles (Moncton, 1998). 2 structures.6 Historians know about the fast rate of Acadian population growth, but otherwise make limited use of the surviving parish registers, which could be used to explore other dimensions of demographic and social practices. Historians have also remained content to make general reference to French national mortality and fertility statistics rather than draw comparisons with more relevant regions in France that had cultural similarities with Acadia and were linked to it by ties of origin; and they pay no attention to how demographic behaviour changed over time.7 No historical study has seriously tried to place Acadian experience in the context of other French rural societies.
This dissertation is an attempt to begin just such a comparison, examining rural societies in Acadia and the Loudunais, a pays in western France. Some readers may be familiar with the town of Loudun from the infamous case of "the Devils of Loudun," in which the priest Urbain Grandier was burned as a witch during the time of Cardinal
Richelieu. Others may know Loudun as an important Huguenot centre in western France until the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes.8 The Loudunais is an area worthy of study in its own right. It was an important military frontier during the medieval period and the
Wars of Religion, a centre for Counter-Reformation activities in the seventeenth century, and boasted a prosperous rural economy, at least in relation to neighbouring regions of
Poitou and Touraine. Further, many great lords of the kingdom held estates there.
6 Griffiths underlines this point in, Migrant to Acadian, xvii. 7 See for example, the beginning steps taken by Gisa I. Hynes, "Some Aspects of the Demography of Port Royal, 1650-1755" Acadiensis III, 1 (1973): 3-17; Jacques Houdaille, "Quelques aspects de la demographic ancienne de l'Acadie" Population 35,3 (1980): 581-602. * Aldous Huxley, The devils of Loudun (St Albans, 1977 (1952)); Michel Carmona, Les diables de Loudun: sorcellerie et politique sous Richelieu (Paris, 1988); Didier Poton, Geographie du protestantisme et reseau urbain dans le centre-ouest a I'epoque moderne (XVT - XVII6 siecles) (Poitiers. 1993); Yves Krumenacker, Les Protestants du Poitou au XVuT siecle (1681-1789) (Paris, 1998); Robert Rapley, A Case of Witchcraft: the Trial of Urbain Grandier (Montreal, 1998); Michel de Certeau, The Possession at Loudun (Chicago, 2000). 3 There is an even more compelling reason to conduct this specific comparison. In the 1960s, Genevieve Massignon first proposed the theory that many of the founding
Acadian families originated in the Loudunais, especially from the seigneurial lands of
Charles de Menou d'Aulnay de Charnisay (around the parishes of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize).9 Some historians, such as Gabriel Debien, have argued that the commonness of the names involved, and the lack of conclusive records, such as ship passenger manifests, makes it impossible to prove this theory.10 But along with a few positive identifications of Acadians in Loudunais parish registers, there is considerable circumstantial evidence to back up Massignon's claim. Nicole Bujold and Maurice
Cailleteau identified and examined the role of one of Aulnay's recruiting agents, an estate manager living in La Chaussee. Jacques Vanderlinden's study of Acadian marriage patterns demonstrates that a "centre" group of families with a common origin, which he believes was the Loudunais, dominated social relationships in the colony. Henri
Wittmann has shown that the Acadian dialect conforms to that used in the region of which the Loudunais was a part, and not to other areas of western, and especially northern, France that supplied so many other immigrants to the New World. Further,
Wittmann argues that language differences demonstrate that immigrants to Acadia were chiefly peasants, while those who went to Quebec had mainly urban and artisan origins.
Given the limited alternatives for recruiting settlers, and the obvious connections that these families seemed to share once they arrived, most historians allow that it is probable,
9 Genevidve Massignon, "La seigneurie de Charles de Menou d'Aulnay, gouverneur de PAcadie, 1635- 1650" Revue d'histoire de l'Amerique Francaise XVI (1963): 469-501. 10 Gabriel Debien, "Les Loudunais en Acadie au 17* siecle" Bulletin de la SocfetS des Antiquaires de l'Ouest et des Musfes de Poitiers Tome VII-4e serie(1963): 153-161. 4 if not ultimately provable, that many Acadians originated in the Loudunais and certainly in the larger region of Touraine and Poitou.11
I find this evidence convincing, and my study assumes the link between Acadia and the Loudunais. For those who are willing to accept this assumption, the findings will be particularly compelling. But even if the reader only acknowledges a common broad regional origin, there is still value in comparing Acadian experience with this particular
set of reasonably prosperous rural parishes in western France. The results will certainly be more relevant than simply contrasting life in Acadia with general conditions in early modern France, and will place claims of Acadian uniqueness, egalitarianism, pragmatism, and prosperity in context.
Thesis
The general argument of this dissertation is that the Acadians did not greatly differ from those they left behind in the Loudunais in their political pragmatism, their
social organization, their local hierarchy, or even their demographic success, and that both rural societies occupy points on a common spectrum of French rural experience within a larger Atlantic world. Specifically, although the natural environment, frontier conditions, and demands of the state were very different for these rural societies, Acadian demographic patterns were gradually becoming more like those of the Loudunais, while
11 Nicole T. Bujold et Maurice Caillebeau, Les origines francaises des premieres families acadiennes, le sud loudunais (Poitiers, 1979); Vanderlinden, Se marier en Acadie francaise. 113; Robert Larin, La contribution du Haut-Poitou au peuplement de la Nouvelle-France (Moncton, 1994); Henri Wittmann "L'Ouest francais dans le Francais des AmeYiques: le jeu des isoglosses morphologiques et la genese du dialecte acadien" in Georges Cesbron, ed., L'Ouest francais et la Francophonie nord-americaine (Angers, 1996); Leslie Choquette, Frenchmen into Peasants; Modernity and Tradition in the Peopling of French Canada (Cambridge, 1997) 71-84,263; Griffiths maintains that the Acadian population was "more broadly representative of the various regions of France," Migrant to Acadian. 65. 5 peasant hierarchy and community institutions retained important similarities throughout.
The experience of both rural societies shows that peasants had a pragmatic perspective, trying to anticipate problems and adapting their existing structures to contemporary conditions. For example, the Acadian pursuit of neutrality in the imperial conflicts of the time was a reasonable choice that almost any peasant would have made if placed in the same situation. Peasants in both Acadia and the Loudunais sought order through the creation and maintenance of a network of social relationships, economic options, and a common landscape of community and agriculture.
Scope
This dissertation does not provide a single, integrated historical narrative of two places. Instead it analyzes and compares rural societies in Acadia and the Loudunais through three approaches. The conclusion then brings the results together in support of the main thesis. States and officials, military leaders and soldiers, aboriginal people, fishermen, and traders - there were many people who have their own histories in these regions, but they appear here only in the way that they had an impact on rural societies.
Readers should also be warned that I do not discuss in detail the deportation, the events of the various wars, or the origins of the French Revolution. Peasants did not know that they were going to be deported, or that a revolution was going to take place; they made decisions based on the information they had at the time and their previous experience.
Although much can be learned from times of adversity, the focus in this study is on periods of relative stability, when peasants could choose from a wide range of alternatives. For Acadia, I do not extend my study past around 1740, when imperial wars
6 returned to the region and ultimately culminated in the deportation. For the Loudunais, I do not go beyond about 1765, both to ensure the analysis remains relevant to the experience of the pre-Deportation Acadians and also to avoid turning that part of the thesis into a narrative of the worsening conditions that led up to the Revolution. These chronological limits are particularly important for the analysis of demographic patterns, which could be seriously disrupted during crisis.12
Sources and their Limitations
We have always known most about political conditions in Acadia, and what officials thought of the Acadians, because their letters, reports, and council minutes are the main sources that have survived. But the small colonial administrations at Port Royal
(re-named Annapolis Royal by the British in 1710) were caught up in their own objectives and problems, and were little interested in the details of Acadian life. A second group of sources, used by several historians, are the censuses created between
1670 and 1710. These censuses were of varying quality and, at best, incomplete, undermined by the possibility of error or evasion in an area of such scattered settlement and the reluctance of most peasants in declaring property to officials (who might see opportunities for taxation). However, they do provide at least a rough indication of the size of families, their livestock herds, and land under cultivation. A third major source is the parish registers, covering most of the eighteenth century, that have survived from the largest communities - Annapolis Royal, Minas, and Beaubassin. Although they have
12 Because of both the focus on periods of stability and the availability of sources, the periods of analysis for the chapters on rural demography overlap but are not precisely contemporary (1712-1740 for Acadia, 1737-1765 for the Loudunais). See the introduction to Part II. 7 some gaps (particularly in Beaubassin), these documents certainly provide enough information (over 3 500 baptisms, burials, and marriages) to establish demographic practices and patterns. I discuss the state of these records in more detail in the introduction to Part II. Parish registers in France and its colonies were composed of standardized entries by the parish priest listing dates, participants, and witnesses to baptisms, marriages, and burials. Occasionally they also include notes on a family's origin or status, or remarks if there was something unusual about administration of the sacrament, such as the requirement to obtain a dispensation for consanguinity. Finally, a handful of notarial records have survived for the period from 1670 to 1710, but the rest appear to have been lost in a suspicious fire a few months before the British captured Port
Royal in the latter year.13 We know that the Acadians had notaries throughout the eighteenth century, but it seems that British efforts to extinguish Acadian property rights during and after the Deportation included getting rid of these official documents.
For the Loudunais, similar sources are available such as parish registers and official correspondence of the intendant and subdelegate.14 But there are no censuses and
I was also unable to find any tax rolls for Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize (taille, vingtieme, or otherwise) that would list property and family size. However, there is a rich notarial record, which affords the historian a host of property transactions, marriage contracts, testaments, inventories, debts, and assembly meetings that help fill this gap and also provide additional insights into social and economic relationships and local
13 Milton P. and Norma Gaudet Rieder, Acadian Church Records Vol I-V (Louisiana, 1976,1977). Results cross-referenced with White, Dictionnaire g&iealogique des families acadiennes. LAC G3-2040 Colonies, Notaires d'Acadie (Etude Loppinot) 1687-1710. 14 Parish registers consulted at AD V SSrie 9E 82/2 (La Chaussee), 9E 178/2 (Martaiz<5), and 9E 17/1 (Aulnay). Records of the intendants and their subordinates through consultation of S6rie C at both AN, AD VandADI-L. 8 hierarchy. For example, a 1727 document from Martaizg lists the contributions of all heads of household in that parish to the vestry.15 There were many notaries in the
Loudunais, each assigned a group of parishes to serve within a district (bureau). In the eighteenth century, the notary for Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize was sometimes located in the neighbouring parish of Saint-Clair, and other times in Martaize itself.
Peasants might also have recourse to other notaries in the district (for example, at Saint-
Cassien), or one of the several notaries located in the towns. Fortunately, researchers can access both the Controle des actes, which lists and provides brief summaries of each document recorded by a notary, and, in many cases, the complete documents as well. In addition, the court records of the royal court (bailliage) of Loudun are filled with documents in which seigneurs, merchants, officials, and ordinary peasants make claims and press charges.16 It is fair to note that because of the wealth of notarial and court records, I am often able to say more and argue more conclusively about rural society in the Loudunais than in Acadia.
All of these sources must be used carefully. Parish registers and censuses were not completely accurate. Contemporary under-reporting and errors reduce the mortality and fertility statistics we can derive from them. Further, the commonness of many peasant names, the use of nicknames, and changes in spelling by the priest or notary can make it difficult to correctly identify people. Another concern is that neither Acadians nor inhabitants of the Loudunais are speaking directly in these documents. Notaries used official language and set phrases with little variation. Many court records are
15 AD V 4E 110 15 1727-1729 Ren6 Lanlaud, Saint-Clair, 22 Apr 1727 assembly at Martaizd. 16 AD V 5 B 3 through 5 B 6, plumitifs d'audience, 1750-1765. 17 This problem with the existing sources is discussed by A. J. B. Johnston in "La seduction de l'archetype face au deTi de l'histoire de l'Acadie" SHA. 36, 1 (2005): 12-46. 9 simply summaries of the magistrate's findings. A few do include witness statements that can reveal tantalizing details about everyday life, especially since the clerk made an effort to accurately record the details of events and who said what. Still, these accounts were influenced by the relationships of authority and subordination involved, not to mention that court fees depended in part on the length of time needed to hear witnesses. As a result, testimonies were often limited rehearsals of events, and witnesses of one side or the other usually repeated each other. Although much can be learned from these sources, we must consider the bias of officials and their limited ability (or desire) to perceive what was going on in rural society, along with the possibility of transcription errors and other technical mistakes.
Given the challenges of the documentary record, there are real limits on how much any scholar can claim to know about peasants in Acadia and the Loudunais, especially individual motivations. However, by bringing together several different approaches and types of sources, using both qualitative and quantitative methods, it is possible to use the strengths of one source to compensate for the limitations of others.
Together, they can be used to form reasonable conclusions about many aspects of these rural societies.
Structure
The dissertation is composed of three parts of three chapters each - Contexts of
Rural Development, Demography, and Socioeconomic Structures. Each part, encompassing a distinct approach, can stand alone. However, Part I, which generally focuses on the seventeenth century and earlier, provides a foundation for Parts II and III,
10 which concentrate on the eighteenth century. Meanwhile the results of Part II and Part III reinforce but are not dependent on each other.
Part I studies the contexts for rural development. In Chapter 1,1 consider the natural environment, arguing that peasants in both Acadia and the Loudunais were generally fortunate in the terrain, climate, and natural resources they had to work with, and that they sought to make the best use of these conditions by constructing and maintaining a distinct and unified landscape of community and agriculture. Chapter 2 examines frontierexperienc e and its significance in both the Loudunais and Acadia. On the one hand, peasants in both places were pragmatic, avoiding conflict and accommodating military forces operating around them. Indeed, immigrant families from the Loudunais had several centuries of frontier experience under their belt when they arrived in Acadia. On the other, Acadia was a different kind of borderland - a march - and this gave the area a more independent and distinct identity, but also created a greater insecurity and vulnerability for rural communities there. Chapter 3 describes the demands of the state in both regions, showing the great difference between them: in the
Loudunais, the state wanted its taxes first and foremost, while in Acadia it demanded service. As a result, the relationship between states and communities were also very different. While most peasants in the Loudunais generally put up with the state and accepted royal rule, even if they were not always happy with its regulations and requirements, the Acadians were left mostly on their own, lacking a supporting or protecting state.
Part II is an analysis of rural demography. It considers trends and changes in mortality, fertility, and nuptuality first in the Loudunais (chapter 4), then in Acadia
11 (chapter 5), and then compares the results (chapter 6) using the themes of growth and homeostasis, conformity, social hierarchy, and continuity and change. I argue that in both places peasants adjusted their demographic practices to local conditions, and that
over time the expansion in the main Acadian communities was significantly slowing, and
moving to a demographic pattern very similar to that of the Loudunais. I also look in
detail at the impact and causes of mortality, and am able to identify a significant mortality
crisis in the middle of Acadia's supposed Golden Age. My analysis confirms and extends
that of Jacques Vanderlinden on Acadian marriage patterns, which he studied between
1670 and 1710. I found that endogamy among Acadian centre families between 1712 and
1740 continued and, if anything, became more rigid.
Part HI examines socioeconomic structures. Chapter 7 looks at the seigneurial
system, and argues that it continued to matter in both Acadia and the Loudunais, though
for different reasons. Chapter 8 considers the rural economy and differences in wealth, especially through the use of budgets I have created from contemporary sources. Though they practiced different forms of agriculture, I found that in both places there were similar
gaps between large and small farmers. In other words, some peasants were far richer than others and, even in Acadia, many peasants did not produce enough to feed their households. Chapter 9 examines community political life, as expressed through the vestry and the village assembly. Although these institutions functioned in different ways,
I show that their structures and intents did not greatly differ, despite all the emphasis some historians have placed on the uniqueness of the Acadian deputies in the eighteenth
12 century.18 Peasants chose representatives who negotiated their concerns with the state, but important decisions were always made by the group of senior heads of household in the community.
In the conclusion, I bring the results of all of these approaches together in support of the main argument, and suggest further avenues for study. The results are of interest to regional specialists, but also increase our understanding of rural societies generally and of how they change over time. I also hope that this dissertation will open a door to a larger social history of the French Atlantic World.
18 See for example: Brebner, New England's Outpost. 47; Henri-Dominique Paratte, Peoples of the Maritimes: Acadians (Halifax, 1998) 37; Clive Doucet, Lost and Found in Acadie (Halifex, 2004) 42,84; Elizabeth Mancke, "Imperial Transition" in Reid, et al., The 'Conquest* of Acadia. 179. 13 PART I, CHAPTER 1 -
THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF ACADIA AND THE LOUDUNAIS
Introduction
Historians have long noted the sometimes disastrous impact of climatic variability on the people of early modern France. Early or late frosts, heavy rains or periods of little rain at all; weather conditions played a crucial role in defining the success of harvests, the range and length of epidemics, and, ultimately, the mortality rate of peasants. This chapter considers the natural environments of the Loudunais and Acadia as a whole, including climate but also terrain, wildlife and natural resources. The health and well- being of the rural economy and the peasants themselves in part rested on their ability to manage and adapt to their environment. Over the long term, the environment shaped everything from settlement patterns to cultural identity and personal fears. Of course, landscapes could also be transformed, as the Acadians demonstrated, though only with considerable and ongoing efforts. The state was also interested in the environment, especially in ensuring that local natural resources supported its own larger economic interests and political goals. In France, bureaucratic efforts to restrict the use of woods and waterways sometimes came into conflict with seigneurs and rural communities. In
Acadia, competition over natural resources (such as fish and furs) could lead to war, often with serious consequences for the peasants caught in the middle. Although peasants in
Acadia and the Loudunais lived and worked in very different conditions, in both places they sought to make the best possible use of their natural environments, as well as create a sense of order, by developing and maintaining a unified landscape of community and agriculture.
14 Terrain The Loudunais - A basis for prosperity
The Loudunais was a region with an alternating landscape of limestone and clay plains and rolling chalk hills, bordered on the north by the Vienne river valley.1 The potential of the region's soil, particularly for wheat, was recognized in the medieval period. Beginning in the twelfth century, lay and clerical seigneurs, hoping to increase their landed revenues, sought to expand cultivation throughout the region. Most of these efforts ended during the Hundred Years' War, as raiding and epidemics took their toll and the Loudunais became a military frontier governed by various English and French castellans for over a century. Unfortunately for the region, its terrain proved as well suited for military operations as agriculture, with high features (hills) for fortifications and camps that permitted excellent fields of observation, and relatively open plains for manoeuvre.2 Loudun itself, originally founded as a fortress town by Celts, was built on the top of a large hill which dominated the surrounding plains.3
The coming of peace in the second half of the fifteenth century initiated a century of agricultural development and population growth. Arable land in the Loudunais was worth considerably more than elsewhere in Poitou because of its productivity. By 1600, all the best land was under the plough.4 The limits of expansion had not yet been reached, however. Over the following decades, organized agricultural societies were
Alphonse Le Touz6 de Longuemar, Excursion g^ologique et archeologique dans le Loudunais. (Paris, 1861) 5; Paul Raveau, L'agriculture et les classes pavsannes: la transformation de la propria dans le Haut- Poitou au XVr siecle (Paris. 1926)96. 2 Roland Sanfacon, Etefrichements. peuplement et institutions seigneuriales en Haut-Poitou du Xe au XIII6 siecle (Quebec. 1967)30-36. 3 L6o Desaivre, Deux Vovageurs en Poitou au XVII" siecle: Dubuisson-Aubenay & Leon Godefrov. (Poitiers, 1903) 17. 4 Raveau, Transformation de la propria. 97; Gabriel Debien, En Haut-Poitou: D6fricheurs au Travail XV-XVuT siecles (Paris. 1952) 10. 15 formed with royal support and awarded tax exemptions to clear large areas of marshlands in western France. Entrepreneurial landlords in the Loudunais also seized the opportunity, creating new farms along the Dive and Brandt Rivers north of Moncontour.
These developments were close to Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize^ the parishes more particularly concerned by this comparative study. It is reasonable to assume that the peasants living there were aware of them, especially as several marshland farms
(cabannes) owed tithes to the parish priest (cure) of Martaize.5 Interestingly, these new marshland farms were being created at roughly the same time as some families from these same parishes were volunteering to emigrate to Acadia.
In the early modern period, the rural economy of the Loudunais continued to be centred on wheat grown on the cereal plains. Surpluses were taken north along the many small rivers to Saumur, where the grain joined the larger Loire trading network. These rivers and the few roads in the region tended to orient the Loudunais north to Touraine rather than south to Poitou.6 Of course, wheat was not the only product of Loudunais agriculture. Peasants also cultivated secondary grains like rye and barley for their own use. Some parishes, though not Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, also produced wine for export. Livestock, though, was a very secondary pursuit because there was little
5 AD V G9 61 Cur6 de Martaizg, 21 Jul 1677 and 1680. Apparently these rightswer e the subject of a long standing dispute with the owners of the cabannes. The royal court (bailliage) at Loudun ruled in the priest's favour in 1680. On the clearing of marshlands in Poitou see Jean Paul Billaud, Marais Poitevin: Rencontres de la terre et de Feau (Paris. 1984). 6 AN K-1051, Memoire de la Province de Tours, 1698; AN G7 519 Tours 22 Jul 1687, the intendant reported that "le principal bien de cette eslection consiste en bleds." There were just two significant roads connecting the Loudunais and Haut-Poitou. Yves Krumenacker, "La Geographie du Poitou au XVTtF siecle" Bulletin de la Soci&e des Antiquaires de l'Ouest et des Musses de Poitiers 4e serie - tome XVI (1981): 231. On the grain trade, see Abbott Payson Usher, The History of the Grain Trade in France. 1400- 1710 (New York, 1973) and also Part III, 8. 16 terrain suitable for pasture, perhaps only 700 ar (287 ha) in the entire pays J Most peasants owned (or leased) some goats, chickens, and perhaps a cow to provide eggs, meat, and milk for their own subsistence, but only a few seigneurs and estate managers appear to have been involved in commercial husbandry. The Loudunais also had few wooded areas, and these too were almost exclusively controlled by the seigneurs. As a result, wood for fuel or construction was very expensive.8 The peasants of Aulnay, La
Chaussee, and Martaize" were positioned just to the west of the large Bois de Guesnes, and so may have had better access to wood than some. The only other significant wooded areas in the region were east of Loudun (the Bois Rogue), and a relatively large forest around the abbey of Fontre vault in the north of the pays.
With so little variation in terrain, it should be no surprise that human settlement and agriculture also tended to present a single landscape. This was quite different from the mixed-farming and dispersed hamlets of the bocage found elsewhere in Poitou and most of western France.9 In the Loudunais, peasants lived in centralized villages and worked in nearby fields, producing for an export-driven market economy. Small communities were spread out fairly evenly across the plains of the region. There were certainly hedges, ditches, or lines of stones to mark particular properties, but this was mostly open-field country. Significantly, the population density was just 28 inhabitants
7 Melika Louet, Le pays loudunais et mirebelais au XVIIIieme Steele (d'apres les roles de faille)(D.E.A . memoire, University de Poitiers, 2000), 29 8 Raveau, Transformation de la proprtete\ 129,142; Debien, Dgfricheurs au Travail. 37; Sanfacon, D6frichements. peuplement et institutions seigneuriales, 3,112. Annie Antoine found that woods, pastures, and other uncultivated lands tended to remain under direct seigneurial control throughout much of western France. "Systemes agraires de la France de 1'Ouest: une rationalite meconnue?" HES 1999, 1: 122. 9 J. Pitte, Exode rural et migrations int&ieures en France: l'exemple de la Vienne et du Poitou-Charentes. (Poitiers, 1971), 235; Jacques Peret. Les pavsans de GStine poitevine au XVDT siecle (Poitiers. 1998); Jean-Pierre Poussou, La Terre et les Pavsans en France et en Grande-Bretapae aux XVII" et XVIIP siecles (Paris, 1999)49, 119. 17 for each km2, about half the national average. It appears that peasants held larger farms than elsewhere in rural France and, as a result, enjoyed a somewhat higher standard of living. Indeed, the early modern inhabitants of the Loudunais can be described as a
"prosperous peasantry."10
There were still certain areas of rougher terrain and poorer soil that remained uncultivated. Like other officials of early modern France, and echoing colonial governors of Acadia as well, the intendant of Tours complained that the peasants were unwilling to put in the work needed to cultivate these areas because "ils aiment trop les plaisirs de la Vie et ne sont past assez laborieux."11 The lack of financial incentives and the limited potential of this land seem more likely to blame. Further, uncultivated areas were often an essential source of fertilizer and vegetation for livestock, a particular concern in the Loudunais.12 In general, the best land was already sown with crops, and the remainder was either impractical for development or used for other purposes.
Efforts to further increase the production of foodstuffs nevertheless continued in the eighteenth century. In 1766, the King declared fifteen-year exemptions from the principal taxes and the tithe for any newly cultivated land, hoping to boost the state's food supply. Brigitte Maillard argued that few in the Loudunais seized this opportunity, finding that only 0.87 per cent of the land of the election of Loudun was cleared for new cultivation after this date. Gabriel Debien believed that this was because, unlike other areas of Poitou, few landlords pursued significant improvements to their estates, and
10 Leslie Choquette, Frenchmen into Peasants : Modernity and Tradition in the Peopling of French Canada (Cambridge, 1997) 84; Maillard, Les campagnes de Touraine au XVIIf siecle: structures agraires et gconomie rurale (Rennes, 1998) 18,46. The average population density in eighteenth-century France was 50 inhabitants / km2 - it was generally lower in Anjou (44), Maine (42) and Touraine (31). 11 AN K-1051, M&noire de la Province de Tours, 1698. 12 T. J. A. Le Goff, Vannes and its Region: A Study of Town and Country in Eighteenth-Century France (Oxford, 1981), 169; Antoine, "Systemes agraires de la France de 1'Ouest," 126. 18 associations for land development were weak on capital and membership. My research indicates that this portrayal needs to be updated. The records of the royal court
(bailliage) of Loudun reveal that some 10.84 km of newly cleared land (roughly 3.6 per cent of the land of the election), from over fifty claims and a dozen parishes - including
La Chaussee - were registered between 19 Nov 1766 and 7 Aug 1769 alone.14
Furthermore, leadership and example were provided by the seigneur of the demesne of
Loudun itself, Ren£ Charles de Maupeou, sometime premier president of the Parlement of Paris (1743-57) and subsequently Vice-Chancellor of France (1763-68). Maupeou accounted for almost one-third of the cleared land claimed for exemption, through a score of different projects across his holdings in the Loudunais. Of course, these records do not indicate whether the cultivation lasted, and some claims may have been false. But given how extensive farming already was in the Loudunais, this is a significant result which shows that many landlords and peasants did try to take advantage of the exemptions offered by the King.
In general, the rural economy of the Loudunais was a clear example of peasants making the best use possible out of the terrain of their natural environment. The fertile plains, requiring little preparation and providing a consistent yield, had been intensively cultivated for wheat since the late fifteenth century. Of course there were other important factors in the success of the rural economy, such as peace and security, and the availability of markets, which will be covered elsewhere. Although there was little change to the agricultural system during the early modern period, this was because it
13 Gabriel Debien, "Les deirichements en haut Poitou sur la fin du XVIIIe siecle" Bulletin de la Society des Antiquaires de l'Ouest et des Musees de Poitiers. 4e serie -tome XVI (1981): 288-306; Maillard, Les campaenes de Touraine. 289. 14 AD V 5 B 1 Bailliage du Loudun, Procedures, 1763-1785 19 worked. When incentives were offered, some peasants and landlords did take the initiative to improve their lot, working in the marshlands in the early seventeenth century and clearing new areas for cultivation after 1766. But there were few opportunities for further expansion because most of the land was already worked; the few woods and other uncultivated areas were important complements to the arable. This was certainly a very different situation from that of the terrain in Acadia, which seemed entirely covered by woods or water.
Acadia - Distance and Travel
The most striking feature of the terrain of Acadia for Europeans was probably its distance fromFrance . Colonists had to endure a difficult passage across the Atlantic, which under favourable conditions could take about six weeks, and sometimes considerably longer. The Jesuit priest Biard, sailing with Jean de Biencourt, seigneur of
Poutrincourt in 1611, described a voyage lasting four months that was "so rough and dangerous, especially in small and badly equipped boats, [that] one experiences the sum total of all the miseries of life."15 For the newly appointed Bishop Saint-Vallier of
Quebec, the main danger on his 1685 trip fromFranc e was the risk of disease from cramped quarters and poor sanitary conditions; two of the nine priests accompanying him were lost, as well as several soldiers.16 In 1699, the Sieur de Diereville, a visiting trader and writer, complained that his voyage fromL a Rochelle to Port Royal took fifty-eight
15 P. Biard to C. Baltazar, 10 Jun 1611 in Reuben Gold Thwaites, ed., The Jesuit Relations and allied documents: travels and explorations of the Jesuit missionaries in New France. 1610-1791 Vol 1, Acadia: 1610-1613, (Cleveland, 1896). On Poutrincourt see Jean-Claude Collard. Poutrincourt: aventurier Picard en Acadie. (Ihval-Boiron, 2006). 16 Saint-Vallier, Jean-Baptiste de, Estat Present de TEglise et de la Colonie Francoise dans la Nouvelle France (New York, 1965 (1688)) 6. 20 days, two weeks longer than expected, and alluded to another seaborne risk when he described how upon arriving, the settlers "fled into the Forest with carts loaded with their possessions... thinking them pirates."17
Even in the eighteenth century, the sea voyage to Acadia proved a dangerous undertaking. In 1746, the fleet of the Due d'Anville left La Rochelle with 40 per cent of the navy's men-of-war and an expeditionary force of 3 565 regular and marine troops aiming to recapture Louisbourg, liberate Acadia, and invade New England.18 Dispersed by storms and racked by disease, the remnants of the fleetlimpe d into Acadia months overdue and, after another epidemic, were reduced to a total strength of 1 200 men. Its two senior commanders committed suicide, and those ships that got past British privateers eventually staggered into Quebec, having accomplished none of their goals.19
Even leaving aside the dangers of travel, the simple fact that the response time between
Acadia and Paris was usually over a year had a serious impact on the effectiveness and conduct of the colonial administration.20
Sea travel between colonies in the Atlantic was also difficult. Marc Lescarbot, a lawyer and administrator for Poutrincourt, underlined that the mists, winds, and rocky shores of the region were more dangerous than the ocean voyage. His trip fromFranc e to the Grand Banks off Newfoundland was completed in just five largely uneventful weeks.
But it took another two weeks to arrive on Acadia's northeastern coast, and a further eighteen days to move around the peninsula and arrive safely at Port Royal, time spent in
17 Sieur de Diereville, Relation of the Voyage to Port Roval in Acadia or New France, trans., Alice Lusk Webster, (Toronto, 1933) 32,80. 18 James Pritchard, Anatomy of a Naval Disaster: The 1746 French Naval Expedition to North America (Montreal & Kingston, 1995) 40 and 89. 19 NAC PRO High Court of Admiralty, MG 40 D5 Serial HCA 32 Prize Papers. 20 Kenneth Banks, Chasing Empire across the Sea: Communications and the State in the French Atlantic. 1713-1763 (Montreal, 2002) 53. 21 constant worry that the ship would be dashed against the coast. Another explorer,
Nicolas Denys, noted that the entrance to the harbour at Port Royal had to be taken with
"great care" as it was narrow and had a heavy tidal current.21
The overland voyage between Quebec and Port Royal was no less difficult. Saint-
Vallier described the 600 km canoe trip, with its difficult and numerous portages, as "le voyage le plus long & le plus fatigant que j'aye fait." It took him sixteen days to reach the outskirts of Acadia, and several more before arriving at Beaubassin, on the isthmus of
Chignecto. Clearly, the 30 000 livres allocated in 1670 to improve communications and travel between Quebec and Acadia had had little impact.22 The last leg of the bishop's trip, fromMina s to Port Royal, took nine days "d'une f&cheuse navigation ou on ne dormit presque point." Giving up on the waterways, Saint-ValHer and his entourage carried their canoes the final 30 km and eventually arrived, exhausted, at the fort.23 The distance but also the rough terrain was a significant obstacle to any effective official, economic, or social connections between Acadia and New France. This was one of the main reasons why Acadian society developed very differently from that of the St
Lawrence Valley.
Even travel within Acadia could be treacherous and was certainly an impediment to building a successful colony. The Acadians settled in relatively small areas of marshland around the Bay of Fundy (Baye Francoise); an area not much bigger than the
300 km2 of the Loudunais. The distance between the communities, however, was much
21 Marc Lescarbot, Nova Francia. 1606 trans., P. Erondelle (London, 1609) 85; Nicolas Denys, The Description and Natural History of the Coasts of North America (Acadia) trans., William F. Ganong (Toronto, 1908 (1672)) 123. 22 Depenses pour Canada et Acadie, 3 Apr 1670, Collection de manuscrits. This amount also included wages for 100 sailors. 23 Saint-Vallier, Estat Present de l'Eglise. 73-85. 22 greater. The easiest method of travel was by boat across the bay. In the 1690s, the
French governor Villebon reported that he could reach Minas fromPor t Royal by sea in a single day, but that the landward route was more difficult, consisting of about 30 km by canoe, and another 50 km overland. It was about 100 km by sea fromPor t Royal to
Beaubassin, but 300 km by land.24 The French forts at Pentagouet and Nashwaak, further inland on the other side of the Bay of Fundy, were even further from all the Acadian principal settlements. The bay was the centre of communications, movement, and trade for everyone. Yet during periods of conflict, the threat of warships and privateers could prevent anyone from traveling at all.25 This left only the overland routes, which were mere tracks, if that, during the seventeenth century, and were certainly the long way around. It was militarily simple to cut off the Acadian communities from the French posts on the other side by blocking access to the bay.
The distance between colonists and governors, and the isolation of both individual settlements and Acadia as a whole, had important consequences for Acadia's early development For officials, a chief concern was the time it took to communicate. For example, Villebon did not learn of the Treaty of Ryswick, which returned Acadia officially to French control in September 1697, until July of the next year. Governors also had great difficulty relaying orders, enforcing directions, or securing provisions from the dispersed and distant Acadians. In these circumstances, the French state could have little influence over its settlers and their affairs. The very notion of Acadia as a united
24 "Memoir on the present condition of Port Royal," 1699, in John Clarence Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. (Saint John, 1934) 129. 25 The French company agent Tibierge reported in 1695 that all the Acadians were "extremely timid about venturing into this river [the Saint John River on the other side of the Bay]" in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 142. 26 Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 17. 23 colony in a larger French empire is suspect, consisting, as one historian puts it of "little more than the remnants of dreams, the fragmentary pieces of statesmen's ambitions."
Distance and isolation gave the Acadians a degree of independence, but also forced them to be largely self-sufficient The distance from Quebec and France limited their trading partners, making them dependent on visiting New England merchants like
John Nelson for the material goods they could not make themselves.28 No French trading company was able to establish an effective system of exchange in the colony. It was also difficult to maintain close relations between Acadian communities, particularly between
Port Royal and Beaubassin. While a few Acadians did have boats, they avoided using them when the bay was too dangerous - which was most of the time between 1670 and
1710. Gradually, each community developed its own outlook and identity; which was certainly more distinct than that felt in the Loudunais between the neighbouring parishes of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize.29 Finally, the marshlands in which the Acadians settled were distant from the off-shore banks fishedb y other Europeans and the deep woods hunted for fur-bearing animals. As a result, the Acadians rarely benefited from these resources and got most of their living from agriculture.
Acadia - the development of agriculture
The chroniclers of early Acadia differed in the way that they described its terrain.
Biard recounted in 1616, that "for verily all this region...through Satan's malevolence,
27 James Pritchard, In Search of Empire: The French in the Americas. 1670-1730 (Cambridge, 2004) 263. 28 George A. Rawlyk, Nova Scotia's Massachusetts: A Study of Massachusetts-Nova Scotia Relations 1630 to 1784 (Montreal, 1973) 34-35; Richard R. Johnson, John Nelson. Merchant Adventurer: A Life Between Empires (Oxford. 1991). 29 The independence and distinctiveness of the Acadians at Beaubassin is discussed by Paul Surette, "L'esprit du Chignectou, ou comment dejouer une expulsion" Egalit& Revue acadienne d'analyse politique 52 (2005): 81-90. 24 which reigns there, is only a horrible wilderness." Those hoping to recruit settlers and promote investment were more enthusiastic. For Lescarbot, in 1606, it was "like the land which God did promise to his people, by the mouth of Moses."30 Peninsular Acadia had an irregular surface of hills and valleys with lowlands and uplands, soft rock and hard rock, that often ended in granite shores made extremely treacherous by the tides of the
Bay of Fundy. It was almost entirely covered by woods, mostly conifers but also birch, maple, and oak. The only exceptions were the tidal meadows in the area around the bays, which were flooded in March and September. These marshlands occupied over 30 000 ha, with the largest continuous area on the isthmus of Chignecto (about 16 200 ha).
Champlain, inspired by his native Brouage, may have had the idea of developing these marshes to produce salt. Certainly, settlers quickly recognized the potential of the marshlands. They also realized that the soils in the forest were not very fertile, requiring considerable efforts to clear, for questionable results. Soil fertility, quite simply, was the most important factor in the original decision of most Acadians to concentrate their settlement and their agriculture in the marshlands.
Some historians argue that early Acadians had already used dykes while farming in the Poitevin marshes and so came to Acadia prepared to employ similar techniques.34
The inhabitants of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize would certainly have been aware of new marshland farms on the nearby Dive River. But the early settlers appear to have
30 Lescarbot, Nova Francia. 91. 31 Andrew Hill Clark. The Geography of Early Nova Scotia to 1760 (Madison. 1968) 13. 32 Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia. 24; Eliane et Jimmy Vige, Brouage: Capitale du sel et patrie de Champlain (Saint-Jean-d'Angely, 1990); Marc Lavoie, "Les Acadiens et les "Planters" des Maritimes: une <5tude de deux ethnies, de 1680 a 1820" (PhD thesis, University de Laval, 2002) 10. 33 Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia. 374. 34 Robert Sauvageau, Acadie: La guerre de cent ans des Francais d'Am&ique aux Maritimes et en Louisiane. 1670-1769 0?aris, 1987) 15; Yves Cormier, Les aboiteaux en Acadie: hier et auiourd'hui (Moncton, 1990) 26. 25 lacked the knowledge necessary to get started since one of their seigneurs, Charles d'Aulnay, had to contract five indentured servants (engages) with the necessary skills to build dykes in 1636. These "saulniers et bastisseurs de maraix sallans," were given free passage, had all of their living expenses covered, and were even given fishing rights.35
Perhaps following the lead of these men, the Acadians cut into the turf of these meadows and they discovered that it was made up of grass and herbs mingled with mud which
"have heaped themselves yearly one upon another from the beginning of the world."
This substance proved to be a useful construction material, creating sods the size, weight, and strength of bricks, especially useful for dykes.36 The soil of the marshlands turned out to be exceptionally fertile once drained and de-salinated, producing "fine and good wheat." Before long, cultivation was spreading to the marshes upriver from Port Royal, a process speeded up in 1654 by the arrival of Acadians moving away from the new
English colonial regime.37
Many visitors and governors noted the Acadians' successful exploitation of the marshlands. Villebon reported in the 1690s that the peasants produced enough wheat, rye, peas, and oats to feed everyone comfortably, provision other parts of the colony, and also export for profit. The land could further produce flax and hemp crops sufficient to provide ample quantities of linen. Unfortunately, in his view, the colony's abundance was wasted because the settlers were "not very industrious."38 Diereville wrote in 1699 that it produced "all kinds of Vegetables, enough Fruit, & a sufficient amount of Wheat"
35 LAC France: AD C-M, SeYie E, MG A2, Engagements of Jehan Cendre and Pierre Gaborit, 1 Mar 1636 and Saint-Jehan Passenger List, 1 Apr 1636; Leopold Lanctot, L'Acadie des Origines (Quebec, 1994) 48. 36 Lescarbot, Nova Francia. 97; J. Sherman Bleakney, The Acadians at Grand Pre" and their Dvkeland Legacy (Montreal-Kingston, 2004) 28. 37 Denys, Description and Natural History. 124. 38 "Memoir on the present condition of Port RoyaL 1699" in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 128. 26 in the marshes, though the rest of the land was simply a "vast extent of wood." Saint-
Vallier, visiting in 1685, noted that the secret of the Acadians' life of comfort was the
"bons et vastes paturages" upon which they could keep many cows and other livestock.
Though colonial administrators bemoaned Acadian reluctance to clear and cultivate the
wooded uplands, there seemed little motivation to do so, as the forest soil was poor.
When one area filled up, the Acadians preferred to move and cultivate new marshlands
rather than expand existing communities into the woods. Their almost exclusive reliance
on marshes was unique in the New World.40 Another possible reason for this strategy
may have been a deliberate accommodation with the Mi'kmaq population which
established distinct zones for the "people of the forests" and the "people of the shore."41
The marshlands supported a varied agriculture producing many different crops
and also provided nourishment for increasingly large herds of livestock. Most Acadians
grew wheat and peas, and some farmers planted orchards as well. The land did not need to be fertilized, and produced high yields year after year. The area had the added benefit of being rich in fish and mollusks, which could supplement Acadian diets, especially in
the early years of settlement.42 Perhaps best of all, the Acadians could transform wild
39 Saint-Vallier, Estat Present de TEglise. 95; Diereville, Relation of the Voyage. 84-86. 40 Matthew G. Hatvany, Marshlands: Four Centuries of Environmental Change on the Shores of the St Lawrence (Quebec, 2003) 44. Villebon reports that the settlers of Port Royal sent their children to Minas and Beaubassin rather than clear new land from the forests "because the work was too hard" in "Memoir on the Settlements and Harbours from Minas at the head of the Bay of Fundy to Cape Breton, 1699" in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 133. 41 Clive Doucet, Lost and Found in Acadie (Halifax, 2004) 24. John Mack Faragher suggests the accommodation was explicit in A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of the French Acadians fromthei r American Homeland (New York, 2005) 48. 42 Andree Crepeau et Brenda Dunn found considerable evidence of fish and mollusc remains in the refuse pit of "L'&ablissement Melanson: un site agricole acadien (vers 1664-1755)" (Pares Canada, 1986) 12. 27 spaces into farms in relatively short order, and certainly much faster than settlers clearing forests in other parts of New France.43
This method of farming was a critical factor in the development of rural society in
Acadia. It required a lot of space, and could only be performed in the marshlands along the rivers and certain shores of the Bay of Fundy. But as we have seen, these areas were not contiguous, and so Acadian communities grew up very distant from each other. Even within each community, the farms were dispersed, centred on groups of families working together to build dykes around suitable marshland areas. In 1707, for example, most of the Acadians at Port Royal were spread out along the Dauphin River. On the far side, sixteen family farms were distributed over nearly twelve kilometers of marshland. A map of Acadian farms in 1733 shows a similar pattern of settlement, which might be characterized as a sort of prosperous bocage, complete with mixed farming, de centralized parishes, and obvious natural and man-made boundaries.44 As the population grew, settlers moved to Beaubassin and Minas where new marshlands could be dyked.
Over time, each community modified its practices to make best use of local soil conditions and terrain. For example, the larger contiguous area of marshland in
Beaubassin formed wide grasslands when cleared that were ideal for cattle-raising, while orchards flourished in the more narrow and fertile areas upriver from Port Royal.45 In general, however, with the exception of tiny groups at Pobomcoup and La Heve, the
43 William C. Wicken, "Re-examining Mi'kmaq-Acadian Relations, 1635-1755" in Sylvie Depatie, et al., eds.. Habitants et Marchands Twenty Years Later: Reading the History of Seventeenth- and Eighteenth- Century Canada (Montreal, 1998) 99. 44 Maurice Basque, Pes hommes de pouvoir histoire d'Otho Robichaud et de sa famille.notabl e acadiens de Port Roval et de Neguac (Neguac, 1996) 50; Edith Tapie, "Les structures socio-eeonomiques de Grand Pr6, communaut^ acadienne" (MA. thesis, University de Moncton, 2000) 34; Regis Brun, Les Acadiens avant 1755. Essai (Moncton, 2003) 1-10. See Map 4. 45 Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 285. 28 entire Acadian population used dyked marshland to grow crops and raise livestock, creating a unified landscape of settlement and agriculture.
J. B. Brebner once asserted that "there were in effect, two Acadies, each important in its own way. The one was the Acadie of the international conflict, the other the land settled and developed by the Acadians."46 States might argue and fight over the whole of the northeastern borderlands, but the interest of the Acadians was the relatively small area of the marshlands. That settled zone was the area that the English governor of
Nova Scotia, Thomas Temple, was describing when he wrote to the Lords of Council in
1668 that "Acadia is but a small part of the country of Nova Scotia."47 Of course,
Temple's assertion was self-interested - he did not want the English King, who had signed the Treaty of Ryswick in 1697, to give the whole peninsula back to the French.
Yet he was right in that the rest of the wooded lands remained relatively untouched by
Europeans, though certainly well traveled by the M'ikmaq. Despite official pretensions, most of Acadia remained outside the effective rule of the European powers until the second half of the eighteenth century.
Climate
The Little Ice Age
Climate can not be considered a constant factor of the environment like terrain.
Instead, it was a variable which had fluctuations with serious consequences for
J. B. Brebner, New England's Outpost: Acadia before the Conquest of Canada (New York, 1927) 45. 47 Thomas Temple to the Lords of Council, 24 Nov 1668, Memoires des commissaires. 298. 29 agriculture, and indeed, for human survival. Between 1350 and 1800, the Little Ice Age
(LIA) affected much of the world, including Western Europe and North America.
Environmental historians caution against making generalizations, but it is generally accepted that the LIA was a period of cooling after the medieval warm period. It lowered annual mean temperatures between one and two degrees, which could decrease the length of the growing season, particularly in maritime regions such as Acadia which already had relatively few frost-free days. Perhaps more important, the LIA also increased climatic variability. Short-term shifts, such as markedly colder or wetter conditions, could have a devastating impact on harvest results, and can also be linked to some forms of epidemics.
Wheat was particularly intolerant to higher than normal precipitation, with obvious
implications for the Loudunais.49
The period from 1675 to 1715, also known as the Late Maunder Minimum
(LMM), has been described as the nadir of the LIA. The LMM refers to a reduced level of observed solar activity (e.g. sunspots) that has been linked with the coldest temperatures of the entire LIA. It certainly coincides with two of the coldest winters in
French history, those of 1693-94 and 1709-10, both of which led to major mortality
P. D. Jones and R. S. Bradley, "Climatic Variations over the last 500 years" in Raymond S. Bradley and Philip D. Jones, eds., Climate since A. D. 1500 (London, 1995) 660; A. Michaelowa, "The Impact of Short- Term Climate Change on British and French Agriculture and Population in the First Half of the Eighteenth Century" in P. D. Jones, et aL, eds., History and Climate: Memories of the Future? (New York, 2001) 201; John F. Richards, The Unending Frontier: An Environmental History of the Early Modern World (Berkeley, 2003) 61. 49 Richard C. Hoffmann, Land. Liberties, and Lordship in a Late Medieval Countryside - Agrarian Structures and Change in the Duchy of Wroclaw (Philadelphia, 1989) 273-289; Brian Fagan, The Little Ice Age: How Climate Made History. 1300-1850 (New York, 2000) 102; J. M. Grove, "Climatic Change in Northern Europe Over the Last Thousand Years and its Possible Influence on Human Activity" in Gerold Wefer, et aL, eds., Climate Development and History of the North Atlantic Realm (Berlin, 2002) 313. 30 crises.50 However, historians have emphasized that even the LMM was not universally cold, and the causes of climate variations cannot be reduced to a simple fall in sunspot activity. Although the period 1689 to 1700 was significantly cooler in France, the decade after 1700 was warmer than average until the killing cold of 1709. The increase in the dust volume index (DVI) caused by the volcanic eruptions of Vesuvius, Santorin, and
Fujiyama in 1707-08 seem much more likely causes of the grand hiver than reduced sunspot activity.51 The North Atlantic region, including Acadia, may have been colder than elsewhere during the LMM because of the "inter-variability of the atmosphere-ocean system," a finding supported by tree-ring evidence for northeastern North America between 1690 and 1710.52 Whatever the causes, the LMM corresponded to a period of greater climatic variability and especially cold winters in both the Loudunais and Acadia, as seen by compiling the observations of various contemporaries (discussed below).
50 Neville Brown, History and Climate Change: A Eurocentric Perspective OLondon & New York, 2001) 296; J. Luterbacher, et al., "The Late Maunder Minimum (1675-1715); A Key Period for Studying Decadal Scale Climatic Change in Europe" Climatic Change Vol 49 (2001): 441-462. 51 Christian Pfister and Walter Bareiss found a similar temperature pattern in "The Climate in Paris between 1675 and 1715 according to the Meteorological Journal of Louis Morin" in Burkhard Frenzel, et al., eds., Climatic Trends and Anomalies in Europe. 1675-1715 (Stuttgart, 1994) 151-172; Michael E. Mann, et al., also argue that greenhouse gases may have had an effect in "Global Scale Temperature Patterns and Climate Forcing over the Past Six Centuries" Nature Vol 392 (1998): 779-787; Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, Histoire humaine et compare du climat: canicules et glaciers XIII" -XVHT siecles (Paris, 2004) 473-529. 52 R. D. Arrigo and G. C. Jacoby, Jr., "Dendroclimatic evidence from northern North America" in Bradley and Jones, eds., Climate since A. D. 1500.302; E. R. Cook, et al., "Dendroclimatic evidence from eastern North America" in Bradley and Jones, eds., Climate since A. D. 1500.345; J. Luterbacher, "The Late Maunder Minimum (1675-1715); climax of the 'Little Ice Age' in Europe" in P. D. Jones, et al., eds., History and Climate, 49. 31 Table 1 - Adverse weather reported by contemporary observers in Acadia and the Loudunais
Year The Loudunais Acadia 1684 Long, cold winter 1686 Extreme temperature variability during the summer 1688 Flooding 1692 Cold winter, spring flooding 1693 Flooding (spring), very cold winter 1697 Early, very cold winter 1698 Drought 1699 Flooding, "Hurricane" 1705 Flooding 1709 Grand hiver 1711 Severe Flooding 1712 Flooding
There certainly seems to be a connection between the LMM and the increased
mortality rates of the period. The Loudunais, like much of rural France, lost nearly
twenty per cent of its population between 1690 and 1715.53 Historians point out that
climate conditions were not solely to blame, as France was also at war for most of that
period (1690-97,1702-13).54 However, we know that climate affected the food supply
and also the spread of disease: protracted cold periods contributed to the risk of louse-
borne and respiratory diseases, partly by keeping people indoors longer in cramped,
unsanitary conditions; drought favoured the spread of the bacteria for dysentery and
typhoid fever.55
53 AD I-L C337 Etat ou nombre des feux de chaque paroisse de rejection de Loudun depuis 1732; Lachiver, Les ann6es de misere. 453; Le Roy Ladurie, Histoire humaine et compared du climat 528. 54 Brown, History and Climate Change. 289; Le Roy Ladurie, Histoire humaine et compared du climat. 529. 55 John D. Post, Food Shortage. Climatic Variability and Epidemic Disease in Preindustrial Europe: the Mortality Peak in the early 1740s (Ithaca, 1985) 24,263; Michaelowa, "The Impact of Short-Term Climate Change," 210. 32 Historians have not considered whether the LMM affected population growth in
Acadia. Although the inaccuracy of the census records, general lack of parish registers, and paucity of other documents make exact statistics impossible, the results are clear enough to suggest that there probably was a connection, especially when we know that different rates of immigration did not cause the disparity in the rate of population growth during the period.56
Table 2 - Population growth in Acadia during the LMM Year Population Increase Increase / Year / (Peninsular Acadia) 1 000 people 1689 800 1693 1 150 350 110 1701 1400 250 27 1707 1800 400 37
Warfare also played a role in slowing the rate of population growth; Acadia was conquered in 1690 and again in 1710, and also experienced major raids or invasions in
1696,1704, and 1707.57 But the fall of Port Royal in 1690 does not appear to have had a large impact on the growth rate, and the 1696 raid only affected Beaubassin, while the violence of 1704 and 1707 was more general throughout the colony. Since the dramatic drop-off in the growth rate occurred before these later events, we can conclude that the climatic conditions of the LMM were an important, if not the most important, factor.
Population figures for peninsular Acadia from Clark, The Early Geography of Nova Scotia. 121-131. 57 See Part 1,2. 33 Fortunately, during the subsequent period down to about 1740, the climate in
Western Europe and North America was relatively warmer and less variable.58 It is interesting to note that this corresponds to the period of the Acadian "Golden Age" - a time of great demographic and agricultural expansion. Meanwhile, the population of the
Loudunais was able to recover from the mortality crises of 1693-94 and 1709-10. It was a period of growth and stability almost everywhere. Significantly, it was also a time of relative peace. But cold and variability returned in the early 1740s, coinciding with the
last great surge in mortality from natural causes to be experienced simultaneously across most of early modern Europe. In that crisis, dysentery appears to have been the biggest killer in France, a disease linked to poor nutritional status. In Acadia, it seems likely that greater temperature variability, storms, and several cool, wet years recorded in the larger region probably caused increased mortality, though their impact cannot be exactly measured.59
Such were the major shifts in climate during the early modern period in the
Loudunais and Acadia; it remains to consider the ways in which the climates of these two regions shaped, supported and limited the development of their rural societies.
The Loudunais
In 1698, Intendant Miromesnil characterized the climate of the Loudunais and the larger province of Touraine as "temperate."60 During the early modern period (under the
58 Fagan, The Little Ice Age. 157. 59 Post, The Mortality Peak in the early 1740s. 17,273; W. R. Baron, "Historical Climate Records fromth e Northeastern United States, 1640 to 1900" in Bradley and Jones, eds., Climate since A. P. 1500.84-86; Le Roy Ladurie, Histoire humaine et compared dn climat. 576-607. 60 AN K-1051 Memoire de la Province de Tours, 1698. 34 influence of the LI A), the average annual temperature was eleven degrees, ranging from three in January and nineteen in July. Summers tended to be warm and dry, while there was plenty of rainfall in the winter and spring to nourish developing crops. These were ideal conditions for wheat. Annual precipitation was 640 mm / year, greater than nearby
Anjou and also than further east, such as at Richelieu (540-550 mm / yr), but not too wet.
Westerly winds prevailed and temperature extremes were normally moderated by the
Atlantic Ocean, though not as much as in coastal areas. This made the climate of the
Loudunais "sans grandes oppositions et tout en nuances."61 An average of fewer than fifty days of frostprovide d a lengthy growing cycle in which peasants could cultivate both spring (usually barley) and summer crops.62 In short, a favourable climate went with good soil to support a generally prosperous, wheat-exporting rural economy.
Climate variations, however, caused serious disruptions to this economy, particularly during the LMM. For example, higher precipitation caused inundations of the Loire and its subsidiaries during the spring and early summer. In 1693 and 1712, the intendant reported that floodsha d damaged crops, and also ruined meadows so that there was nowhere to put livestock. In 1711, he confirmed reports of severe flooddamage. 63
A particularly long winter in 1684 frozemos t grain crops in the ground in both Touraine and Poitou, leaving only some of the rye and oats.64 In some summers it rained too much, in others not enough, and even the slightest variation caused worries and prices to rise. Cold winters within reason were a benefit for cereal harvests, but wet ones, and
61 Pitie, Exode rural et migrations interieures. 235; Debien, "Deiricheurs," 46; Pierre Leveel, Histoire de Touraine (Chambry, 1988) 501. 62 Leveel, Histoire de Touraine. 501; Francois Lebrun, Les Hommes et le mort et Aniou aux XVlf et XVuT siecles (Paris, 2004 (1971)) 127. 63 AN G7 521 Tours 30 Jun 1693 Miromesnil to C-G; AN G7 529 Tours 8 Mar 1711 Chauvelin to C-G; 23 Jun 1712 Chauvelin to C-G. 64 AN G7 519 Tours 28 May 1684 De Nointel to C-G; AN G7 450 Poitiers 23 Apr 1684 De Nointel to C-G. 35 particularly wet summers, could devastate wheat and also push back wine production into the autumn. Short of killer colds like that of the grand hiver of 1709, it was humidity rather than temperature, which determined harvest results.65
Officials were very aware of the impact that climate variations could have on the rural population. The intendant's principal task was to ensure the regular collection of state taxes, and climate effects on the harvest and rising grain prices were often cited as reasons why receipts were slow or incomplete.66 The intendant did his best to maintain confidence in the local food supply and keep prices steady, often by having grain brought in from other provinces, or preventing its export.67 This is a good example of the way in which peasants and officials shared similar interests and concerns in the countryside.
There were two serious mortality crises in France during the LMM, 1693-94 and
1709-10.68 In and around the year 1709 there was a general food shortage across western
France, and during the winter of 1709-10 (the grand hiver), ice destroyed new crops in what should have been late spring. In the gen£ralit6 of Tours, the culminating years for mortality were 1706-08.69 When the King demanded 32 000 sacks of grain for his troops fighting in Flanders in 1709, intendant Chauvelin of Tours could only reply that a third of the parishes in his generality had no grain at all, though he thought that the peasants were
Lachiver, Les annees de misere. 268-316. Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, Times of Feast Times of Famine: A History of Climate Since the Year 1000 trans., Barbara Bray (Garden City, 1971) 289-292. 66 AN G7 450 Poitiers 22 Jul 1686 De Nointel to C-G. 67 AN G7 519 Tours 3 Jul 1685 De Nointel to C-G; AN G7 450 Poitiers 28 May 1684 De Nointel to C-G; AN G7 465-467 Poitiers 16 Jun 1720 De la Tour to C-G; Annette Smedley-Weill, Les attendants de Louis XIV (Paris, 1995)247. 68 Brown, History and Climate Change. 296. 69 Pierre Valmary, Families Pavsannes au XVIIT siecle en Bas-Ouerev: Etude demographique (Paris, 1965) 84; Jacques DupSquier, La population rurale du bassin Parisien a l'epoque de Louis XIV (Paris, 1979) 237. Francois Lebrun adds that dysentry struck the Loire Valley in 1707 in Histoire des pays de la Loire: Orleanais. Touraine. Anjou. Maine (Toulouse, 1972) 272. 36 practicing "all manner of tricks to hide it." A few big peasant producers may have had some grain to hide, but most of them were dying from a combination of malnutrition and disease. Indeed, the peasants of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize might be excused for wondering if the end of the world was near when an earthquake shook the Loudunais in
1711.71
Fortunately, climatic conditions improved in the succeeding decades and the population was able to recover. Despite a brief period of adversity between 1738 and
1742, a warmer and less variable climate prevailed until at least 1765. Although we can see the demographic effects during periods of climatic variability, discussed in detail in
Part II, the available documents do not permit us to see to what degree peasants considered the climate when they made decisions such as when to invest in more land, when to sell or buy produce, when to get married, or when to have children. It is likely, however, that their interest in weather conditions bordered on the obsessive. Although the climate was generally favourable in the Loudunais, the intendants reported that even small variations in temperature or precipitation could increase fears of bad harvests and lead to intense price speculation. No doubt poor weather was linked in the minds of peasants to other scourges such as famine, war and endemic disease. This said, concerns about the weather did not lead cultivators in the Loudunais to change their focus on wheat, the most intolerant of grain crops to climate variability. They must have felt that the risk was manageable and well worth the reward.
70 AN G7 528 Tours 3 Nov 1709 Chauvelin to C-G. 71 Sieur Gu&uveau au Contr61eur-G6n&al, 7 Oct 1711 in A. M. Boislisle, Correspondance des Contrdleurs- G&ieVaux des Finances avec les intendants des provinces iParis. 1874). Also see Auguste-Louis Lerosey, Loudun: Histoire Civile et Religieuse (Loudun. 1980 (1908)) 50. 37 Acadia
Voltaire famously dismissed Canada as "quelques arpents de neige" upon learning that France had given up this territory to Great Britain in exchange for Martinique and
Guadeloupe in 1763. One of the few things French people probably knew about New
France in the seventeenth century was that it was very cold. The early colonizers struggled to counter this view, by emphasizing that the climate of Acadia, at least, was
actually not that bad. Nicolas Denys wrote that it was much like Nantes or Bayonne for
snowfall, while Biard thought it more like Paris or Picardy with its fog and drizzling rain.
Lescarbot stressed that Acadia was much milder than Quebec. He allowed that the
Acadian winter could be tedious, but argued that the snow cover helped "shelter the fruits
of the earth from frost."72 Biard conceded that the Acadian winter was colder and the
snow lasted longer than in France, but he thought that this was because the land was
uncultivated and so the earth, unploughed and covered by trees, could not be warmed by
the sun. Settlement would quickly improve the situation. He further pointed out that proximity to the ocean reduced the "intolerable" summer heat often experienced in
France. Denys went so far as to claim that "there is very little snow in this country, and
very little winter."73
These unconvincing attempts to minimize the impact of the Acadian winter gave
way later in the century to more frankassessments. 74 Villebon wrote in 1692 "I never
remember such a hard winter" and later noted that he had had to abandon his fort at
72 Lescarbot, Nova Francia. 120; Biard, "Relation de la Nouvelle France" in Thwaites, ed., The Jesuit Relations. Vol III; Denys, Description and Natural History. 252. 73 Biard, "Relation de la Nouvelle France." Denys makes a similar point about the woods preventing the snow melting, Description and Natural History. 252. 74 Though companies seeking investments fromth e king could still be found claiming the climate was just like La Rochelle as late as the 1680s, "M&noire sur 1'Acadie [compagnie de la peche s6dentaire de l'Acadie], 1682" Collection de manuscrits. 291. 38 Nashwaak temporarily because of flooding when the ice melted at the end of March. The freezing of the rivers early in November made travel not only more difficult, but more
dangerous as well; the fort chaplain fell through the ice and drowned in 1697. The
following January and February were even worse, "these two months have been very severe; it is a long time since a winter like this, with so much snow, has been known; the garrison has suffered greatly in consequence."75 Diereville found summer to be more pleasant in Acadia than in France, but "winter is colder; it snows almost continuously at this season, & the winds are so cold that they freeze one's face." The snow, he complained, lasted seven or eight months on the ground, especially in the woods, giving the air a "glacial" feel, and imposing idleness on the inhabitants, which he felt should be remedied by increasing commerce.76 The extended winter may have facilitated a level of
leisure and socialization that was not possible in most of rural France, where peasants cultivated several crops each year just to get by. In 1720, British official Paul Mascarene noted to his superiors that "the climate is cold and very variable even in the southernmost part of this Country, and is subject to long and severe winters."77 The Acadian climate, or the perception of it, appears to have been a considerable obstacle to attracting new migrants from either France or New England.
Acadia did have an annual mean temperature well below that of Paris and the
Loudunais, though above that of Quebec. This was in part because the peninsula benefited only in part from the warm waters of the Gulf Stream, which mixed offshore
75 Villebon, Journal, Jan-Mar 1692 and Jan-Mar 1697, in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 35.110. 76 Diereville, Relation of the Voyage. 100. 77 Mascarene, 1720 in Thomas B. Akins, ed., Acadia and Nova Scotia: Documents relating to the Acadian French and the first British Colonization of foeProvince . 1714-1758 (Cottonport. 1972)40. 39 with the much colder Labrador Sea Water, while France benefited from generally warm oceanic currents.78 In addition, the Acadians lived around the Bay of Fundy, where it was somewhat cooler than the Atlantic coast where the British founded Halifax in 1749.
As a result, the growing season in Acadia was significantly shorter than in the Loudunais, with only four or five months frost-free. Acadia and New France were especially colder than Paris and the Loudunais during the winter.79
Table 3 - Estimated early modern annual mean temperatures, France, Quebec, and Acadia Annual Mean Temp Mean Temp January Mean Temp July Halifax 6.7 -5 17.8 Bay of Fundy -6.5 15.5 Quebec 4.5 -9.6 19.5 Paris 10.9 3.5 18.3 Loudunais 11 3 19
In general, the Bay of Fundy region experienced a cool, rainy summer, a warm and sunny autumn, colder interior air currents in the winter, and a late spring. The presence of the ocean water moderated temperature extremes and contributed to a large amount of precipitation, over 1 000 mm on average annually.81 This was nearly double that of the Loudunais. Another characteristic of the region's climate was frequent fog, with over one hundred days of it a year, lasting several hours each day. Lescarbot
J. Meincke, "Climate Dynamics of the North Atlantic and NW Europe: An Observation-based Overview" in Wefer, et at, eds., Climate and History of the North Atlantic. 25-40. 79 Schott indicates 160 days frost-freeo n average, The Canadian Marshland, 10; Henri-Dominique Paratte, Peoples of the Maritimes: Acadians (Halifax, 1998) 33. 80 Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia. 30; Carl Schott, The Canadian Marshland, trans., J. W. Ryire, (Kiel, 1995) 8. I have decreased the twentieth-century values they provide by 0.5 degrees to approximate the effect of the LIA (which they do not seem to be aware of). Paris temperatures from Lachiver, Les annees de misere. 467; Loudunais temperatures fromPitie \ Exode rural et migrations inf&ieures. 235 81 Schott, The Canadian Marshland. 10,44. 40 thought that these mists "will serve as a rampart to the country," assisting the French in hiding their fortifications from enemies.82 Biard credited the clean air and water, regularly refreshed by mists and rains, with reducing the incidence of disease among the early colonists.83 These apparent benefits notwithstanding, the shorter growing season and risks of early or late frostsma y help explain why many Acadians diversified their crops and relied on livestock for much of their revenue.
In addition to a long, difficult and often tedious winter, Acadia experienced occasionally catastrophic storms. Biard noted that blizzards could last up to ten days, while more violent storms hit the Bay of Fundy in fall or early winter. Diereville described a windstorm in 1699 as "the unmatched Hurricane" and noted that the oldest inhabitants vowed "there had never been such a gale in that Region before."84 The
Maritime region frequentlyreceive s the tail end of dissipating tropical storms from the
Caribbean, bringing rain and high winds called nor'easters. Once in a while these storms are particularly strong, even reaching hurricane status, as did Hurricane Juan in 2003,
Beth in 1971, the "Great Nova Scotia Cyclone" of 1873 and the hurricane of 1810.85
When storms with strong winds combined with tides at the height of their amplitude, this could cause big floods, as in 1688,1699, and 1705 when some of the Acadian dykes were overwhelmed. The Bay of Fundy is famous for the dramatic difference between high and low tides, from four to as much as seventeen metres. A tidal bore is located not far from
Beaubassin. Since it took from two to five years to desalinate the marshland once it had
82 Lescarbot, Nova Francia. 85; David Phillips, "Nova Scotia Climate," Atlantic Climate Centre, Environment Canada. http://atlantic-web 1 .ns.ec.gc.ca/climatecentre. 83 Biard, "Relation de la Nouvelle France." 84 Biard, "Relation de la Nouvelle France"; Diereville, Relation of the Voyage. 86. 85 Phillips, "Nova Scotia Climate." 41 been covered, flooding could seriously harm the local economy. Raiders deliberately cut dykes in 1696 and 1704 to achieve the same effect86 The resulting loss of crops and the extended recovery time explain why Acadian population expansion appears greatly reduced during the last decade of the seventeenth century. When not flooding their farmland, the tides could assist the Acadians, who took advantage of low tide to find mollusks and set up small fishing nets on the flats.87
Although the marshland soil was highly fertile, the climate afforded Acadians a limited window of opportunity to take advantage of it, particularly during the LMM.
Acadian farmers no doubt worried every year about when the frost would arrive, or when to begin seeding in the spring. Wheat was an important crop but relatively intolerant to variations in climate, so many farmers diversified what they planted to help ensure that they would not lose everything if frost arrived early (or late) or if precipitation levels changed. Their strategy was not foolproof; a drought in 1698 ruined the entire harvest, causing a serious famine in the colony the following year. After a serious flood, the soil became unsuitable for anything but pasture for at least two years. Given these conditions, it is not surprising that most Acadians invested early in livestock as security for times when the crops failed. The warmer and less variable climate between 1710 and 1740, along with the return of peace, made possible a succession of consistent harvests which contributed to the demographic and economic expansion of the "Golden Age," but the
Acadians continued to devote much of their time to their herds and it made eminent sense to do so.
86 Hatvany, Four Centuries of Environmental Change. 46. On raiders see Part 1,2. 87 Lescarbot, Nova Francia. 97; Lavoie, "Les Acadiens et Ies "Planters," 8; Bleakney, The Acadians at Grand Pre\ 6. 88 Jean Daigle, "La femine de 1699 en Acadie," SHA Vol 7,3 (1976): 147-149. 42 Wildlife
So far, we have considered the ways in which peasants adapted their methods to the local terrain and climate. But the wilderness was not empty; wildlife could be a source of food, but some predators posed a dangerous threat to the livestock and people who lived in the countryside. In addition* animals that could be captured and sold for profit, such as fish, drew commercial and imperial competitors into conflict, placing the rural population further at risk.
Wolves and Perceptions of Wolves in France
Wolves ICanis lupus lupus/said the French population had a long history of antagonism in the medieval period. Charlemagne created royal wolf-hunters in the eighth century. As late as 1438 and 1439, wolves penetrated into the heart of Paris and killed thirty people. Nobles hunted wolves to protect the deer in their hunting parks as much as the tenants on their estates. Wolves and the wild places they inhabited (woods, marshes, and fens) were a "symbole de la peur, de toutes les peurs, peur panique, peur collective, peur solitaire, peur obsidionale, peur m^taphysique."89
In the early modern period, there were tens of thousands of adult wolves across
France. They ate hundreds of thousands of sheep. It seems that most wolves preferred wild prey when it was available, but the reduction of their habitat (in a word, hunger) drove them to approach human habitations and kill livestock, bringing wolves directly
Fr&teric Muyard, Les loups et la loi: du XVT siecle a nos jours, histoire d'une hantise populaire (Sp^racedes, 1998) 12-13; Jacques Berlioz, Catastrophes naturelles et catamites au Moyen Age (Sismel 1998) 29; Aleksander Pluskowski, Wolves and the Wilderness in die Middle Ages (Rochester, 2006) 102. 43 into contact with peasants. This was an indication, not of the health of the wolf population, but its desperation. Several dozen people were killed by wolves every year,
usually children watching herds or otherwise separated from their families. A surprising
number were also attacked in or around their homes.91 Rabies became an important
problem in the seventeenth century, probably as a result of more frequent encounters with
domestic dogs and humans. A rabid wolf would attack indiscriminately until killed.92
Wolf attacks seem to have been particularly bad when times were already difficult.
L'ubiquite des loups, l'attention qu'ils suscitent, fait de la chasse au loup un indicateur de la sante des carapagnes et meme des villes, de la qualite des annees qui passent. Un moment d'inattention, un recul economique, un hiver rude, ils se multiplient.93
Not surprisingly, the state attempted to destroy the animals. Francis I created an enlarged
department of wolf-hunters under the administration of the Eaux et Forets in 1520, with
lieutenants and sergeants for every region of France. An edict of 1601 required all
seigneurs to lead their peasants on annual wolf hunts with muskets and dogs. Larger
bounties, money for traps, and more wolf-hunters were created in 1649 and 1669.94
Louis XIV's eldest son, the Grand Dauphin, became a celebrated wolf-hunter.
But the attacks continued into the eighteenth century. The most famous example
was the "Beast" of the Gevaudan (in fact, probably a group of wolves) that killed at least
98 people between 1764 and 1767 in an isolated part of Languedoc despite the efforts of
Pluskowski, Wolves and the Wilderness. 31,73. 91 Jean-Marc Moriceau, Histoire du m^chant loup: 3 000 attaques sur rhomme en France (XV-XX6 sfecte') (Paris, 2007) 269. 92 Lachiver, Les annees de misere. 57; Moriceau, Histoire du m6chant loup. 257. 93 Feraand Braudel, Civilisation mateYielle. economie et capitalisme. XV - XVlir siecle. Tome I: Les stuctures du quotidien: le possible et rimpossible (Paris, 1979) 47. 94 AN G7 521 Tours 25 Jun 1693 Miromesnil to C-G; Lebrun, Les homines et le mort 290; Lachiver, Les annees de misere, 55; Muyard, Les loups et la loi. 30-32. On systematic hunting of wolves throughout Western Europe and North America, see Richards, Unending Frontier. 9; Pluskowski, Wolves and the Wilderness. 7. 44 peasants, nobles, mounted police, and dragoons. Wolf attacks in the 1760s were also reported in Soissons, Perigord, Champagne, Hainaut, La Rochelle, Dijon, and Lyon. The state and provincial authorities increased their efforts but wolf numbers seemed limitless; over 5 000 wolves were killed in the generalite of Poitiers alone between 1770 and
1784.95 Although contemporary records give us some indication of the number of people killed, the quantity of injured and the psychological affects of these attacks are difficult to quantify. When the wolves were rabid, victims often lingered for days or even months before dying from the infection. A few unfortunates were shot, suffocated, or otherwise killed by their loved ones as they succumbed to the worst stages of the disease.96
Wolves were broadly associated with evil and the Devil, partly from an exaggeration of the very few references to wolves in the Bible. They could be associated with witchcraft; werewolves (loup-garous) were common figuresi n local folklore. It was also common to refer to raiders and brigands as wolf-like. Wild places were seen as dangerous and outside the order of the community. But perceptions of wolves could be more complicated. They sometimes appeared as guardians and even objects of ridicule in medieval and early modern culture. The wolf of Romulus and Remus was a symbol of imperial legacy and of martial strength. Some local healing remedies called for wolf fat or organs.97 In general, however, stories and sightings of wolves inflamed the fears of early modern people. Few people knew anything about wolves other than that they tended to appear in greater numbers and attacked with greater frequencydurin g difficult
95 Guy Crouzet, La Grande Peur du GeVaudan: Une enquflte historique documents sur Faffaire de la b€te (2001) 74,97; Richard H. Thompson, Wolf-Hunting in France in the Reign of Louis XV (Lewiston, 1991) 21,38-50; Moriceau, Histoire du mechant loup. 169-214. 96 Moriceau, Histoire du mechant loup. 411-444. 97 Pluskowski, Wolves and the Wilderness. 145-190. Jacques Fencant and Maryse Leveel, Le Folklore de Touraine: Dictionnaire des rites et coutumes (Chambray. 1989)260-261. 45 winters or times of war and dearth. Certainly nothing good came fromthem . At best, they were pests that threatened a peasant's livestock. At worst, wolves were fiends waiting for the chance to devour children.
The Loudunais and Surrounding Region
The province of Touraine, and the wider Loire valley southwest of Paris, was the most dangerous region in France for wolf attacks. This was because of its wooded areas surrounded by relatively scattered rural communities that afforded wolves both habitat and potential livestock prey. In contrast, there were few wild spaces left in the early modern Loudunais, but there were a few dense wooded areas remaining that could provide refuge to wolves, particularly since the animals' territories might extend from
100 to 500 km2. Of course, rumours, stories and fears traveled still further and probably faster than the predators. The inhabitants of the Loudunais were certainly affected when wolf attacks became particularly bad in the larger generalite. For example, in the midst of the 1693-94 mortality crisis in Anjou, the "beast" of Touraine (actually several wolves) killed 200 people from nineteen different parishes in and around the Bourgeuil forest.100 Although the Marquis de Razilly was credited with saving Bourgeuil from another wolf pack in 1711, most organized hunting expeditions against them failed. In
1714, another twenty-five people from the same area were killed in a single day.
Eventually, after a young woman had been devoured near the major city of Angers, and
98 In fact, Jean-Marc Moriceau has found that while rabid wolves were more of a problem during the winter months, wolves acting simply as predators were much more likely to attack in the summer, Histoire du mgchant loup. 281. 99 Moriceau, Histoire du mediant loup. 262. 100 Moriceau, Histoire du mfohant loup. 128. 46 another person attacked in Tours itself, the intendant prevailed upon the King to increase royal bounties to 50 It for each adult wolf and 20 for each pup.101 When higher bounties and teams of royal wolf-hunters proved unable to prevent further attacks, the intendant hired local men to beat the woods and kill the animals.102 Feelings of helplessness and vulnerability in the face of food shortages and disease during this period were no doubt compounded by the apparent inability to stop the wolves.
Wolves were a recurring problem throughout the eighteenth century, and not just during times of crisis. Touraine was particularly struck between 1742 and 1767. The situation had gotten so bad in 1748 that the King sent 2 000 It to help pay for wolf hunts and the intendant ordered the delegates (syndics) of several parishes to gather the best shooters from their communities to help.103 The Loudunais had its share of wolves as well. Five wolf bounties were claimed in Loudun in 1751, and wolves were killed in the
1770s in the Guesnes forest just to the east of Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaize.104
Fear of wolves created "un climat de peur continu" for many peasants, especially in Touraine, and at the very least contributed to common feelings of insecurity.105
Rumours flew, undoubtedly adding not only to the perceived number of attacks but also their reputed grisliness and deadliness. In one memorable account, the subdelegate of
Tours reported that he had heard the habitants relate that "un cheval et un loup enrages
[avaient] mordu quelques personnes et plusieurs bestiaux aux environs de cette ville."
The lieutenant-general de police of Tours was sent to investigate, and discovered that the
101 AN G7 529 Tours 26 Oct 1711 Chauvelin to C-G; 1 Dec 1713; 2 Jul 1714. 102 AN G7 529 Tours 3 Oct 1714 Chauvelin to C-G; 6 Dec 1714; Moriceau, Histoire du mechant loup. 137. 103 AD Tours C412 16 Apr 1751 Subdelegate to Intendant; Extralt registre du Conseil d'Etat, 24 Dec 1748; 104 Etat general des sommes payees a ceux qui ont tue des loups, 1751; Madeleine Renaud, Loups du Poitou (Les amis du pays de Lussac-les-Chateaux, 1985) 30. 105 Moriceau, Histoire du mechant loup, 153. 47 only disturbance had been caused by a sick horse which had attacked other livestock in its
pen and been killed by its owner.106 Even in the original official account, the image of a
rabid horse (coincidentally named Reynard) alongside a vicious wolf terrorizing the local
population was compelling, so one can only imagine how the story became embellished
as it spread. On the one hand, the response to wolf attacks was a good example of the
way that communities, seigneurs, and officials could work in concert with funds and
experts from the state to protect rural society. On the other, the failure of these efforts to
eradicate the problem probably frustrated peasants greatly.
Did fear of wolves help shape the system of centralized villages of the Loudunais?
Did it keep the inhabitants of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize from going far into the
nearby woods? Was it related to their limited livestock holdings? Did it bring local
seigneurs and peasants together? Any answers would be, at best, intriguing speculation.
Certainly, fear of wolves would not have been as important as factors such as terrain and
climate in determining the structures of rural society. Yet peasants' perceptions and
experience of wolves certainly had a role in shaping their perspective towards the
environment, towards state officials, and emphasized the need for security.
Wolves and the Wilderness in Acadia
Given popular fears and experiences with wolves, in the Loudunais and
elsewhere, it would be reasonable to conclude that this was a legacy brought to the New
World by the Acadians. The Eastern Wolf I Cards lupus/ was found throughout much of the northeastern region of North America. Colonists in New England were, if anything,
106 AN G7 529 Tours 3 Oct 1714, Subdelegate to Intendant; Oct 1714, Lieutenant-general de police de Tours to Intendant 48 more committed to destroying wolf populations, and sometimes engaged in wanton cruelty. Jon Coleman argues that terrorizing wolves and mounting their skulls on buildings was an expression of the anger and frustration that settlers felt with their environment. He also points out that most Englishmen would never have actually seen a wolf before, making them even scarier and/or detestable.107 A confrontation between humans and wolves appeared inevitable. European settlement and hunting reduced deer and moose populations, while their poorly controlled livestock and dogs wandered into the woods. The results were predictable; wolves had been extirpated in the Boston area as early as 1657.108 In contrast to New England, we know little about wolves in New
France. One contemporary observer described them as neither as large nor as mean as wolves in France. It seems that few approached the settlements in the St Lawrence, though voyageurs were generally fearful of wolves when they traveled into the pays d'en haut. In addition, oral traditions concerning werewolves brought over from France combined readily with aboriginal beliefs in windigos and other monsters.109
The relationship of aboriginal people with wolves was more complicated than that of the white people of New England and New France. Aboriginals did hunt wolves that competed with them for deer, and wolf-hides had significant value to them. Rarer black wolf hides could be traded to the Algonquins for as much as forty beaver skins. Despite the efforts of New England officials, however, few aboriginals were willing to actively help them hunt wolves or claim bounties. Indeed, white settlers may have associated
107 Jon T. Coleman, Vicious: Wolves and Men in America (New Haven, 2004) 72. 108 Virginia DeJohn Anderson, Creatures of Empire: How Domestic Animals Transformed Early America (Oxford, 2004) 101-104; Coleman, Wolves and Men in America. 54-56. 109 Pierre Boucher, Histoire veritable et naturelle des moeurs et productions du pays de laNouvelle-France. vulgairement dite le Canada (Boucherville, 1964 (1664)) 58; Carolyn Podruchny, "Werewolves and Windigos: Narratives of Cannibal Monsters in French-Canadian Voyageur Oral Tradition" Ethnohistorv51. 4 (2004): 677-700. 49 aboriginals with wolves in a subconscious manner. The Mi'kmaq and Abenaki were described by early Acadian and New England settlers as having tame dogs and wolves.
Like raiders in Europe, aboriginal warriors who attacked settlements were often described by Europeans as wolf-like.110
Despite similar habitat to the mainland and plentiful moose and caribou, the wolf appears to have been very rare in peninsular Acadia. It has been suggested that a few traveled across the isthmus of Chignecto to hunt, but there is no evidence that they lived anywhere near the Acadian communities. They no doubt had plenty of wild prey to occupy themselves with. Bounties were offered during the early nineteenth century but few were paid out, and wolves seem to have disappeared entirely soon after. The reasons for the absence of a local wolf population are not known.111
Acadia is likely, however, to have had a large black bear (ursus americanus) population; there are 7 000 black bears in Nova Scotia today. Unlike wolves, black bears do not eat large prey or livestock; they subsist on vegetation, insects, and small animals.
They also hibernate during the winter, the time when wolf attacks were most feared.112
There is no record of a bear attack in Acadia; they seem even more inclined to avoid humans. Perhaps most importantly, Acadian settlement did not cut into the forest or decimate their food. There was no reason for the bears to come down into the marshlands. Similarly, in New France, black bears generally left the inhabitants alone.113
Although there were few wolves in Acadia, the settlers would not have known this when they first arrived, and fear of forests may have contributed to the decision of
110 Coleman, Wolves and Men in America. 34,47,60. 111 Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, www.gov.ns.ca/natr/wildlife/endngrd/specieslist.htm. 112 www.bearnovascotia.ca/bear_biology.htm. 113 Boucher, Histoire veritable et naturelle. 55-6. 50 most Acadians to live in the coastal and marshland areas. They also tended to travel by water. An automatic suspicion of wild places was part of an Acadian's cultural legacy, and may have been reinforced by the notion that the forest was an aboriginal zone.1 As time passed without encountering large predators, the Acadians probably felt more confident expanding their holdings - though they continued to stay out of the woods. As
we have seen, this was also related to the fact that the Acadians' knowledge that the soil
in the uplands was of low quality. Yet the Acadians clearly had some familiarity with the terrain outside the marshlands. They did not hesitate to cut trees for firewood and
construction. There were also a few saw-mills in the colony by the end of the
seventeenth century. For the Acadians, forests were a place of danger but also refuge,
where they could hide themselves and their belongings when human wolves (raiders)
invaded their territory.115 In 1755, many Acadians, often with the assistance of the
Mi'kmaq, successfully hid out in the woods for years when the British attempted to deport them.116 In the final analysis, it is impossible to say to what degree fear of wolves and wilderness fitted into the nearly universal determination of the Acadians to settle in the marshlands - but it was likely a contributing factor. Of course, such fears could be overcome when a more immediate threat was presented.
Other Wildlife in Acadia
Peasants in France rarely consumed meat from wild sources. Even seigneurs rarely enjoyed venison or wild fowl; their small forests could not support large animal
114 Wicken, "Re-examining Mi'kmaq-Acadian Relations," 99. 115 Pluskowski, Wolves and the Wilderness. 57. 116 Geoffrey Plank, An Unsettled Conquest: The British Campaign Against the Peoples of Acadia. (Philadelphia, 2001) 150. 51 populations. An exception to this was the coastal and marshland areas of Poitou where plentiful fish, crustaceans, and game birds supplemented rural diets.117 The Acadians similarly benefited from fish, mollusks, and fowl from the rich shores of the Bay of
Fundy.118 Lescarbot described plentiful deer, elks, and fowl, and flocks of sea birds so thick that he killed twenty-eight with a single cannon shot. Denys commented on the abundance of hares, partridges, and pigeons. Others were more apt to complain about the bugs.119 Nevertheless, there is little indication that the Acadians regularly engaged in hunting expeditions into the forested uplands, even in the winter when they had little work to do on their farms. By the end of the seventeenth century they showed a marked preference for meat from cattle and pigs rather than game, though they continued to use some elk and seal skin for clothing.120 The availability and cost of livestock and game counted no doubt as much as taste, but this preference indicates that the Acadians, at least in the principal settlements, had a ready supply of home-grown meat. Their limited hunting and foraging activities indicate that most Acadians maintained an agricultural focus, preferring to remain on the open marshlands where they worked and built their homes.
Fish
It was fish which first brought Europeans to the Maritime region, and fishing remained its primary attraction. In the seventeenth century, French and English ships
117 Emmanual Le Roy Ladurie, "1660-1789" in Duby et Wallon, Histoire de la France rurale. 348; Benoit Clavel, "L'animal dans 1'alimentation medievale et moderne en France du Nord (XIF-XVII6 siecles)" Revue archaeologique de Picardie No Special 19(2001): 112. 118 Lescarbot, Nova Francia. 97,107; Denys, Description and Natural History. 125; Hatvany, Four Centuries of Environmental Change. 12. 119 Biard, "Relation de la Nouvelle France"; Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 92. 120 Diereville, Relation of the Voyage. 96-106. 52 carried back an average of 35 000 metric tons of dried cod and 12 000 tons of wet cod for
sale in Europe annually; in addition, increasing amounts of the region's cod were sold
and consumed in North America and the West Indies. There were several banks for cod
fishing located east and south of Acadia, including the areas around Sable Island, Canso,
and Cape Sable. From early on, New Englanders asserted their rights to the cod off
Acadia, exercising at times virtual dominance over this area and denying access to both
French vessels and the Acadians themselves. By 1675,440 boats and 1 000 fishermen
from New England worked these waters, bringing in 60 000 quintals or 6 250 metric tons
of dried fish each year.121 In fact, the conflict between New England and the French in
Acadia can in large part be understood as a dispute over fish.122
The Acadians, for their part, did what they could, mainly fishing in local rivers
and in the Bay of Fundy for their own subsistence. Diereville tried to set up a venture in
Port Royal in 1699; it brought in 30 000 cod over the first six months but did not last.123
Pierre Landry led a group of nine Acadians in a coastal fishingbusines s in 1701 but also
appears to have given up soon after. Fishing rights figured prominently in the seigneurial
concessions granted in the seventeenth century, such as Aulnay's grant to Martin de
Chevery in 1649, and those from Governor Frontenac in Quebec to Pierre de Joybert and
Michel Le Neuf de la Valliere in 1676.124 But neither the seigneurs nor the fishing
companies from France could protect their claimed rights against English and other
foreign fishingvessels . In 1682, the Compagnie de la peche sedentaire de 1'Acadie
121 Richards, Unending Frontier. 557-563. 122 Rawlyk, Nova Scotia's Massachusetts. 18-25. 123 Diereville, Relation of the Voyage. 98. On Acadian seasonal fishing for salmon and eels, see Wicken, "Re-examining Mi'kmaq-Acadian Relations," 97. 124 Concession accordee par Aulnay a Martin de Chevery, 20 Mar 1649 and Concession de seigneurie a Pierre de Joybert, 16 Oct 1676 in Vanderlinden, Lieutenant civil et criminel; Concession de Chignitou ou Beaubassin au Sieur Le Neuf de la Valliere, 24 Oct 1676, Memoires des commissaires. 575. 53 reported that it had established a habitation at Chedabucto of thirty people, and asked the
King for a frigate to defend the post against the Bostonnais. In 1687, the King did send a
frigate to Acadia, but trusted it to his new governor, Meneval, rather than to the
company. In his memoir of 1697, company agent Tibierge admitted they were doing
little actual fishing: Chedabucto had been looted in 1688 and then captured in 1690 along
with Port Royal by William Phips' New Englanders. He added that the Acadians were
afraid to venture far to trade or fish for fear of English reprisals, which prevented them
from trading with the company or the French officials now established on the Saint John
River.126
The company frequently complained that the French governors, who were unable
to stop the English from fishingoffshore , instead garnered a tidy profit from selling
permits to the English that also allowed them to dry their fish on Acadian shores and even
trade within the colony. In a 1682 memorandum, the company claimed that the coasts
were "ruined" by the English fishermen, while the governor earned 50 It for each billet.
The company director, Bergier, had to return two confiscated New England fishing
vessels in 1684, because their masters' held these permits. He noted that the English,
who in his view behaved like pirates, were polluting cod spawning grounds by throwing
fish entrails and heads into them. The new governor in 1685, Perrot, proposed a
compromise - if the King sent a warship, cannon, and fifty additional soldiers, he could
at least make sure the English traded the fish they caught for French goods.127
125 Les interessez a la pSche s&lentaire a la coste d'Acadie, 1682; Instructions du Roy au Sieur de Meneval, 1687, Collection de manuscrits. 291,396. 126 "Memoir on the Present State of the Province of Acadia, 1697' in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 204. 127 Valliere's granting of fishing rights to foreigners and commerce with them were cited directly as the cause of his removal as Commandant of Acadia in 1684. Destitution de La Valliere, Apr 1684, in 54 In 1687, Louis XIV issued new instructions: rather than allowing the governors to regulate English fishing and trading, he directed Meneval to eradicate it. This led to a rapid increase in hostilities including privateering, raiding, and confiscations, with the
Acadians caught in the middle. As Meneval prophetically pointed out in 1689, should
English anger turn into an expedition against Port Royal, "il seroit fort a craindre que les
Francois n'eussent pu leur resister." Villebon would later argue that issuing fishing permits to English ships would not only raise funds, but would also prevent privateering and protect the Acadians, as the English fishermenonc e established, would not want to lose their privileges.129 Instead, hostilities continued until the final fall of Port Royal in
1710. Even then, the French successfully maintained some fishing rights in the region; the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) confirmed French ownership of lie Royale (Cape Breton
Island), and the right to catch and dry fish on the north and west shores of Newfoundland.
The Mi'kmaq also understood the Europeans' preoccupation with fish. In the 1720s, they focused their attacks against the British on the fishingpos t of Canso, and also captured or robbed several New England fishingvessels . The abundant cod first brought Europeans to Acadia, and fish remained the predominant economic and imperial interest.
Competition over this resource was one of the most important factors in the ongoing conflict in the region.
Vanderlinden, Lieutenant civil et criminel, 298; M^moire de l'ambassadeur de France sur l'Acadie, 1684; M&noire du Sieur Bergier, 1685, Collection de manuscrits. 291. 128 Memoire du Sr Perrot, 1685; Instructions du Roy au Meneval, 1687; Observations sur l'estat present de l'Acadie, Meneval, 1689, Collection de manuscrits. 385,396,472. 129 Villebon, "Memoir on the Settlements and Harbors from Minas at the head of the Bay of Fundy to Cape Breton, 1699" in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century, 133. 55 Furs
The fur trade also played an important role in the development of Acadia as a colony and as a zone of conflict. As in Quebec, it was the basis of the early relationship
with aboriginal societies, and also one of the few sources of profit for early colonizers.130
Thomas Temple noted in 1668 that the colony's only revenue came from furs and elk-
skins.131 But the trade itself was supposed to be exercised by monopolies or by the
governors. The letters patent for Aulnay as governor in 1647 included a fur trade
monopoly throughout the colony and the right to confiscate the property of anyone else
found trading. The Acadians themselves had been explicitly excluded from the trade by
the King's order of 1645.132 As with fish, governors, seigneurs, and the company worked
against English incursions and also against each other. In 1685, the company demanded
restitution from the seigneur of Beaubassin, La Valliere, who they claimed had stolen furs
from Bergier's son and an "Indian captain". La Valliere also seized a company ship
loaded with merchandise including furs worth two thousand livres in 1687.133 In the later
seventeenth century, the fur trade was largely controlled by John Nelson, a New England
merchant and heir to Thomas Temple, along with the Baron de Saint-Castin, who lived
with the Abenaki in Maine. Nelson maintained a ship and warehouse at Port Royal to
assist his operation. Louis XTV, recognizing the importance of the fur trade and the
Griffiths points out that the importance of the fur trade in Acadia has been greatly underestimated in Migrant to Acadian. 64. 131 Thomas Temple to the Lords of Council, 24 Nov 1668, Memoires des commissaires. 298. He stated that the revenue was only £900 per annum, and was attempting to get reimbursement fromth e English crown for his expenses in Acadia, claiming he was "reduced to the lowest poverty and much in debt." 132 Lettres patentes en faveur du Sieur de Charnisay, Feb 1647, Collection de manuscrits. 121; Arret de 6 Mar 1645, Memoires des commissaires. 497. 133 Memoire de la compagnie de la pesche sedentaire de 1'Acadie, 1685; Memoire sur la pesche de l'Acadie, Chevry, 1687, Collection de manuscrits. 349,403. 56 alliance with the Abenaki, offered Saint-Castin a pardon for his economic treason if he would henceforth bring his furs and his native allies to support France.134
In the conditions of a colonial settlement, such monopolies could never exercise complete control over the trade, and it was impossible to stop individual Acadians from participating. Some officials cloaked their opposition to these initiatives in moral tones, expressing fears that the Acadians would be hopelessly corrupted by such activity. Perrot argued in 1685 that they dispersed themselves throughout the marshland in order to trade and engage in sexual relationships with aboriginals freely while avoiding traditional authority. When Intendant de Meulles visited Port Royal in 1686, he ordered any
"vagabond" living "une vie tout a fait de sauvages" to abandon the woods and their aboriginal mistresses by next autumn or face fines and corporal punishment. He was concerned that aboriginal "passions dereglees" would attract those young people "qui aiment peu le travail a les imiter."135 But the reality was that few Acadians were hunting animals in the woods, though they were certainly willing to trade for furs with visiting
Mi'kmaq. By 1700, the fur-bearing animals in peninsular Acadia had been significantly reduced - Diereville noted in 1699 that hunting brought "much less profit than hardship." The fur trade was increasingly pushed out to the mainland, where it became part of New France's diplomacy with aboriginal societies. In the eighteenth century, some furs continued to be traded between the French and the Mi'kmaq at Louisbourg,
134 Memoire sur l'Acadie par M. de Meneval, 1687, Collection de manuscrits, 411. On Nelson, Saint- Castin and the fur trade, see Rawlyk, Nova Scotia's Massachusetts, 35. 135 On Perrot, see Faragher, A Great and Noble Scheme. 73; Ordonnance de M. de Meulles contre les vagabonds du Port-Royal, 12 mai 1686, in Vanderlinden, Lieutenant civil et criminel. 302. 136 Diereville, Relation of the Voyage. 101; Leslie Choquette, "Center and Periphery in French North America," in Christine Daniels and Michael V. Kennedy, eds., Negotiated Empires: Centers and Peripheries in the Americas, 1500-1820 (New York, 2002) 195. In fact, fur-bearing animals had become scarce throughout the northeastern area of North America by the end of the seventeenth century, Richards, The Unending Frontier. 551. 57 and sometimes the goods passed through Beaubassin. But in general, as with fish, the fur trade was a matter of imperial competition, not a commercial activity of the Acadians.
The Acadians were ultimately concerned with transforming marshlands into farms and living spaces. They rarely took part in the commercial fishing and fur-trading enterprises of aboriginals, English, and French operating in the colony.138 To a certain extent they were constrained, but it also seems that they were not very interested. The
Acadians probably would have been happy if the fish, furs, and the rapacious individuals who fought over them simply went away. This is not to say that some Acadians did not occasionally shoot a deer, cast a net, or trap a rodent. Rather, it is to emphasize that the
Acadians' focus was on producing crops and livestock for sustainable agriculture, a perspective that separated them from the other Europeans in the region, and underscored their desire to build and maintain a rural society.
Conservation and Control of Natural Resources
The Loudunais
Royal foresters in France had existed in some form for centuries. Francis I created a Department of Waters and Forests (Eaux et Forets) in the early 1500s. An edict of 1669 increased its size and span of control, placing the organization directly under the supervision of the Controller General. Although this edict codified existing law, this was a significant new step towards official conservation of the kingdom's natural resources, albeit with the state's interests clearly in mind. Officers of the Waters and Forests
137 Christopher Moore, "The other Louisbourg: Trade and Merchant Enterprise in lie Royale, 1713-58," in Eric Krause, Carol Corbin, and William O'Shea, eds., Aspects of Louisbourg (Sydney, 1995) 230-240. 138 John G. Reid, Acadia. Maine, and New Scotland: Marginal Colonies in the Seventeenth Century (Toronto, 1981) 188. 58 Department more actively enforced many rules, such as those requiring seigneurs to reserve at least one-quarter of their woods for royal use and regulating use of woods for feeding livestock.139 The primary motivation may have been Louis XIV s ambitions to challenge his enemy at sea by building up his navy. Though the idea soured for him after the 1692 defeat at La Hogue, French rulers periodically returned to the issue of supplying the navy with timber.140 New arrets dealing specifically with this concern were issued in
1700 and 1748.
The department of Waters and Forests was headed by a grand master and masters for each region, who appointed local lieutenants, who in turn employed a variety of minor officials and security agents.141 At first, their main task seemed to be to prevent clerical and lay seigneurs from arbitrarily cutting their forests to make a quick profit or pay off debts. Similarly, they ensured rural communities did not cut their common woods to pay their taxes. Claiming responsibility for the maintenance of forests at the local level was a significant assertion of royal authority. Seigneurs great and small had to submit requests to cut wood for specific tasks such as rebuilding a church, or clearing dead trees so that new ones could grow. Those who abused their seigneurial privileges in these matters found themselves facing sanctions and fines, as did the Duke of Saint-Germain who wrongly assumed that his high standing would allow him to ignore the local lieutenant in
1707.142 The diligence shown by these officials, and their willingness to stand up to the great nobility and major abbeys shows that they had the support of the King and
139 Paul Walden Bamford, Forests and French Sea Power. 1660-1789 (Toronto, 1956) 20. On the implications for livestock, see Jean-Marc Moriceau, Histoire et geographic de Felevage francais: Du Moyen Age a la Revolution (Paris, 2005) 225. 140 Paul Walden Bamford, Forests and French Sea Power. 1660-1789 (Toronto, 1956) 5-28. 141 AN G71358 Eaux et Fdrets Poitou-Bourbonnais, 1706 a 1715, 15 Dec 1708 Sieur Milon to C-G. 142 AN G7 1358,23 Jan 1706,27 Jul 1706 and Mar 1707. 59 specifically their supervisor, the Controller General. For his part, the King employed this department as part of a larger absolutist policy, reminding the seigneurs that they held their fiefs at royal sufferance and subject to royal supervision. This did not prevent the
King from treating these posts like other venal offices, in ways that increased royal revenue but reduced their authority, such as duplicating the offices.143
As the seigneurs learned to play by the rules, the role of Waters and Forests increasingly became one of mediating disputes between seigneurs and rural communities and policing local habitants to ensure they did not infringe on seigneurial rights. Fines and confiscations were ordered for peasants caught poaching or cutting wood illegally.
Most seigneurs' requests to cut woods were granted, though usually with the condition that saplings were planted in their place. In this way, consistent with other aspects of
Louis XIV's absolute rule, department officials actually strengthened seigneurial control over forests and rivers, through both the direct help they gave to the seigneur's men in such tasks as patrolling, and their indirect endorsement, as royal representatives, of seigneurial activities. It paid to collaborate with this new government institution. This does not mean that the officials always sided wholly with the seigneurs, particularly when traditional communal rights to woods could be proven.144 Local department officials worked in close proximity to rural communities, and were often chosen from the rural elite. In Martaize, the estate manager Alexandre Goujon was also a lieutenantparticulier des Earn et Forets. His responsibilities likely included the forest of Guesnes and the marshes around the Dive River.
AN G7 1358,1707; Bamford, Forests and French Sea Power. 86. AN G7 1358, 13 Aug 1712,14 Feb 1713; AD V B 1262 Eaux et Fdrets, 16 Dec 1728. 60 The officers of Waters and Forests had a genuine interest in conserving the kingdom's forests and rivers; a series of edicts from the maitrise of Fontenay-le-Comte in
Poitou during the eighteenth century illustrate their concerns. Trees less than ten years old were not to be cut under any circumstances, and sixteen large trees in each arpent had to be reserved for the navy. Navy commissioners were able to enter anyone's woods at will to mark trees for royal ships - hindering them in any way was punishable by a 3 000
It fine. Trees along major roads were not to be cut until they were at least twenty-six years old, and only after six months notice had been giving to the local lieutenant.
Cutting was not permitted at all during the winter months, and livestock less than six years old were not allowed in the woods to forage. Forests were not to be turned into pasture or arable on penalty of a fine of 3 000 It for each arpent cleared. While most infractions would lead to fines, corporal punishment was threatened for anyone who started a fire in the woods under any pretext. Finally, seigneurs and communities were advised that gardes would be sent to explain to them how best to maintain their woods, and mayors and delegates were to ensure that all information was posted and understood.145
Royal supervision (or interference) with seigneurial and communal property did not end with their woods and waterways. In 1702, a royal edict established "arpenteurs, priseurs & mesureurs de Terres, Prez, Vignes, Bois, Eaux & Forests dans chacune des
Villes, Bourgs & autres lieux du Royaume." In part a transparent extension of venal office-holding to raise funds for the royal treasury, these officers nevertheless asserted themselves as surveyors over the existing officials appointed by the seigneurs as well as
145 AD Vendee B 1368, Maitrise particuliere des Eaux et Forets de Fontenay-le-Comte, 5 Apr 1752. 61 over parish assemblies. With a fine of 300 It levied on those who interfered, half of
which would go to the officer in question, these men would be looking for
troublemakers.146
Establishing royal standards for conservation and measurement was a direct
assertion of the absolutist state. It eroded the authority of seigneurs to directly police and judge affairs involving their natural resources even as it supported their traditional rights.
Although the King's ultimate concern was to make use of the trees in his state and to
increase his revenue, such rules also undoubtedly helped ensure that at least some forests
were preserved.147 Supervising the clearing out of trees killed by cold, disease, or old
age, for example, helped ensure forestry renewal. Enforcement of the rules also at least
deterred seigneurs and peasants who might wish to turn trees into timber to make some
quick money. It was certainly a rare example of a state recognizing its own self-interest
in conserving its natural resources over the long-term. In a region like the Loudunais,
where forests were few and exclusively controlled by seigneurs, this had little benefit for
the local habitants, beyond the continued collection of deadfall. In general, the peasants
had little connection to the limited natural resources of their environment.
Acadia
Acadia did not have dedicated Waters and Forests officers to supervise the
clearing of wood, hunting, or fishingpractices . Most seigneurial concessions permitted the inhabitants to hunt and cut wood for their own individual use. Some Acadians tried to
make commercial use of the vast forests. In 1699, Villebon reported that several
146 AD Vendee B 1368 Edit du Roy, May 1702. 147 Bamford, Forests and French Sea Power. 93. 62 sawmills were either already in operation or planned for construction around Port Royal and Minas. In fact, Acadian masts were shipped to France in 1699 and between 1701 and
1708; they were deemed of better quality than those from Quebec. The Conquest in 1710 ended this burgeoning enterprise.148 Certainly no interest was shown in restraining the hunting of fur-bearing animals, and in any event, it is doubtful such a measure of control could have been effective. The only two areas where French officials showed concern for conservation were in reserving the best trees for the navy and preventing the English from using the fishing grounds. This was in the context of protecting the King's or the trading company's rights - less a matter of conservation and more of ensuring that only the appropriate Frenchmen were able to exploit the natural resources.
Neither the Acadians nor the trading companies showed any concern for over fishing, and only denounced pollution where it was associated with English fishing vessels. There were signs that over-fishing had already exhausted some of the banks around Acadia and New England by the eighteenth century. Recent scholarship has shown that the cod were not one huge population but several local ones that could be disrupted individually. The LMM may have affected fish behaviour, but it seems likely that commercial fishing also had an impact on them, altering their age, size, weight, and spawning and feeding habits.149
It remains to consider the damage to the marshland ecology caused by dyking and the expansion of agriculture. Demographic expansion in other French colonies took a
18 Villebon, "Memoir on Minas, 1699" in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 133; Bamford, Forests and French Sea Power. 121. 149 Richards, Unending Frontier. 568; J. Alheit and E. Hagan, "Climate Variability and Historical NW European Fisheries" in Wefer, et al., eds., Climate and History of the North Atlantic. 435-445. 63 significant ecological toll. The Acadians literally transformed the landscape, much more profoundly than just by clearing trees, hunting wildlife, and polluting local water.
As a sceptical historian, Jean Paul Billaud, points out:
II n'est.. .pas question de partir a la recherche d'un age d'or, d'une periode originelle ou I'activit^ humaine aurait ete avantage en symbiose avec le milieu naturel. Certes, le mythe du 'bon sauvage' ne fait plus recette mais l'imagerie naturaliste a vite fait de transfigurer le paysan d'hier en modele de 1'ecologiste de demain.151
While this remark mainly concerns the reclamation of the Poitevin marshes, the comment holds just as true for Acadia. Certainly environmental damage would have been localized at first, but as the Acadian population and its livestock herds grew and dispersed throughout the marshlands around the Bay of Fundy, the effects would have become cumulative. We are unable to measure the impact of Acadian farming on waterfowl, fish and amphibians, and other marsh dwelling creatures, but it seems reasonable to note that the inhabitants were in the process of eliminating that eco-system entirely, with serious consequences for traditional Mi'kmaq fishing and gathering.152 Consider the amount of vegetation eaten and ground trampled by their herds alone. The British were annoyed because the Acadians had occupied all the best land, which they themselves wanted. This was an important motivation for the deportation. As early as 1731, the governor complained that the Acadians were "like Noah's progeny spreading themselves over the face of the Province."153 As with fish and furs, the concern of all was who got to exploit the resource, not preserving the natural environment. After 1755, English settlers soon took over from where the Acadians had left off.
150 Philip P. Boucher, "The 'Frontier Era' of the French Caribbean, 1620s-I690s" in Daniels and Kennedy, Negotiated Empires. 207-234. 151 Billaud, Marais Poitevin. 11. 152 Wicken, "Re-examining Mi'kmaq-Acadian Relations," 100; Richards, Unending Frontier. 6-9. 153 Philipps to Board of Trade, 5 Oct 1731 in Akins, Public Documents of Nova Scotia. 86. 64 Conclusion
The regions of early modern France were profoundly shaped by their environment, such as the Loire Valley with its characteristic levees, the marshlands of
Bas-Poitou, or the bocage of parts of western France. There was an essential unity between the physical and economic aspects of a region that provided the basis for a common identity and community. 54 The 'visceral' attachment to the land so often attributed to peasants was not just the development and preservation of a patrimony, but a connection with the physical features and the agrarian structures that defined their lives and was familiar.15S This was also true of the marshlands of Acadia and the cereal plains of the Loudunais. Once established, peasants were reluctant to move outside of these zones, and there was rarely much incentive for them to do so.
It has been suggested that "it is difficult to exaggerate the physical and psychological distance that separated the Old World from the New."156 There is no doubt that geography isolated Acadia from the rest of France and its colonies, and separated
Acadian communities from each other as well. The arrivals of ships bearing news, provisions, trade goods, and new colonists were unusual and widely celebrated events.
Some people found the isolation too much, such as the lonely priest in Port Royal who begged Bishop Saint-Vailier to replace him in 1686.157 The effect of this isolation on the
154 Jean-Marc Moriceau, Les fermiers de l'lle-de-France. XV8 - XVIIF siecle: L'ascension d'un patronat agricole (Paris. 1994)25. 153 Pierre Goubert, The French Peasantry in the Seventeenth Century trans., Ian Patterson (Cambridge, 1982) 27; Jacques DupSquier, Histoire de la population francaise Vol 2: de la Renaissance a 1789 (Paris, 1995) 103. 156 Faragher, A Great and Noble Scheme, 10. 157 Saint-Vallier. Estat Present de PEglise, 307; Dale Miquelon, New France. 1701-1744: A Supplement to Europe (Toronto, 1987) 128. 65 Acadians was no doubt a heightened sense of insecurity, but also independence and commitment to community. They were largely on their own, and they knew it.
The terrain, climate, wildlife, and natural resources of the Loudunais and Acadia were quite different, supporting distinct models of agriculture with particular advantages and risks. Their rural economies are discussed in more detail in Part III. In general, rural society in the Loudunais was made both prosperous and vulnerable by its reliance on an export-driven wheat market, since the crop fetched high prices regularly, but occasionally was severely affected by climatic variability. For example, the period of the LMM contributed to mortality crises in France, and also reduced population growth in Acadia.
The Acadian system of dykes was also at once strength and weakness. It permitted farms to be established quickly, supporting a dynamic expansion of population and cultivation all around the Bay of Fundy. But whether overcome by weather, tides, or raiders, the consequences of a breach were not just the destruction of a particular crop, but the loss of the use of the land for several years afterward. The frequencytha t this occurred led most
Acadians to invest in livestock. The abundance of wildlife and fish in Acadia was more curse than gift, as rival trading companies, states, and aboriginal people fought with each other in order to secure them. The Acadians, for the most part, tried to stay out of the way. Peasants in both places also seem to have stayed out of the woods, though they certainly used trees for fuel and construction materials. We might assume that natural predators would have been more of a threat in Acadia, but wolf attacks were actually more of a concern in the Loudunais. The large predators (mostly bears) in Acadia were not interested in munching on sheep or children, but old fears of wild places died hard.
66 The colonists also had to negotiate their use of the land with the Mi'kmaq, which is discussed in more detail in the next chapter.
As different as were their environmental conditions and the resulting agricultural models, peasants in both places developed a largely unified landscape of settlement and farming that made the best use of their natural environments. That landscape was at once order, security, and vision - binding peasants together with common interests and perspectives. Everyone was part of the system. This is not to say that peasants did not take advantage of opportunities when they appeared, such as those who cleared new land in the Loudunais when offered tax exemptions, or those in Acadia who built large herds of cattle to trade with Louisbourg. Peasants were not indolent and routine-bound, nor were they controlled by their communities. They were families actively pursuing their interests in a system that worked for them and their kin, over the long term.
67 Map 1 - The Loudunais and the Loire15 8
138 AD V Serie FIL 192 Loudunais et Mirebalais, 1635, A. Guiljelmum et I. Blaeu. Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize" are in the bottom right corner of the map, east of Moncontour. The Loire is at the top. 68 Picture 1 - Fields around Loudun
mmm
•«!*.**• ***,
" ,4
• tf^tf &*«$*.• .TO; '^^J ** v&
159 The photographs in this chapter were taken by the author in the summer of 2005. 69 13 O
mm I I ^
, • ^ • A .-•*••' * •*?••.'• 8 8
N
o m
Picture 4 - Belleisle Marsh (near Annapolis Royal)
72 Picture 5 - Fields near Grand Pre (Minas)
^eStS^imMSi wmm 3%gjj|Mii
73 -a 1 ON
H o> o p f 00
o
I
-J Picture 7 - Former location of Beaubassin
"it/. - j^^^
•Si' ~ • * :• • -':-. i /* , J i . • PS3MSM5
75 PART I, CHAPTER 2
FRONTIERS
Introduction
Frontiers have long intrigued historians. In the early modern period, borders were not defined with the precision of today. Even internal divisions within states were not exact. For example, the limits of the province of Poitou were presented in three different ways by three different early eighteenth-century maps.1 Historians of Europe usually examine frontiers as political and often militarized boundaries between states, while those interested in North America have tended to treat them as zones of settlement between metropolitan areas and wilderness. Others consider economic, cultural, religious, and administrative frontiers and point out the ways that these could overlap with political and settlement ones. Collectively, this approach has rewarded researchers with new insights into government, security, diplomacy, trade and, perhaps most importantly, the relationships of real people on both sides of these boundaries. At the same time, the proliferation of concepts and definitions surrounding frontiers can be confusing.
This chapter considers the experience of the Loudunais and Acadia primarily as political and military frontiers. My intent is not to restate existing political narratives, but rather to focus on the importance of this experience for the development of rural societies.3 It is certainly not new to suggest that Acadia was a borderland, but the
1C. Passerat, Etude sur les Cartes des Cdtes de Poitou et de Saintonge. ant&ieures aux Levtis du XDC6 sidcle (Niort, 1910) 86; Yves Krumenacker, "La Geographie du Poitou au XVIII6 siecle" Bulletin de la Society des Antiquaires de FOuest et des Musses de Poitiers 4e serie - tome XVI (1981): 205-235. 2 Daniel Power and Naomi Standen, eds., Frontiers in Question: Eurasian Borderlands. 700-1700 (London, 1999) 2-9; John F. Richards, The Unending Frontier: An Environmental History of the Early Modern World (Berkeley, 2003) 5-6. 3 For the latest and most comprehensive political narrative of Acadian history, see N. E. S. Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian: A North American Border People. 1604-1755 (Montreal & Kingston, 2005). 76 significance of this needs to be explored, and connected to the legacy of the Loudunais.
Like the natural environment, political and military conditions shaped everything from settlement patterns and agriculture to cultural identity and personal fears. In the short term, wars and raids could seriously disrupt and devastate rural societies. Over the long term, peasants had to accommodate and negotiate with military commanders and political authorities, as well as adapt to an often changing situation. The choices they made could determine the well-being of their communities and sometimes their very survival.
The Loudunais had been part of a military frontier for centuries, but after 1630 it benefited from increased security and stability and grew closer to the French state.
People fromther e who came to Acadia in the mid-seventeenth century arrived with plenty of frontier experience and understood the importance of maintaining neutrality.
They applied this perspective to Acadia, but political control there was so limited, tenuous, and contested, that the region is best understood not as a frontier,bu t as a march between English and French and also aboriginal claimants. The march lasted fromth e earliest settlement until the deportation of 1755, making political relationships very complicated and long-term security impossible for the inhabitants. Between 1605 and
1763, whenever war was declared between England and France, Acadia was one of the theatres of operation. It changed hands no less than ten times. Like other rural societies in Europe and North America that lived in marches, the Acadians developed a distinct identity and enjoyed a degree of independence, but at the same time they were subject to much insecurity and vulnerability.
77 The Loudunais
A Military Frontier
The town of Loudun was founded as a military fortress, built on top of a hill to dominate the surrounding plains. The Celts named it Lugdunum and defended it from the
Romans. Local legend has it that Charlemagne gave Loudun to Roland before the latter's death as a hero in Spain.4 By the tenth century, the Loudunais belonged nominally to the
Count-Dukes of Poitou, but was in fact ruled by a group of military castellans. In 986, the Loudunais was won by the Counts of Anjou, who further fortified the area and, along with abbeys such as Fontrevault, took an interest in expanding agricultural cultivation.
The square tower of Loudun and the keep at Moncontour were built in 1040 by Foulques
Nerra, also known as the first Plantagenet. Throughout this period, peasants provided labour and food in return for protection - the quintessential feudal relationship. Yet they also showed a degree of independence and pragmatism, abandoning landlords who raised their obligations in order to work elsewhere on newer developments with better terms.5
The Loudunais became an even more important frontier in the twelfth century. In
1154, the King of England held dynastic rights to all of western France from Normandy to Gascony, and the Loudunais formed part of the eastern boundary of this Angevin
Empire. Though the Capetian Kings of France were nominally sovereigns of these territories, they controlled only a comparatively smaller area around Paris. When the rivals went to war, the men in charge of the borderlands between them exercised
4 A. Souch£, Loudun et les pays Loudunais et Mirebelais (Loudun, 1927) 19; Robert Fauvreau, "Les debuts de la ville de Loudun" Society des Antiquaires de l'Ouest Tome HI - 5e serie (1989): 163-182. 5 Roland Sanfacon, Dgfrichements. peuplement et institutions seigneuriales en Haut-Poitou du Xe au XIIIe Steele (Quebec, 1967) 16-70. 78 significant influence.6 In 1204, the French King Philip Augustus captured Normandy and ultimately won all but part of Aquitaine for France. He conquered the Loudunais in
1206, and it was formally ceded to France in 1214. Fighting soon resumed, however.
Several regional nobles had enjoyed considerable autonomy under the Angevins and resented their new ruler's centralizing efforts. In 1242, Hugh X of Lusignan led a serious revolt against Louis IX. The King responded quickly, gathering an army at Chinon and then marching through the Loudunais, storming the keep of Moncontour, and eventually defeating Hugh's forces at Taillebourg. At last the area was quiet, and Loudun emerged as one of a group of fortified cities and religious centres that formed the base of the expanding French state in the west.7
Like most of the rest of France, rural society in the Loudunais was devastated by the Black Death, which arrived after 1348. The epidemic killed about one-third of the population over several years. At the same time, the pays again found itself a major battlefield between England and France during the Hundred Years' War. Heavily defeated at the Battle of Poitiers in 1356, France ceded Poitou, including the Loudunais, to England at the Treaty of Bretigny in 1360. The region was "partout ruine, parfois ravage" by the plundering of both sides, contributing to a general insecurity and fear.8
English victory brought no respite, as the area was treated as an occupied rather than an annexed territory; the Earl of Derby's depredations were particularly brutal.9 Never really ended, hostilities flared up again around 1370 with a number of vicious back-and-
6 Daniel Power, "French and Norman Frontiers in the Central Middle Ages," in Power and Standen, eds., Eurasian Borderlands. Ill; Kathleen Thompson, Power and Border Lordship in Medieval France: The County of Perche. 1000-1226 (Rochester. 2002). 7 Fauvreau, "Debuts de Loudun," 182. 8 Robert Fauvreau, "De la guerre a une society nouvelle" in Jean Combes, ed., Histoire du Poitou et des Pays Charentes (Clermont-Ferrand. 2001) 195. 9 Edmond-Ren6 Labande, Histoire du Poitou. du Limousin, et des Pays Charentais (Toulouse, 1976) 204. 79 forth battles. Moncontour was the site of two bloody sieges in 1371 and 1372. The advantage gradually went to the French, and most of the Poitevin nobles swore oaths of allegiance to the King of France at an assembly at Thouars in 1372. By 1373, the English had been driven from the Loudunais and the rest of Poitou.
The region then became the base for additional French campaigns to defeat the
English throughout western France. Jeanne d'Arc famously met the dauphin at Chinon.
Poitiers became one of two capitals of the monarchy of Bourges from 1418-1436 and was granted a Parlement (1418), a Cow des Aides (1425) and a university (1431).10 Yet real peace was slow in coming. Noble factions continued to fight amongst themselves and general brigandage became a virtual local institution, with rural communities obliged to pay protection money.11 Finally, in 1453, local authorities managed to impose relative order. The Loudunais was no longer a militarized frontier between medieval states, and a reasonable degree of security had been established. Bandits and brigands continued to prey on the inhabitants for years afterward and not just on lone travelers in the woods.
For example, during the reign of Francis I, a large group of brigands attacked Loudun itself and were repulsed by the assembled habitants.12 Despite these difficulties, the period between about 1450 and 1550 was one of stability, general growth and relative prosperity for rural society.13
Souche\ Loudun et les pays Loudunais. 39; Fauvreau, "De la guerre," 201. 11 Fauvreau, "De la guerre," 202; Richard C. Hoffmann describes a similar situation in Land. Liberties, and Lordship in a Late Medieval Countryside - Agrarian Structures and Change in the Duchy of Wroclaw (Philadelphia, 1989)274. 12 Auguste-Louis Lerosey, Loudun: Histoire Civile et Religieuse (Loudun, 1980 (1908)) 18. 13 Souche, Loudun et les pavs Loudunais. 40; Labande, Histoire du Poitou. 210. 80 A Religious and Military Frontier
During the medieval period, the various fortresses, towers, and walled estates that covered the Loudunais, and its natural hills and plains, had proved ideal ground where noble war-bands could posture, stalk, and kill each other, as well as terrorize the local population. Nobles returned to these methods during the protracted series of civil wars known as the Wars of Religion. Calvinism became an instrument for some lords trying to reinforce their status and resist the efforts of a centralizing monarchy. Religion also divided rival factions competing over influence at court. The first Calvinist church of
Loudun opened in 1555, and a man from Loudun was one of the first in France to be burned as a heretic for Calvinist beliefs. Overall, twenty Protestant temples were established in Poitou, and several more in Touraine, by 1561.14 Protestantism became a dominant force in many cities and some rural areas. Indeed, for the next seventy years,
Poitou was known as the veritable "citadel of Calvinism," the most important source of its military forces, leaders, and educators in France.15 In Touraine, by contrast, Protestant churches were pillaged and their members, mostly artisans in the larger cities, imprisoned. By 1598, just 500 Protestants were left in Tours, and few remained in the other cities of Touraine.16 As a result, the inhabitants of Loudun along with nearby
Saumur, found themselves on the exposed edge of a Protestant movement that spread like a crescent across much of Poitou down through southwestern France into Languedoc.17
To the north was persecution, to the south comfort and support. Of course, not all of
14 Labande, Histoire du Poitou. 240; P. Boissonnade, Histoire de Poitou (Paris. 1977 (1926)) 199; Yves Krumenacker, Les Protestants du Poitou au XVnT siecle (1681-1789) Claris, 1998) 33. 15 Boissonade, Histoire de Poitou. 191. 16 Eugene Pepin. Histoire de Touraine (Paris. 1991 (1935)) 164; Idelette Ardouin-Weiss, Le protestantisme en Touraine au temps de Tedit de Nantes (Tours. 1998) 18. 17 Didier Poton, Geographie du protestantisme et rfeeau urbain dans le cenfre-ouest a repoque modeme (XVr-XVirsiecles) (Poitiers, 1993) 218. 81 Poitou was Protestant; there were many local religious divisions that the Counter-
Reformation would later effectively exploit.
When a civil war broke out in 1562, the Loudunais was once again a contested frontier; the various small fortresses of the Loudunais were treated like "les pieces d'une gigantesque partie d'tehees." Troops moved frequently through the region, living off the land and inadvertently spreading disease.18 By 1568, large armies had been assembled under the Huguenot leader Conde and the Catholic Due de Anjou, the future Henry III.
The Huguenots advanced into the Loudunais from the south and the Catholics crossed the
Loire from the north to meet them. In late 1568, the armies skirmished outside Loudun itself, though lack of provisions, an epidemic among the soldiers of both sides, and the onset of winter prevented a major confrontation. The Catholic army took shelter at
Chinon while the Protestants wintered in Thouars and Loudun.19 The presence of the bored soldiers antagonized confessional differences in the town, and a number of churches and convents were pillaged and burned.20 This was certainly an uneasy season for rural communities in the Loudunais, caught as they were between rival movements and forced to assist in the provisioning of the armies.
In the spring of 1569, Conde was defeated at Jarnac, captured, and later murdered.
Now led by Coligny, the remaining Protestant army stole the march on Anjou and laid siege to the city of CMtellerault, whose mostly Catholic population had refused them entry. They held out long enough for Anjou to come to their aid, and the Protestants retreated in good order back across the Loudunais, preparing to meet the Catholics just
18 Labande, Histoire du Poitou. 240; Pepin, Histoire de Touraine. 169. 19 Dumoustier de la Fond, Essais sur Phistoire de la ville de Loudun (Poitiers, 1778) 41. 20 Edwin Bezzina, "After the Wars of Religion: Protestant-Catholic Accommodation in the French town of Loudun, 1598-1665" (Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, 2004) 142. 82 outside Moncontour. The resulting battle was the largest of the Wars of Religion. In the end, 29 000 Protestants and 22 000 Catholics killed a total of 19 000 men between them, including twenty captains from the Loudunais, and Anjou held the field. This did not gain him any political advantage in Paris, however, and after another brief truce in 1570, armies were once again at work in the Loudunais, with the Protestants having re established themselves across Poitou, and the Catholics at Chinon.22 Loudun was occupied by a Catholic army in 1574 after a protracted siege, and had to drive off a band of 120 brigands in 1577. In 1587, after refusing entry to a Catholic army commanded by the Due de Joyeuse, the city was broken into and pillaged for several days. When
Henry of Navarre arrived shortly thereafter, he was received "in triumph" and in 1589,
Loudun officially surrendered to the then proclaimed Henry IV, though not before negotiating a treaty which protected both Catholic and Protestant religious freedom and
ensured no royal garrison would be quartered there.24 After almost thirty years of fighting, peace was finally restored.
When Henry IV issued the Edict of Nantes (1598), which permitted Protestant worship in some parts of his kingdom, the "prospects for coexistence did not look good, and yet the desire for peace was often strong enough, both nationally and within localities, to counter the impulse towards violence." In Loudun, the population was split approximately in half between Protestants and Catholics. But unlike other areas of
21 De la Fond, Essais sur Thistoire. 44; Lerosey, Loudun: Histoire Civile et Religieuse. 65; Jacques Sergent et Thierry Thomas, Le pays loudunais (Tours, 2001) 43. 22 Francois Lebrun, Histoire des pays de la Loire: Orleanais. Touraine. Anjou. Maine (Toulouse, 1972) 236. 23 Souch6, Loudun et les pays Loudunais. 51. 24 De la Fond, Essais sur rhjstoire, 65; Michel Carmona, Les Diables de Loudun: Sorcellerie et politique sous Richelieu (Paris. 1988) 56. 25 Keith P. Luria, Sacred Boundaries: Religious Coexistence and Conflict in Early Modern France (Washington, 2005) xvi. 83 Poitou, Calvinism did not spread across the surrounding countryside. A few rural areas had Protestant temples, such as Chouppes, but these were built by seigneurs for their own private worship. Over the course of the seventeenth century, these personal enclaves gradually disappeared. Protestants were not present in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and
Martaize, or in neighbouring parishes - though peasants may have encountered them when they visited Loudun. Rural communities certainly had little to gain from religious conflict, and were undoubtedly sick of requisitions, threats and disruptions. Peasants were anxious to see royal authority asserted over a still dangerous countryside full of brigands, demobilized soldiers, and die-hard nobles of the Catholic League.
Though riots, attacks on places of worship, and numerous other incidents of violence and property damage occurred in Loudun during the Wars of Religion, the
Catholic and Protestant inhabitants had avoided the worst excesses of the period - for example, they did not participate in the massacre of Saint Bartholomew's Day in 1572,
Once peace was restored, residents tried to get on with their lives. This was not simply a matter of toleration: the relatively equal distribution of population, wealth, and political power forced Catholics and Protestants to live and work together. Royal commissioners ensured that the provisions of the Edict of Nantes were enforced, and municipal elections returned both Protestant and Catholic officials. For peasants visiting Loudun's markets, shops, or legal courts, the return of stability was no doubt appreciated.
Yet the peace was fragile, and the Loudunais remained part of a fortified frontier.
Loudun was one of several Protestant strongholds {places de surete) concentrated in this
26 Pierre de Chouppes was governor of Loudun between 1590 and 1601. The Protestant temple on his personal domains was taken down soon after the Peace of Ales. Bezzina, "Protestant-Catholic Accommodation in Loudun," 69, 128. 27 De la Fond, Essais sur rhistoire. 118; Luria, Sacred Boundaries, 30-32. 84 region including Saumur, Chatellerault, and Thouars, manned by pennanent Protestant garrisons. The King recognized the importance of the area, appointing Sully as provincial governor of Poitou and placing the Loudunais specifically under his control in
1604.29 A provincial synod of Protestant representatives met at Loudun in 1610 and duly renewed their allegiance to the King. But after the assassination of Henry IV, great nobles once again sought to use confessional differences to further their own ambitions.
The Prince of Conde assembled a group of like-minded Protestant nobles and roamed the countryside with their retinues, threatening to rebel against the boy-King Louis XIII and the Queen Regent, Marie de Medici. At a conference in Loudun in 1616, the Regent struck a deal with Conde which re-established peace and maintained the Edict of Nantes in exchange for a royal amnesty for Conde and his followers. Secret articles provided rich pensions and indemnities for the nobles involved. This settlement only encouraged
Conde to revolt again for still more royal bienfaits, but his second rebellion lacked credibility and support and soon fizzled out.30
In the 1620s, after conquering Beam and eliminating Protestantism entirely there, the King found himself again at war with his Huguenot subjects, in a conflict that culminated in the dreadful siege of La Rochelle and the Peace of Ales (1628-29). Under the terms of that treaty, all Protestant garrisons and fortifications, including those of
Loudun, would be dismantled under the supervision of Cardinal Richelieu, Louis XIII's prime minister, though the King "magnanimously" permitted the continuation of the
28 Didier Poton and Fabrice Vigier, "Espaces et froatieres religieuses dans le centre-ouest a 1'epoque moderne" in Les Cahiers de GERHICO: Espaces. Limites. Frontieres Centre-Quest francais. Acadie 2 (2001). 29 De la Fond, Essais sur l'histoire. 60; Souche, Loudun et les pays Loudunais. 52. 30 M. Bouchitte, ed., Collection de documents inedits sur rhistoire de France #44 a la conference de Loudun (Paris, 1862)62-64. 85 Protestant religion. When the fortifications came down in the 1630s, this marked the end of the Loudunais' experience as a military frontier, though it was probably some time until this was appreciated by the inhabitants.
The Loudunais as Military Frontier and Rural Society
From 986 to about 1450, the Loudunais was an important military frontier between larger states. In the second half of the sixteenth century, it was also a frontier between Protestant and Catholic forces within France embroiled in a series of brutal civil wars. Only walking distance to the west of Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaize was
Moncontour, the scene of some of the largest and bloodiest battles of medieval and early modern French history. Unlike the inhabitants of military frontiers in Wales, Ireland, and
Scotland, people on either side of the boundary here in western France were not very different from each other and shared common economic interests.32 As a result, the rural population had little invested in the conflict and peasants did not actively participate in the fighting. Yet we can trace the paths of armies and war-bands, guess at the movements of brigands and deserters, and speculate on their interactions with rural communities. Troops passing through needed food and shelter. Raiders and other desperate men seized anything they could. At the very least, warfare was a serious disruption to the rural economy and promoted fear and uncertainty. At worst, it threatened peasants' very lives, either from the fighting itself or the diseases that inevitably dogged soldiers on the move.
31 Labande, Histoire du Poitou. 220; Janine Garrisson, L'Edit de Nantes et sa revocation: histoire d,un intolerance (Paris, 1985) 79; R. J. Knecht, Richelieu: Profiles in Power (London, 1991) 64-83. 32 Steven G. Ellis, "The English State and its Frontiers in the British Isles, 1300-1600" in Power and Standen, eds., Eurasian Borderlands. 153-181. 86 As a result, rural communities in the Loudunais remained small, centralized, and
close to rivers, forests, hills, and fortifications that could provide refuge. Most peasants
simply stayed in their villages when soldiers were in the neighbourhood, letting their
delegates negotiate any demands the fighting men might have. The extensive walls of
many seigneurial manors suggest that some peasants hid out with their landlords. The
uniformity of the rural landscape was also a defence. The forty-two parishes of the
Loudunais were of similar size, wealth, and layout; nothing stood out as a particularly
inviting target for pillage. Only when raiders were resident conquerors bent on
destruction, such as the Earl of Derby's troops, did depredations threaten everyone.
Military forces usually concentrated their efforts on the fortifications at Loudun and
Moncontour; peasants did their best to stay out of the way. Living in a frontierwa s not
all bad. In peacetime, garrisons, no matter where they came from, needed food, and were
likely to pay well for it. This may have been an early factor in the development of a
prosperous wheat-exporting economy in the Loudunais. Military authorities were reliable
customers and could also help eliminate bandits and outlaws.
Given these conditions of incessant conflict, it is no surprise that the rural population remained low and agricultural production limited during the medieval period,
despite the efforts of some seigneurs and the abbey of Fontrevault. Few peasants would
have volunteered to migrate to a place likely to see further warfare. The population was
reduced still further by the Black Death. After 1450, however, the fortuitous combination of peace and relatively empty, fertile lands encouraged the expansion of rural settlement
87 and agriculture throughout the Loudunais. The connection of the Loudunais with the larger Loire trading network was part of this relatively late development. The Wars of
Religion in the second half of the sixteenth century momentarily stalled these efforts, but even so, the combatants seemed more interested in killing each other than terrorizing peasants. There is no question that the rural economy was disrupted during times of intense fighting, such as 1568-69, but it appears to have recovered quickly once the
armies moved on, and certainly did so after 1598. Significantly, tension returned in the
early seventeenth century as a result of ongoing religious differences and competing noble factions, particularly during the Regency of Marie de Medici. Even after the apparently total defeat of the Protestant forces in 1629, the inhabitants of the Loudunais, on the frontier between Catholics and Protestants in the west, probably assumed that war would resume, sooner or later. In fact, this may have been one of the motivations that led
some peasant families to volunteer to migrate to Acadia
A Religious Frontier
Although the Loudunais was no longer a major battleground after Conde's revolt and the Peace of Ales, it continued to be an important confessional frontier that drew much attention from King and Church in their efforts to contain and then destroy the
Huguenot religion. In the 1630s, new missions of Capuchins, Carmelites, Cordeliers and
Ursulines were established in Loudun and also toured the countryside.34 Militant
33 Paul Raveau, L'agriculture et les classes paysannes: la transformation de la propria dans le Haut-Poitou auXVIesieclef Paris. 1926). 34 Ardouin-Weiss, Le protestantisme en Touraine. 8; Herve' Lemesle, '"Pour la grandeur de Dieu:' les m^canismes de la reforme tridentine a Loudun au XVIF siecle" (mgmoire de maitrise, University de Poitiers, 1986) 81; Poton, Ggographie du protestantisme. 216-226. 88 preachers sought to polarize the population through public debates, devotions and vigils.35 To make matters worse, the plague returned to the area, killing thousands and forcing the authorities to impose martial law in order to clear the streets. It was in this emotionally charged atmosphere that Urbain Grandier was burned as a witch in 1634, and
Richelieu's agents arranged the demolition of Loudun's fortifications.36 Richelieu aimed at reducing the city further by transferring many of its royal institutions, such as the grenier a sel, to the new city (named Richelieu) that he was building nearby.
The 1630s were an important turning point for Loudun's Protestants. There was no longer a Protestant governor and garrison, and the fortificationswer e dismantled.
More importantly, the demographic balance between Protestants and Catholics was changing. There was little difference in the fertility of Protestant and Catholic couples in seventeenth-century Loudun, but migration into the town came from the predominantly
Catholic countryside. For example, after the plague, which killed about one-third of the urban population, the vacuum created in the town was filled by a particularly large influx of peasants, artisans, and seasonal workers from the surrounding rural communities, almost all of which were Catholic. There was simply no "reservoir" of Protestants to replace the losses fromdiseas e or famine which were typical of early modern towns. By
1659, the Protestants of Loudun had become a decreasing minority of relatively wealthy but isolated families - islands "in a sea of Catholic dominance."37 There was also a significant change in the balance of offices held by Protestants and Catholics. By mid- century, all of the positions at the royal and municipal courts (bailliage and prevote) and
35 Jean Queniart, La Revocation de l'edit de Nantes: Protestants et Catholiques francais de 1598 a 1685 (Paris, 1985) 79; Luria, Sacred Boundaries. 48,152. 36 Carmona, Les diables de Loudun; Michel de Certeau, The Possession at Loudun (Chicago, 2000). 37 Bezzina, "Protestant-Catholic Accommodation in Loudun," 128. 89 in the marechaussee were controlled by Catholics; though the Protestants were able to keep some of the key fiscal offices in the election and the grenier a sel (then in
Richelieu). As a result, Huguenots seeking legal redress could not look to local justice
for assistance. Even economic transactions such as leases, loans, and property exchanges were increasingly kept within family compacts defined by their religious identity.
Although "co-existence" or "accommodation" continued in Loudun, the two groups seemed to grow increasingly apart after the 1630s — more so than other divided communities in western France.39 It was not that there was conflict between them; they
simply seemed to maintain distinct social, economic, and political networks. This trend
was intensified by increasing royal repression of the religion pretendue reformee. As early as 1637, edicts appeared prohibiting Protestants frombein g notaries or attorneys
(procureurs). Other offices, such as clerks (greffiers), bailiffs (huissiers), and military positions soon were forbidden them as well. Protestants across France sought to come to an understanding with the King. In 1659, the Protestant national synod held at Loudun professed their loyalty to "le trdne qui a sonfleuve, comme celuy du del, pour la rafraichement des peuplesj"40 But that same year, the end of the war with Spain also ended France's need for support from Protestant princes abroad, and the King and his government hardened their attitude towards their religious minority.41 In an effort to strangle the Protestant population at Loudun, the Loudunais was transferred from the generalite of Poitou to the mostly Catholic one of Tours in 1660, Protestant ministers and
38 Bezzina, "Protestant-Catholic Accommodation in Loudun," 91,336. 39 Gregory Hanlon, Confessional Community in Seventeenth Century France: Catholic and Protestant Coexistence in Aquitaine (Philadelphia, 1993) 73,96; Jacques Peret, "Vitality et turbulences" in Combes, Histoire du Poitou. 266; Bezzina, "Protestant-Catholic Accommodation in Loudun," 128-137, 336-368. 40 Lettre escrite a sa Majesty par le svnode national convoqug a Loudun le 10 novembre 1659 avec la response de sadite Majeste (Paris, 1660) 10. 41 Queniart, La Revocation de I'&lit de Nantes. 105; Labande, Histoire du Poitou. 266. 90 assemblies were forbidden to communicate with foreigners, and no synods were permitted. A strict interpretation of the number of places of Protestant worship granted by the Edict of Nantes resulted in the demolition of half the Protestant temples across the
state.42 Royal repression had an effect in many areas of France; between 1562 and 1670,
the number of Protestants fell from ten to five per cent of the overall population. But in
Poitou, the Protestant population, numbering between 77 500 and 90 000, endured.43
The royal government seemed set on nothing less than the elimination of
Protestantism across the kingdom, and stepped up its efforts in the 1680s. From 1661 to
1679, twelve general acts against Protestants were issued by the government. Between
1679 and 1685, a period dubbed "Pagonie de la R. P. R." by Elisabeth Labrousse, there
were eighty-five.44 The last Huguenot academies were closed in 1681. Virtually all
offices were closed to Protestants. In 1679, an edict directed that Protestant temples had
to allow surveillance by local authorities, and that if any nouveau converti (the name
given to those who returned to Catholicism) was seen returning to a Protestant temple, it
would be destroyed, and its minister banished. In 1680, all mixed marriages were legally
banned, and conversions to Protestantism outlawed.45 Intendants began increasing the
taxes imposed on Protestant households, and promised relief for those who converted.
An "avalanche" of discriminatory measures indicated "/a maturation d'une hostility
42 Queniart, La Revocation de l'&tit de Nantes, 103; Garrisson, L'Edit de Nantes et sa revocation. 83. 43 Ganisson, L'Edit de Nantes et sa revocation. 46,88; Philip Benedict, The Huguenot Population of France. 1600-1685: The Demographic Fate and Customs of a Religious Minority (Philadelphia, 1991)34; Krumenacker, Les Protestants du Poitou. 43. 44 Elisabeth Labrousse. "Une foi. une loi. un roi?" La revocation de l'Edit de Nantes (Paris. 1985) 167-172. 45 Queniart, La Revocation de T^dit de Nantes. 117-118; Luria, Sacred Boundaries. 236; Walter C. Utt and Brian E. Strayer, The Bellicose Dove: Claude Brousson and Protestant Resistance to Louis XIV. 1647-1698 (Brighton, 2003) 21. 91 quasi-generale. But while significant emigration began in 1679, these measures did
not result in the mass abjurations the government hoped for. Intendant Marillac of
Poitiers suggested that the use of dragonnades could be decisive; they had proven
effective against rebellious Breton peasants in 1675.47
The intendant got his way; in 1681 the first dragonnades were instituted in
Poitou. They consisted of quartering troops and raising taxes on Protestant households
that refused to convert. The soldiers were not gentle. One observer claimed that the
Regiment of Asfeld converted the whole province of Poitou in a month.48 These
dragoons were "hard-hearted villains, expert to do Mischief to good Men" and used those
they were billeted upon "as enemies" and the whole province as a "pays conquis.^9
Terrible stories of tortured, raped, and murdered townspeople and peasants soon traveled
ahead of the columns of cavalry that gradually made their way around the province. In
1681, the violence was extremely focused on regions such as Moyen Poitou where
Protestantism enjoyed the most widespread support, and spared most of the poor, the
nobles, and the towns. Although violence certainly did occur,"// serait imprudent de generaliser" about dragoon behaviour. For example, Marillac threatened to fire several
officers whose men were too lenient. It was the financial and social burdens of billeting
and feeding soldiers, which left many habitants impoverished that appear to have been
most burdensome. Clergy who accompanied the dragoons ensured that those who
46 Garrisson, L'Edit de Nantes et sa revocation. 161. 47 Krumenacker, Les Protestants du Poitou. 59-64. 48 Samuel Smiles, The Huguenots in France after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes: with a visit to the country of the Vaudois (London, 1874) 20. 49 "The horrible persecution of the French Protestants in the Province of Poitou: Truly set forth by a Gentleman of great Quality an Eye Witness of those sad passages in a letter to a Worthy Friend of his at Canterbury, June 26,1681" Early English Books Online 497:27,2; Michel Richard, La Vie Ouotidienne des Protestants sous 1'ancien rdgime (Paris. 1985 (1966)) 157. 92 refused to abjure were repeatedly subjected to new billets. Yet this did not have the intended effect. Instead of abjuring, many Protestant families, from all classes and regions, began to emigrate.51 Their stories of harassment and torture, which soon spread across Europe, became embarrassing for the royal government, and the king's ministers expressed concern that bad troop behaviour would spread, so the project was cut short in the end of 1681, and Marillac was recalled.52
Though the initial dragonnades in Poitou did not achieve their aim, they accelerated a process which led to the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, with the full support of almost every intellectual, cleric, and Catholic subject in the realm. The
Revocation was perhaps a natural conclusion for the absolute state, and certainly represented a willingness to brutally enforce conformity.53 Dragoons returned to Poitou in much larger numbers; in 1681 there had been only four companies, now there were twenty-four covering the entire province, with wider discretion to punish all those who remained firm. The presence of two companies of "ces singuliers Apotres" in Loudun led to the demolition of the temple, the conversion of 1 500 Protestants in one night, and the subsequent emigration of over 200 families. Foucault, Marillac's successor as intendant, proudly reported in August 1685 that "vous pouvez compter le Poitou entierement converti dans un mois."54 But as many as 200 000 people, over one-quarter of the
Krumenacker, Les Protestants du Poitou: 69-78. 51 Nicole Vray, Protestants de 1'Ouest. 1517-1907 QEtennes, 1993) 178; Utt and Strayer, The Bellicose Dove. 34. 52 Labrousse, La revocation de l'Edit de Nantes. 175. 53 Garrisson, L'Edit de Nantes et sa revocation. 8,218; Geoffrey Adams, The Huguenots and French Opinion, 1685-1787: The Enlightenment Debate on Toleration (Waterloo. 1991) 19-24; Brian E. Strayer, Huguenots and Camisards as Aliens in France. 1598-1789: The Struggle for Religious Toleration (Lewiston, 2001) 151. 54 AN G7 450 Poitiers, 1684-1693, Aug 1685; De la Fond, Essais sur Phistoire. 150; Lerosey, Loudun: Histoire Civile et Religieuse. 82; Krumenacker, Les Protestants du Poitou. 103. 93 estimated national Protestant population, chose to emigrate, and the city of Loudun, having lost one-third of its population, never recovered. In 1698, the intendant reported that an additional forty Huguenot families comprising 200 persons had left Loudun, leaving just 475 nouveaux convertis remaining in the city, only a few of whom were, in his view, "bons catholiques."55
During the period from 1685 to 1715, authorities' attitude toward Protestants combined repression of those who practiced their illegal religion openly with a great deal of tacit toleration for others who kept their faith under wraps while performing required public acts such as attending Easter Mass. Many intendants, anxious to maintain public order, were reluctant to fully enforce the laws or punish transgressors. Further, the
King's wars distracted the state's attention, absorbed the intendants in tax collection, and kept royal soldiers busy elsewhere. There were still some dramatic episodes of repression. In 1688, Foucault surprised a large Protestant assembly at Grand Ry, killing fifteen people, sending thirty-one to the galleys, and imprisoning two hundred more. But while assemblies were common, such mass confrontations with authorities were rare.
The administration focused its repression on the organizers and ministers, simply lacking the resources to repeatedly capture and imprison hundreds of people.56 Jean Bigot, a schoolteacher in Fontenay, was hanged for holding illegal assemblies in 1687, while some of his accomplices were sent to the galleys.57 Andre Archimbault, caught in less
CO sensitive times (1699), was merely condemned to the galleys for life. The King sent a secret instruction to the intendants in 1698 directing them to concentrate their efforts on 55 AN K-1051, Memoire de la Province de Tours, 1698. 56 Vray, Protestants de POuest 167. 57 AN G7 450 Poitiers, 1684-1693, 12 Feb 1687. 58 AD V CI Justice et Police, 1696-1789,1699. 94 capturing leaders, ensuring children went to catechism, and confiscating the goods of those who had fled. He otherwise counseled restraint, hoping to prevent further emigration.59 Surveillance was common, if ineffective, as in 1702 when the intendant asked each parish priest to report the names of nouveaux convertis who were attending mass and sending their children to catechism.60 Poitou was unlike the south of France, which witnessed the Camisard revolt and the phenomenon of the convulsionnaires. In the Loudunais, those few Protestants who had managed to retain their faith no doubt continued to stay hidden, while in general the area stayed peaceful.
The Huguenots of Loudun, Royal Repression, and the Rural Population
The Protestants of the Loudunais had been almost exclusively located in Loudun itself. Since peasants regularly traded and visited in the town, they would have been well aware of the confessional differences. The inhabitants of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and
Martaize would also certainly have known about the Protestant temple located in the nearby rural community of Chouppes. Monks and friars preached against the Huguenots on street corners in Loudun, and also visited rural communities. The trial of Grandier, and the dismantling of the fortifications during the 1630s would have been common knowledge. It is difficult to say how peasants reacted or thought about these events; most prudently kept their distance, though some may have traveled to see the public burning.
In fact, the repression of the Protestants during the seventeenth century, centred in
Loudun and culminating in the dragonnades, created an unusual divide between city and countryside. Peasants would have been careful not to be associated with the unfortunate
59 Krumenacker, Les Protestants du Poitou. 138. 60 AD Vienne, C56 Intendants Religionnaires, 1702. 95 Huguenots, and certainly would have avoided troops moving through the area. They probably were particularly attentive to their religious duties, so that their clergy would not target them for troop billets or raised taxes. Trade was disrupted to some degree, though the presence of troops in the area may have increased the demand for provisions.
The repression of Protestants may have also reinforced the tendency for the economic activities of the countryside to be oriented toward the north, to Catholic Touraine, rather than south, to divided Poitou. By 1700, the much reduced city of Loudun had lost some of the administrative institutions and economic weight that linked it with the surrounding countryside, but the peasants of the Loudunais continued to be connected to a larger regional trading network (see Part III, 2) and so continued to have access to markets for their agricultural produce.
A Fiscal Frontier
There remains one more significant manner in which the Loudunais was a frontier before 1715. Protestants after 1685 were treated as criminals in France, but officials also had other sorts of criminals to deal with. Mundane brigands occasionally burdened the rural countryside of western France, particularly during difficult times. For example, during the grand hiver of 1709-10, a particularly violent group of thirty-odd brigands was active in the forest of Craon and kept up a running battle with the force sent by the intendant.61 More important for the Loudunais was the fact that Poitou was a province exempt from the salt-tax (the notorious gabelle), while Touraine, to which the Loudunais
61 AN G7 528 Tours, 4 Dec 1709; the intendant reports that they had killed 7 or 8 brigands and were still pursuing the others. 96 belonged after 1660, paid the full assessment. Soldiers quartered in these regions seized the opportunity to make a profit by smuggling Poitevin salt to Touraine. As the intendant explained to his master in 1695, salt smuggling was rampant because the Loire and its tributaries made it easy to travel almost anywhere and also because many locals were
involved. The Loudunais after 1660 became a fiscal frontierwit h scores of smuggling soldiers and civilians moving back and forth across the boundary. Most smuggling was conducted by individuals and small groups stuffing a few kilograms of salt into backpacks and pockets and bringing it home, storing it in their cellars, a cache in the woods, or with a local tavern-keeper (cabaretier), and then reselling the salt to their neighbours. Of greater concern for authorities were larger bands of smugglers using horses, carts, and even boats to transport large quantities of the mineral to complicit merchants in the main towns.64
The tax farmers responsible for administering the gabelle tried to stop the smugglers, employing brigades of gardes to patrol the fiscal frontiers. These gardes were a cross between policemen and customs officials, carrying weapons and exercising powers of search and seizure, though were not allowed to bother nobles and clergy. In an average year, there were 11 000 arrests for salt smuggling across France, and as many as
18 000 gardes were employed just in the protection zones on the various provincial fiscal frontiers. In Touraine, the brigades were concentrated in the towns near the border with
Poitou, particularly those on the Vienne, Creuse, and Claise rivers, and inspected those
62 J. Pasquier, L'impdt des gabelles en France aux XVIP et XVIIf siecles (Geneve, 1978); Jacques Dupaquier, La population rurale du bassin Parisien a l'epoque de Louis XIV Gratis, 1979) 87; Part I, 3. 63 AN G7 522 Tours, 1694-96,20 Feb 1695; Francoise de Person, Bateliers: contrebandiers du sel. XVIIe - XVuT siecle (Rennes, 1999) 36. 64 Rolande Collas, La contrebande du sel entre Touraine et Poitou (Chambray, 2000) 135-143. 97 moving across the frontier. In 1787 there were 1 763 gardes under 21 commanders
{capitaines generaux) employed to stop salt smuggling just between Poitou and
Touraine.65
The state did not tolerate salt smuggling, though it did consider the amount of salt seized, the size of the group, and whether weapons were involved. In general, punishments for men were harsh, even for a first time offence.
Table 4 - Punishments authorized for men caught salt-smuggling
Individual with Individual using horse Group (5 or more) small amount and/or cart and/or weapons First offence 200 It fine or 300 It or 400 It and whipping galleys for 3 years galleys for 9 years Subsequent 300 It finean d 400 It and Death offence galleys for 6 years galleys for 9 years
Women were treated somewhat more lightly. A first offence for a small amount of salt was punishable by only a fine of 100 It. But a repeat female offender could be sentenced a fine of 300 It and banished for three years from the area administered by the local grenier. Further, women caught with large amounts of salt faced stiffer fines, longer periods of banishment, and might be whipped as well.
The intendants dealt directly with civilians involved in salt-smuggling. They were particularly concerned to make examples of those who used violence while committing their crime. In 1675, Intendant Tubeuf of Tours condemned Guillaume
Fougeray, Urban Besnard, Francois Le Roy, Jacques Le Roy and Pierre Sachot "pour avoir assassine les Capitaine & Archers des Gabelles & Commis le Faux-Saunage a Port
65 Pasquier, L'impdt des gabelles, 115; Collas, La contrebande du sel. 40. 66 These punishments were laid out in edicts of 1680 and 1704, Collas, La contrebande du sel, 152. 98 d'Armes." Fougeray, singled out as the leader, was condemned to be broken on the
wheel and then burned in the public square of Angers, his body left on display for twenty-
four hours as a warning. Besnard, one of the shooters, was to be hanged, after being
questioned under torture about his accomplices. The others were to witness the
executions and then serve terms in the galleys and pay fines. The unfortunate Estienne
Roger of Chateau-Gontier, convicted of killing a guard in front of the very door of the
tax-offices, was hanged and his corpse displayed for three days, while his accomplices
were condemned to life in the galleys. In Chinon, a cloth-maker and his apprentice
were found guilty of salt smuggling while carrying weapons, though they did not fire
them. The elder man was branded on his right shoulder, and both were publicly whipped
at each of the major intersections of the town during market day.69 The intendants appear
to have had some discretion in the sentencing, particularly for unarmed salt-smugglers.
For example, Jacques Auril of La Chaussee, probably a repeat offender, was fined the
major sum of two thousand It but was not sent to the galleys.
Salt-smuggling conducted by royal troops was far more frustrating for the
intendant, as he could not arrest or prosecute them himself and instead had to rely on the
military authorities, who were often reluctant to take action against their soldiers.71 In
general, relations between the intendants and military commanders were not always
smooth, often because of competing political interests, clientage networks, and/or
67 "Extrait du Jugement Souverain & en dernier ressort rendu par Messire Charles Tubeuf...contre Guillaume Fougeray, Urban Besnard, Francois Le Roy, Jacques Le Roy, Pierre Sachot pour avoir assassin^ & c," 1675 (BNF: 4-FM-6199). 68 AN G7 527 Tours, 19 Jan 1707 and 1 Feb 1707. 69 AN G7 527 Tours, 23 Aug 1706. 70 AN G7 518 Tours, 5 May 1679. 71 Guy Rowlands, The Dynastic State and the Army Under Louis XIV: Royal Service and Private Interest. 1661-1701 (Cambridge. 2002) 187. 99 prejudice. The intendants complained about the unruly behaviour of the soldiers billeted in or moving through their provinces, while the commanders sometimes felt that the intendants provided insufficient provisions, horses, and shelter for winter quarters and army staging posts (etapes).12
In 1692, the intendant of Tours was frustrated with the military officers in his province in general and salt-smuggling in particular. The gardes des gabelles, having heard rumours of a band of thirty soldiers gathering salt at gunpoint in Parthenay, sent out a number of patrols to prevent them from getting across into Touraine. One patrol was unlucky enough to find them, and all four of its members were killed. Meanwhile, three companies of the regiment of Ciboure openly loaded all their saddlebags and baggage with government salt before leaving Poitou.73 The intendant of Tours decided to survey this fiscal frontier, visiting soldiers in quarters, inspecting the levies that had arrived from other provinces, and reassuring community leaders. He discovered that the most common crossing point for smugglers was on the Vienne River, north of CMtellerault
(i.e. in the Loudunais). Upon finding eight cavalrymen with salt in their quarters, he had them arrested, but immediately ran into difficulties with the unit's officers. The commander was not present, and the senior captain was loud in his protests. The intendant was forced to wait while the military command got around to holding a court martial (Conseil de Guerre) to deal with these men.74
Mounting tension led to a showdown with the regiment of Asfeld in the winter of
1693. After a court martial in January condemned two soldiers to the galleys for life, and
72 Rowlands, The Dynastic State and the Army. 91-93. 73 AN G7 520 Tours, 16 Feb 1692. 74 AN G7 520 Tours, 20 Feb, 12 Jul, 10 Dec, 28 Dec 1692. 100 imprisoned three others for salt smuggling, their comrades bfoke into the prison and
released them. Anticipating another break-out attempt at Saumur, Intendant Miromesnil appears to have foiled the soldiers' plans, and the commander of the regiment was
implicated. The latter, a certain Sieur de Maurigny, was arrested and imprisoned by
Miromesnil after receiving approval from the Controller-General. Attempts to round up
all the guilty dragoons of this regiment proved difficult, however, and at least one company resisted detention, with the ensuing firefight leaving two dead and several wounded.75
Although a seemingly chastened military command structure organized more
frequent courts martial, soldiers' salt smuggling and behaviour grew worse. In Saumur in
1695, there was an incident between a dragoon and two gardes des gabelles. The cavalryman, no doubt reflecting the view of most peasants, apparently insulted one of the gardes saying "here is a maker of poverty." The garde took offence and pointed his gun at the dragoon, who drew his sword. The dragoon rushed him and the garde missed his
shot, but before the dragoon could deliver a fatal blow, the garde's companion shot him dead on the spot.76 Meanwhile, in 1695 alone, a total of twenty-one dragoons from
several regiments across the generalite of Tours were condemned to the galleys or imprisoned.77 In September, 1696, over twenty witnesses reported that some bored noble officers called up from Paris were moving with their retinues from Poitou to Touraine through Chatellerault, carrying salt with weapons at the ready, ignoring the orders of the gardes des gabelles to desist. Some of the witnesses complained that they and their
75 AN G7 521 Tours, 1693,14 Jan, 15 Jan, 26 Feb, 6 Mar, 10 Mar, 13 Mar 1693. 76 AN G7 522 Tours, 1694-96,9 Feb 1695. 77 AN G7 522 Tours, 1694-96, 15 Jan 1695 in Laval; 15 Feb 1695 in Loches; 23 Feb 1695,24 Dec 1695. 101 horses had been seized to help transport the salt. Others claimed the local mayor was in on the scheme.78 Even more worrisome to the intendant was "des actions tres violentes" between some of the military officers and several rural communities. Apparently, the officers were seizing young men from the villages on the pretence that they were deserters, and the peasants proved more than willing to defend themselves.79
As times grew more difficult during the War of the Spanish Succession, and more troops were quartered in the generalite, so too did salt smuggling grow into an even large problem. A troop of cavalrymen had a long-standing operation near Richelieu and
"faisoient ce mauvais commerce avec beaucoup d'impudence." They killed several gardes sent to arrest them. In 1706, four were caught and arrested. The soldiers were
originally from Chinon and that is where they were sentenced, their apparent leader
executed that October. A frustratedIntendan t Chauvelin related to the Controller-
General that salt smuggling was rampant, involving every regiment in his generality.
Thirteen dragoons from a single unit were arrested in 1711. The imperatives of
imperial war sometimes affected the sentencing. Eight salt smugglers from Saumur had
fit their terms on the galleys commuted to garrison service in the West Indies. In 1712,
forty civilian salt smugglers were rounded up and promptly sentenced to serve in the
Regiment of Touraine.82
Confrontations between billeted soldiers with nothing better to do and the less well-armed gardes continued throughout the eighteenth century. During one incident in
78 AN G7 522 Tours, 1694-96,25 Sep 1696. 79 AN G7 522 Tours, 1694-96,12 Mar 1696; Rowlands notes that forcible impressment "grew to worrying proportions" in this period, The Dynastic State and the Army, 257. 80 AN G7 528 Tours, 14 Jan 1710; AN G7 529 Tours, 2 Jun 1711. 81 AN G7 527 Tours, 1706,23 Jan 1706, Oct 1706,29 Oct 1706. 82 AN G7 529 Tours, 4 Oct 1712. 102 1745, thirty dragoons approached the gardes' watchpost on the bridge into Chinon. They
threw rocks at the building, broke down the doors, and roughed up the sentries (one was
stabbed several times in the leg with a sword).83 Meanwhile, salt smuggling by small
groups of unarmed individuals also continued throughout the period. At least some of
them were peasants hoping to make a quick profit.
Salt-smuggling was a potentially lucrative but also dangerous activity. The salt-
tax was so reviled that few peasants blamed those individuals willing to take the risk, and
were certainly willing to purchase cheaper salt when they needed it. Peasants in the
Loudunais were no doubt especially annoyed that in 1660 their province was summarily
transferred to the other side of the fiscal frontier, forcing them to pay considerably more
salt-tax. But everyone was concerned by incidents of violence between gardes and
armed salt-smugglers, and the behaviour of soldiers billeted or moving through the area
was particularly troublesome. The fiscal frontier, with its gardes, watchposts, and
inspections, was also certainly an obstacle to trade between Poitou and Touraine,
reinforcing the orientation of the rural economy in the Loudunais north towards the Loire
rather than south.
The Frontier Experience of the Loudunais and Rural Society
For generations, rural society in the Loudunais was disrupted and limited by periodic warfare and military depredations. Peasants, whether consciously pursuing
neutrality or simply exercising plain good sense, stayed out of the fightingan d
accommodated both sides when necessary, never failing to negotiate with the victor. For
Person, Contrebandiers du set 43. 103 their part, the armies that garrisoned and fought over the Loudunais were not interested in long-term economic commitments or conscripting peasants to fight. For them, this frontier was simply a strategic objective in larger struggles.
But the Loudunais did not stay a frontier for ever. After the Religious Wars, the military and administrative control of the King of France was not disputed. The intendants who arrived in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries sought to create order and security in the countryside, to help ensure the prompt collection of tax revenue and civil obedience. As a result, state officials and rural communities often found themselves on the same side against those who disrupted local conditions, like salt-smuggling soldiers. They were both interested in ensuring the local economy was profitable. This did not mean that everyone meekly accepted all of the state's fiscal and administrative regulations, but communities wanted order and understood the need to work with the state. During the repression of the Protestants in Loudun, rural communities did their best to prove their loyalty to Church and State.
After generations of frontier living, peasants in the Loudunais recognized that peace, cooperation, and stable government were not only necessary for their physical well-being but also supported a financially successful rural economy. In the eighteenth century, their interests and identity were increasingly subsumed into those of the state that had secured their frontier.
104 Acadia
A March from the Beginning
French officials wanted to make Acadia a fortified frontier for a larger overseas empire, but lacked the will to pay for the defenses and garrisons this vision required.84 All through the seventeenth century, Acadian territory was disputed between English and
French, and on most occasions the English got the better of the exchange. In 1612, a
French fishing boat was captured by the English, who claimed they owned the region.
When an English captain from Virginia named Argall stumbled across a Jesuit expedition at Saint-Sauveur in 1613, he attacked and pillaged the shore settlement and took everyone he could find prisoner. The Virginian authorities decided to send Argall back to "burn everything French." He found the habitation at Port Royal abandoned, took everything his men could carry "even to the boards, bolts, locks, and nails," and then set fire to what remained. Argall paid special attention to crosses, inscriptions, or anything else that demonstrated a French claim to the area.85
France at first relied on its colonizers to manage and develop its new territories.
In 1618, while attempting to get Port Royal going again, Poutrincourt appealed to the office-holders and merchants of Paris, asking them to invest in Acadia and noting that the
English were rapidly expanding already in New England.86 This appeal, and subsequent letters and publications extolling Acadia's resources and potential, failed to attract much interest. In 1627, Richelieu established the Compagnie des Cent-Associes with a
84 Marc Lescarbot, NovaFrancia. 1606. trans., P. Erondelle, (London, 1928 (1609)) 6; Geoffrey Plank, An Unsettled Conquest (Philadelphia. 2001) 18. P. Biard, 1616, in Reuben Gold Thwaites, ed., The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents: travels and explorations of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France. 1610-1791 Vol IV (Cleveland, 1896); Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 24. 86 Letter of Poutrincourt, 1 Sep 1618, Collection de manuscrits. 57. 105 complete trade monopoly and the ability to grant land concessions over all of New
France, but before this project could get off the ground, Quebec was captured by an
English expedition. Meanwhile, William Alexander and a group of Scottish Calvinists captured Port Royal and founded the baronetcy of Nova Scotia. European diplomacy led to England (and Scotland) returning both Quebec and Acadia to France at the Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye in 1632.
Richelieu realized that in addition to the investments of the Cent-Associes, he would also need dynamic leaders to both raise interest in the colonies and protect them from the English. For Acadia he chose his cousin, Isaac de Razilly. Razilly, a noble
from Touraine, was a distinguished naval officer known for a fight against the Huguenots of La Rochelle, in which he lost an eye. He was commissioned as lieutenant-general and dispatched to renew French control of the colony.88 Unfortunately, his task was complicated by the presence of a French explorer and trader named Charles de la Tour, who had remained in Acadia during the 1620s and already been commissioned in 1631 as governor and lieutenant-general of "His Majesty's shore and the places that depend upon it." As a result, Acadia in 1632 not only had ill-defined borders and rival international claims, but also a "divided command and a multiplicity of companies interested in trading supplies for its fur and fish rather than in establishing settlers."89 Razilly, given a ship by the Cent-Associes, was able to assemble an expedition of three hundred men. Nicolas
Denys was one of his principal agents in La Rochelle, and himself came to Acadia to seek his fortune. Rather than return to Port Royal, Razilly chose to establish a new
87 Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 32. 88 Commission of de Razilly, 10 May 1632, Collection de manuscrits. 5; George MacBeath, "Isaac de Razilly" DCB. I. 89 Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 48. 106 headquarters at La Heve, near present-day Halifax, where he was closer to the fishery and the Atlantic route home. La Heve quickly developed into a thriving trading post and stopover for fishing vessels, and Razilly's agents in France annually sent more ships with provisions and workers. This suited La Tour, who had his own posts in the river valley of the Saint John. But Razilly's untimely death in 1635 plunged Acadia into a period of uncertainty and, eventually, civil war.
Razilly's second-in-command, Charles de Menou d'Aulnay Charnisay, was another sword noble from Touraine, and another distant cousin of Richelieu. Aulnay saw in Acadia an opportunity to expand the seigneurial fortune of his family, and therefore pursued trade and settlement more aggressively than fishing. To accomplish this, he moved the principal settlement back to Port Royal, which had better soil and was closer to the Mi'kmaq. As he expanded his influence, Aulnay soon disputed with both La Tour and Nicolas Denys (who had been granted land from Canso to Gaspe), and tried to make himself sole governor of Acadia. Meanwhile, the Saint- Jehan arrived with seventy-eight settlers - the first people who were not explorers or contracted workers. In the following years, under Aulnay's direction, some forty rural families, mostly from the Loudunais and Touraine, were brought from France to develop concessions around Port Royal.91
Aulnay's vision of a feudal Acadia has been called "a fool's dream," but he spent fourteen years fighting for it. The royal government was a long way off, so rather than rely on legal proceedings and appeals to establish his claim to the territory, both Aulnay
90 Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 51. 91 Genevieve Massignon, "La seigneurie de Charles de Menou d'Aulnay, gouverneur de 1'Acadie, 1635- 1650" Revue d'histoire de YAmerique Franchise Vol XVI (1963): 469-501; Nicole T. Bujold et Maurice Caillebeau, Les origines francaisesde s premieres families acadiennes. le sud loudunais (Poitiers, 1979) 30. 92 John Mack Faragher, A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of the French Acadians fromthei r American Homeland (New York, 2005) 34. 107 and La Tour resorted to armed force. In some ways, this was an extension of the noble war-band culture that caused anarchy during the Wars of Religion and the Fronde in
France. Louis XIII attempted to mediate the dispute, as in a letter of 1638 which made
Aulnay governor of Port Royal, La Heve and Pentagouet and La Tour governor of the St
John River area. The King also commanded both to make sure that no foreigners got established in Acadia, with the implicit rebuke that their conflict had made this possible.93
But the two men were too enamored of their ambition to accept a compromise. Aulnay's apparent success in developing Port Royal led the King to confirm him as governor of
Acadia, and in 1641, Aulnay was ordered to arrest La Tour to face charges in France because of his previous dealings with the Scots. This was never done, but it helps explain why, in 1643, La Tour enlisted English help to organize a raid on Port Royal itself. The failure of this expedition was a turning point in the conflict.94 The next year, Aulnay himself signed a treaty with Boston recognizing his governorship and guaranteeing peace and free commerce. He then captured La Tour's main residence at Fort Sainte-Marie in
1645, hanging all but one of the two hundred-man garrison and imprisoning La Tour's wife, who died three weeks later. La Tour, who was in Boston at the time, was forced to flee to Quebec. Recognizing Aulnay's victory, in 1647 the King issued new letters patent making him governor over all Acadia and giving him wide discretionary powers.95
Aulnay could not rest on his laurels. He now faced a wide array of legal challenges and was under increasing pressure from his creditors. Chief among these was
Emmanuel Le Borgne, who claimed debts from him amounting to 260 000 livres.
93 Lettre du Roi to Aulnay, 10 Feb 1638, Memoires des commissaires. 495. 94 Lettre du Roi to Aulnay, 18 Feb 1641, Collection de manuscrits. 116; M. A. MacDonald, Fortune & La Tour: The Civil War in Acadia (Toronto, 1983) 122-23. 95 Letters Patent for Aulnay, Feb 1647, Collection de manuscrits. 121; Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 61. 108 Aulnay's death in 1650 in a canoeing accident only further muddied the water. La Tour came back, appointed governor in 1651, and apparently solidifying his return by marrying Aulnay's widow, Jeanne Motin. But Le Borgne arrived himself to lay claim to
Aulnay's property, bringing with him more than a hundred men, munitions, and supplies on board the Chdteaufort. He quickly seized the posts at Pentagouet, Nipisguit, and on lie Royale (Cape Breton) and also captured Nicolas Denys, who had been named governor and lieutenant-general of the northern coastal parts of Acadia in 1654.96
Clearly, royal instructions counted for little in Acadia; for men like these, might was right. In the midst of this conflict, Robert Sedgwick arrived, capturing both the posts on the Saint John River and Port Royal itself.97 As a result, the English would control the colony until 1670. But this did not lead to the arrival of new settlers - the English only wanted to guarantee their access to the region's fish and furs.
Rural Society and the Acadian March to 1670
The first Acadians would have immediately been struck by the lack of security in the region, and the complexity of political relationships. The settlers immediately found themselves in the midst of a struggle between rival colonizers. They were required to build fortifications and produce food quickly for the needs of Aulnay's security forces.
Just when it appeared that Aulnay had the upper hand, he died, and civil war broke out again. Soon after, Port Royal fell to the English.
Nicolas Denys, The Description and Natural History of the Coasts of North America (Acadia) trans., William F. Ganong (Toronto, 1908 (1672)) 64,100. 97 Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 62. 109 The capitulation of Port Royal in 1654 was negotiated by Le Borgne. He
managed to keep his ship and most of its cargo, and the habitants were authorized to stay
and enjoy their possessions with full liberty of conscience and religion. A victorious
Sedgwick pledged that the church would not be looted and that anyone wishing to leave
the colony would not be molested. Those who left would even be permitted to sell their
possessions or take them along - except for some livestock which Sedgwick felt had been
fairly seized by his soldiers. He did stipulate that all habitants who chose to stay in the
colony would have to sign a registry promising not to bear arms against the English on
pain of death. He left Guillaume Trahan in charge, a blacksmith chosen as the
community's delegate (syndic), until English authorities arrived.
Sedgwick's attack had a number of consequences. For the first time in Acadia, a
true rural community had been captured - not just a collection of transient explorers,
traders, and fishermen. As a result of the continued insecurity at Port Royal, many
Acadians began to move upriver, starting a pattern of migration that would eventually see
families occupy marshlands at Minas and Beaubassin as well. The Acadians recognized
that the King was too far away to protect his subjects; his fort was less a refuge than a
target. It was better to stay away from the posts over which these local men fought.
Further, the conquest ended Aulnay's feudal vision, replacing, for the inhabitants, a
seigneurial concept of owed service for a state concept of passive allegiance. Aulnay's
agents had facilitated their arrival, arranged their transportation, provided their supplies,
and awarded them concessions - expecting service in return. But the English
"conquerors", though they left the Acadians alone, had little interest in developing rural
98 Capitulation of Port Royal, 16 Aug 1654, Collection de manuscrits, 145; A. J. B. Johnston, "Borderland Worries: Loyalty Oaths in Acadie/Nova Scotia, 1654-1755" French Colonial History 4 (2003): 31-48. 110 society either. All the New Englanders wanted was to avoid competition in their own fishing and trading activities in the region. The Acadians were on their own, and were simply required to remain neutral and not bear arms in order to continue on their farms.
This does not mean that the conquest had no impact. French priests were excluded from the colony, so Acadian religious observance and the practice of lay baptism (pndoiement) was entirely up to them. The period of English rule also prevented further French immigration into the colony, which reinforced the close regional origins and developing family links between the early settlers. In general, the Acadians began to develop a distinct identity in this period, and had their first experience negotiating neutrality in the march.100 They realized that no political settlement or administration was bound to last, and that the distant French state was not likely to help them.
Acadia comes under royal control, but remains a march
The Treaty of Breda (1667) once again returned Acadia to France. Alexandre Le
Borgne, son of Emmanuel, was commissioned in 1668 as governor and lieutenant-general and sent to see the English off. They refused to leave, however, and he returned to
France with nothing to show for the 20 000 It he spent on the expedition. This incident may have convinced the King that he needed to provide more direct leadership for the colony. Grandfontaine, a military officer, was now appointed Commandant of Acadia and returned with Le Borgne and some soldiers in 1670. The King ordered them not to return without achieving their mission, even if it meant setting up their headquarters
99 George A. Rawlyk, Nova Scotia's Massachusetts: A Study of Massachusetts-Nova Scotia Relations 1630 to 1784 (Montreal. 1973)34. 100 Jean Gaudette, "Le village des Gaudet du haut de la rivierePor t Royal" SHA Vol 18:1 (1987): 35-45; Clive Doucet, Lost and Found in Acadie (Halifax, 2004) 30. Ill somewhere other than Port Royal. Further, Grandfontaine was to give the inhabitants the option of leaving unmolested within a year with their belongings, if they wanted to remain under English rule. That this choice was afforded to French peasants was rather remarkable; but it does not appear that anyone left. The remainder of the instructions emphasized the creation of a French frontier. Acadia was made subordinate to the government, intendancy and bishopric of Quebec. While the King allowed any English who wished to remain in Acadia to do so, they had to swear an oath of allegiance "like good subjects." All other foreigners were to be excluded from settling and trading in the colony. The commandant's residence was to be strongly fortified against future attack.
Louis XIV also ordered Grandfontaine to establish effective routes with Quebec and with aboriginal populations like the Abenaki, sending 30 000 It specifically for this purpose a month later.101 Yet as Grandfontaine and his successors lamented, they never had the resources to accomplish this vision, and officials in Quebec had more pressing concerns.
The combined military and settler population of Acadia was just four hundred in 1671 - clearly too small to complete these tasks.102 The young Louis XIV may have wanted
Acadia to be a fortified frontier for the rest of New France, but he did not invest enough to change its march conditions.
After 1670, imperial priorities drove official policy, but economic realities continued to define conditions in Acadia. Louis XTV abolished the short-lived
Compagnie des Indes Occidentales and assumed direct royal rule of the colonies. This resulted in increased tensions between English and French in Acadia because the state
101 M&noire of Compagnie des Indes Occidentales, 5 Mar 1670; Instructions to Grandfontaine, 3 Apr 1670, Collection de manuscrits. 191-197. 102 Census of Acadia, 9 Nov 1671, Collection de manuscrits, 215. 112 attempted to block English access to trading and fishing in the colony. Furthermore, the actual French military presence remained woefully and demonstrably unable to protect the Acadian population from reprisals and intimidation. This was well illustrated in 1672 when Governor Chambly could not even protect his own headquarters at
Pentagouet against the fifty men and eight cannon of the Dutch pirate Jurriaen Aernoutsz.
Chambly was severely wounded in the encounter, and he and the commander of the post at Jemseg, Pierre Joybert, were ingloriously captured and held to ransom in Boston.
French claims on the western side of the Bay of Fundy were significantly compromised.
These events certainly would have driven the point home to the Acadians that though they needed to work with whoever was in control of the colony, they could mostly follow their own path.104 Under Governor La Valliere in 1679, they agreed to swear an oath of allegiance to France but continued to trade with the English.
La Valliere and later Perrot knew that they could not enforce restrictions on foreigners in Acadia. Also, they were themselves more interested in trade and smuggling and so were happy to issue permits (for a price) to English fishermen. Perrot advised the
King that he could not stop the English from fishing along the Acadian coast, but if he was given the seigneurie of La Heve and additional soldiers, cannons, and ships, he could at least ensure they sold their catch in Acadia.105 Louis XIV flatly rejected this, signing a
Treaty of Neutrality in 1686 with the English that ostensibly aimed to maintain peace in the colonies even during periods of European war, but was in reality an effort to
103 Naomi Griffiths, The Contexts of Acadian History. 1686-1784 (Montreal & Kingston, 1992) 15; Elizabeth Mancke and John G. Reid "Elites, states, and the Imperial Contest for Acadia" in John G. Reid, et al., The 'Conquest' of Acadia. 1710: Imperial. Colonial, and Aboriginal Constructions (Toronto, 2004) 27. 104 Nicolas Landry et Nicole Lang, Histoire de l'Acadie (Quebec, 2001) 35-37; Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 113. 105 Memoire de Perrot, 1685, Collection de manuscrits, 348. 113 explicitly prohibit trade across imperial boundaries. The English, troubled by aboriginal raids on their outlying settlements, gained a pledge that the French would not support any
"act of hostility." It is doubtful whether either side actually intended to honour this agreement, or whether they could enforce it with their colonial populations, who had their own interests, yet Louis XIV proceeded as if the treaty provided new guarantees for the security of his colonies. He fired the venal Perrot, sending Meneval in a new frigate with sixty additional soldiers in 1687 and explicit instructions to prevent any fishing or commerce by foreigners in Acadia.106
It was unlikely that the Treaty of Neutrality could succeed. Rather than a French frontier, Acadia was an isolated march dominated by English merchants who paid little heed to the supposed international boundary. For example, John Nelson of Boston controlled much of the fur trade, while buying Acadian produce in exchange for the material goods the inhabitants could not get from France. When Meneval sent off four
English trading vessels from Port Royal, he reported that the Acadians were angered because they depended on English supplies.107 Privateering became endemic; the French trading company reported losses of 12 000 livres worth of cargo in 1689 alone.
War broke out between England and France that same year. In 1690, New
England sent yet another expedition to conquer both Acadia and Quebec, this time in supposed retaliation for French and aboriginal raids. Its commander, William Phips, assembled a volunteer force of several ships and at least seven hundred sailors and militia. When he arrived at Port Royal, Phips first took aboard an Acadian informant,
106 Instructions to Meneval, 1687, Collection de manuscrits. 396; "Treaty of Peace, Good Correspondence & Neutrality in America" 16 Nov 1686, Early English Books. 1641-1700 459:12. 107 Meneval to Louis XIV, 10 Sep 1688, Collection de manuscrits. 433; Richard R. Johnson, John Nelson: Merchant Adventurer: A Life Between Empires (Oxford. 1991)26, 133. 114 Charles Melanson and confirmed the state of affairs at the fort. Meneval had under one hundred soldiers, no ships, and crumbling fortifications. Not surprisingly, the governor chose to surrender, after negotiating terms of capitulation similar to those of 1654 which protected the garrison and the inhabitants and their property. This time, however, after securing the French surrender, Phips presided over an extensive plundering of the town.
The church and several homes were destroyed, livestock slain, dykes cut, and "the people were in a state of great distress and fear."108 The conquest: had been a cheap victory over a disabled and dispirited enemy, made all the cheaper by Phips' evident determination to plunder the town in spite of the inconvenient fact that its defenders had been so anxious to capitulate.109 Meneval, two priests, and thirty soldiers were taken prisoner, and Phips had the Acadians swear an oath of allegiance to William and Mary. Before he left to go on to Quebec, he set up a Council to administer the oath to the rest of the Acadians. Its members included a French sergeant, Charles La Tourasse, the king's attorney (procureur du roi) Pierre Du
Breuil, the lieutenant civil et criminel Mathieu de Goutins, the local seigneur, Alexandre
Le Borgne, and two Acadian delegates - Rene Landry and Daniel Leblanc.110
The follow-on English expedition to Quebec was a spectacular failure, but the
French were not quick to reassert their sovereignty over Acadia; for several years, it was unclear who was in control. The Acadians had sworn yet another oath, but refused to pledge themselves to fight on either side. The French commandant, Villebon, judged that he could not defend Port Royal and so moved to the Saint John River, eventually settling well back from the coast at Nashwaak, where he would be closer to Abenaki assistance
108 John Clarence Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century (Saint John, 1934) 9. 109 Emerson W. Baker and John G. Reid, The New England Knight: Sir William Phips. 1651-1695 (Toronto, 1998) 93. 110 Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 29. 115 but far from the Acadian settlements. After he fortuitously captured the English governor sent to supervise Port Royal in 1693, New England did not attempt to further assert its claims, but Villebon did not return to Port Royal either, and even approved the Acadians' oath to Phips and the continuing existence of the Council under La Tourasse. He advised them to work with the English as necessary and to keep their best possessions hidden in the woods in case they had to flee. Throughout the 1690s, the Acadian communities continued to live in an imperial power vacuum without direct supervision, but still subject to competing demands from Nashwaak and Boston. Villebon routinely ordered provisions from Minas and Port Royal, and visited Beaubassin in the winter of 1692-93, though he made himself scarce when an English trading vessel arrived, to avoid witnessing illegal commerce.111
Some Acadians took advantage of the situation, becoming actively involved in cross-border trading and also espionage. Abraham Boudrot was an Acadian merchant whom Villebon routinely despatched to Boston to gain intelligence, while the English mistakenly believed he was working for them. Charles Melanson regularly provided information to Boston on French ships moving in the Bay of Fundy.112 Privateering once again became rife, and French officials complained that Acadians trading grain in Boston, led by Pierre Du Breuil, were provisioning the enemy. Meanwhile, other Acadians served as navigators on the French ships. But the insecurity in the march gradually cut the Acadians off from the Bay of Fundy, especially once privateers began seizing their
111 Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 46. 112 Baker and Reid, The New England Knight. 160. 113 Tibierge, "Report, 1695" in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 148; Robert Sauvageau, Acadie: La Guerre de Cent Ans des Francais d Amerique aux Maritimes et en Louisiane. 1670- 1769 (Paris, 1987)74. 116 shallops and trading vessels. This period ended even the delusion that imperial protection was possible, and it heightened the Acadians' isolation on their marshland farms.
The Acadian communities were a vulnerable target for New Englanders seeking vengeance or plunder, but the inhabitants also showed readiness to protect themselves.
When an English crew trading at Beaubassin in 1693 tried to seize Acadian property, they were driven off by the assembled residents. Against preponderant force, however, the
Acadians soon discovered that the oaths they had sworn to the English were not
"protective talismans", and that they could only hope to suffer no worse than the cutting of their dykes.115 In 1694, an English frigate arrived at Port Royal and when the habitants did not immediately come forward to show their obedience, its crew burned a dozen houses along with several barns full of grain, and killed some cattle as a chastisement.
The captain then treated them "as though nothing had happened."116 In 1696, New
Englander Benjamin Church led a raid by four hundred men to Beaubassin which left most of the village a ruin. Two pirate ships raided Port Royal in the same year, setting several buildings on fire and killing several people. It is little wonder that Diereville's arrival in 1699 prompted the Acadians to flee into the woods and that he found them too scared to "do any business."117 Several people were sick of the attacks and decided to try their luck in new settlements. Minas grew dramatically in the 1690s, and migrants
114 Plank, An Unsettled Conquest 37. 115 Marc Lavoie, "Les Acadiens et les "Planters" des Maritimes: une &ude de deux ethnies, de 1680 a 1820" (Ph.D. thesis, University de Laval, 2002) 10; Johnston, "Loyalty Oaths in Acadie," 37. 116 Villebon's Journal 28 Apr 1693 and 11 Oct 1694, in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 47, 54. 1,7 Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 17-27; Sieur de Diereville, Relation of the Voyage to Port Roval in Acadia or New France trans., Alice Lusk Webster (Toronto, 1933) 82,100. 117 created new communities at Pisiquid and Cobequid, as well as at Chipoudy and
lift Petitcoudiac on the western side of the isthmus of Chignecto.
The Conquest of Port Royal (again)
The 1697 Treaty of Ryswick, which ended the Nine Years' War in Europe, again formally recognized French ownership of Acadia, and Port Royal once more became the seat of the colonial governor. However, the treaty left the balance of power in Europe unresolved, and it certainly did not settle the competing claims in Acadia. War broke out in Europe in 1702 over the question of the Spanish Succession and, once again, Acadia was subject to raids and invasions. Antagonized by the assault on Deerfield by a combined French and Algonquin force in 1704, Benjamin Church returned with 1 300 marauders to plunder Pentagouet, Beaubassin, Minas, and the newer settlements at
Pisiquid and Cobequid. One officer proudly reported that "we left nothing standing of four villages but Port Royal fort." They had deliberately targeted non-combatants in an attempt to terrorize the population and the resulting misery "est grande en
Acadie...plusieurs habitants sont mines, les digues avaient et£ rompues et les terres basses inondees."120 All that remained was to conquer Port Royal yet again. This time, imperial English forces also participated, as Britain, like France, tried to exert more direct metropolitan control. Two successive attacks in 1707 involved a wide assortment of people - New England sailors, Acadian militia, English regulars, Canadian marine troops,
French regulars, pirates, and Abenaki, along with a few Mi'kmaq participated in the
118 R6gis Brun, Les Acadiens avant 1755: Essai (Moncton, 2003) 59; Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 193. 1,9 LAC CO 217 NS "A" 1667-1709, Colonel Dudley to the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, 27 Nov 1704. 120 Leopold Lanctdt, V Acadte des Origines (Paris, 1994) 92. 118 fighting. Remarkably, the French governor Subercase managed to thwart both expeditions.
These victories brought no help fromFrance , which had entered a more desperate phase of the war in Europe. They did serve to increase New England's worries, especially after Subercase began rebuilding fortifications in 1708 and launched successful privateering raids in 1709. A larger and ultimately successful expedition under Colonel
Francis Nicholson and Samuel Vetch was dispatched in 1710 to seize Port Royal once and for all. This time English officials took greater care to maintain a garrison and officials in the newly-named Annapolis Royal. Nicholson behaved just as the French governors before him, directing the habitants to swear oaths of allegiance, and ordering them not to trade or converse with his enemies. That he conquered Acadia "by virtue of an undoubted right of her [the Queen's] Royall Predecessors" is a dubious statement given that those predecessors had seldom hesitated to hand Acadia back to France.122
The Acadians might be forgiven for believing that the occupation would be short-lived.
It was "an important but ambiguous conquest." At first Subercase's capitulation was limited to the area "within a cannon shot" of the fort at Annapolis Royal, which left the status of Acadians elsewhere unclear. But in 1713, the Treaty of Utrecht formally ceded Acadia "in its ancient boundaries," whatever that meant, to Great Britain.
Some New England merchants and fishermenwer e happy that their economic interests in the region were protected, but most New Englanders avoided Acadia, preferring "to stay
121 Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 217. 122 LAC CO 217 NS "A" 1667-1709, Nicholson to Subercase, 1 Oct 1710 and Articles of Capitulation of Port Royal, 2 Oct 1710; Nicholson to inhabitants of Acadie, 12 Oct 1710. 123 Reid, et al., The 'Conquest1 of Acadia, x. 119 isolated, protected from exposure to Acadians or native peoples, at home." As in 1654 and 1690, English rule did not lead to English settlers. The future remained in doubt.
Rural Society and the Acadian March 1670-1710
An extended period of peace, at least by Acadian standards, prevailed between
1654 and 1689. During this time, the population and production of rural society greatly increased, aided by a new group of French immigrants in the 1670s. The 1686 census reported that the Acadian population had grown to 885 people, with around 1 000 cattle,
750 sheep, 600 pigs, and 900 arpents (308 ha) of cultivated land.125 New communities were formed at Beaubassin and Minas. Archaeological evidence indicates that trade with
New England helped support this growth, as most Acadian household goods, such as ceramics, earthenware, and wine glasses, came from Boston.126
When their security was threatened, Acadian communities did not expand as quickly. Between 1690 and 1710, renewed raiding, privateering, and eventually conquests had serious consequences for rural society. Port Royal was sacked in 1690.
Houses and churches were burned, dykes broken, and livestock slaughtered by English raids in 1696,1704, and 1707 as well. In a situation not unlike that of the Loudunais during the Hundred Years War, war-bands committed depredations against each other's territory as part of an escalating campaign of vengeance and cruelty. The Acadians were perpetually ready to flee into the woods at a moment's notice. If military depredations
124 Geoffrey Plank, "New England and the Conquest," in Reid, et al, The 'Conquest' of Acadia. 85. 123 Census of Acadia, 1686 and Memoire de 1'Acadia, 1689, Collection de manascrits. 433,469. 126 Marc C. Lavoie, "Belleisle Nova Scotia, 1680-1755: Acadian Material Life and Economy" (M.A. thesis, McMaster University, 1987); Marc Lavoie "Vie quotidienne en Acadie" Cap-aux-Diamants No 57 (1999): 22-27. 120 were not enough, the conflict also disrupted the system of exchange with New England traders on which the Acadians depended, and also blocked access to the Bay of Fundy, which the Acadians used to visit each other. Communities composed of groups of households spread out across the marshlands became increasingly isolated. By 1710, the
Acadians were ready for peace and seemed quite willing to work with their new British administration. Few had any stake in the French regime. But they also assumed that conflict could resume at any time, and continued to do their best to stay out of it.127
Acadia up to 1713 was neither a frontier of France nor an outpost of New
England. It seemed doomed to remain a march contested but not secured by either side, subject to endemic conflict. The Treaty of Utrecht did not appear to change this situation; a small British administration and garrison at Annapolis Royal soon faced off against the new French establishment at Louisbourg on nearby lie Royale (Cape Breton
Island). In addition, the Mi'kmaq began to defend their territory more aggressively against British encroachments. The Acadians remained a rural population caught between empires, whose only reasonable option was to negotiate with both sides, avoid conflict and hope to be left alone.
The Mi'kmaq and the French
One of the obvious ways in which Acadia differed from any borderland in Europe was the presence of a highly developed aboriginal society, which outnumbered the
European settlers until well into the eighteenth century and continued to claim their own sovereignty over the region. The Mi'kmaq lived throughout Acadia and lie Royale in a
127 Maurice Basque, "Family and Political Culture in Pre-Conquest Acadia," in Reid, et al., The 'Conquest' of Acadia. 48. 121 territory they called Mi'kma'ki. Their neighbours, the Malecite and Passemequody, lived in the Saint John River valley and along the western side of the Bay of Fundy. To the west, in present-day Maine and New Brunswick, was the territory of the powerful
Abenaki confederacy. From the beginning, the French sought to gain influence among these aboriginal peoples. The royal patent of the Sieur de Monts in 1603 directed him to
"cause the people which do inhabit the country, men (at this present time) barbarous, atheists, without faith or religion, to be converted to Christianity." He was also expected to bring them under the King's authority.128 Similar sentiments were expressed in all of the later governors' instructions. The French, lacking the power to coerce the natives, tried to involve them in their economic and military activities, and to convert them to
Christianity. Religion, alliances, and the fur trade created relationships of friendship, but not subordination.
The significance of Mi'kmaq "conversions" should not be exaggerated. Although many Mi'kmaq were baptized and regularly attended services conducted by missionaries, the religious situation was complicated, not least because of language. The Jesuit priest
Biard explained in 1612 that even those who learned the Mi'kmaq language struggled to explain abstract concepts and words which had no equivalent in their vocabulary. As for the aboriginals themselves, Biard wrote that "the nation is savage, wandering and full of bad habits; the people few and isolated" and that "it is self-love that blinds them, and the evil one who leads them on." Interestingly, he compares the Mi'kmaq view of their own
128 Lescarbot, Nova Francia. 6. 129 Relationships with aboriginal people in regions where they could not be coerced have been discussed at length. See for example, Richard White, The Middle Ground: Indians. Empires and Republics in the Great Lakes Region. 1650-1815 (Cambridge, 1991); Eric Hinderaker, Elusive Empires: Constructing Colonialism in the Ohio Valley. 1673-1800 (Cambridge, 1997); Alan Taylor, The Divided Ground: Indians. Settlers and the Northern Borderland of the American Revolution (New York, 2007). 122 superiority with his perception of French Protestants -"holding themselves higher and boasting of being better than the Catholics." Nevertheless, he told his superiors of the close bond he had established with Membertou's tribe and that "I love these honest people with all my heart."130
Missionaries worked with the Mi'kmaq throughout the early modern period, sometimes encouraging them to support French imperial aims, often patiently attempting to instruct them in the Catholic faith. The bonds between particular missionaries and
Mi'kmaq family groups could be profound. Saint-Vallier, Bishop of Quebec, visiting
Acadia in 1686 thought that the Mi'kmaq
ont des qualitez merveilleuses pour le Christianisme. lis sont d'un naturel doux & docile; ils exercent volontiers Fhospitalite, ils vivent entre eux en grande union, ils aiment leurs enfans autant que toute autre Nation du monde; les femmes sont aussi laborieuses que les hommes; on ne les voit jamais inutiles.
He cited in particular their dedication to prayer and to their priests.131
The missionaries were often the only link between French authorities and the
M'ikmaq, who lacked a centralized government of their own. Chiefs and councils administered the seven districts of Mi'kmaq territory and wielded considerable local economic power, assigning winter hunting grounds to groups of families and settling disputes. Still, this control was closer to territorial behaviour than to a state-centred form of government. The lands in each area tended to remain with the same families and there were prohibitions against trespass by other aboriginals; in fact, when groups of Mi'kmaq in the eighteenth century seized British vessels or held up European travelers, this was often an expression of family territorial rights rather than collective political action. The
130 P. Biard, 1611 in Thwaites, ed., TTie Jesuit Relations. Vol 1. 131 Saint-Vallier, Jean-Baptiste de, l'Evgque de Quebec. Estat Present de l'Eglise et de la Colonie Francoise dans la Nouvelle France (New Yoric, 1965 (1688)) 43-49. 123 Acadians appear to have understood this system; settlers requested approval and
1*^9 sometimes paid for the rightt o move onto new land.
The fall of Port Royal in 1710 was not at first a very significant political event for the Mi'kmaq. They had seen the fort fall on numerous occasions with little change to the everyday realities in the region. Some did join the Baron de Saint-Castin's Abenaki force in 1711, which laid siege to the new British garrison and fought some bloody skirmishes, but most Mi'kmaq were more concerned with harvesting eels for the winter than driving out the latest conquerors.133 By 1720, however, the Mi'kmaq began to realize that this new English administration was more secure and had more potential to interfere with their economy than those of the seventeenth century. In response, the Mi'kmaq Grand
Council emerged as a headquarters where aboriginal leaders came to discuss their options among themselves and wim other aboriginal groups like the Abenaki Confederacy.
Significantly, the Mi'kmaq went to war against the British on their own in 1722, before the French were willing to get involved. They raided the fishing settlement at Canso, and laid siege to Annapolis Royal. Throughout the northeastern borderlands, aboriginals came together and tried to exercise their military and political power independently in an effort to preserve their territory and influence. The fighting ended in 1725, and the
132 Daniel N. Paul, We were not the Savages (Halifax, 1993), 5-6; William C. Wicken, "Re-examining Mi'kmaq-Acadian Relations, 1635-1755" in Sylvie Depatie, et aL eds., Habitants et marchands Twenty Years Later: Reading the History of Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Canada (Montreal. 1998)99; Janet E. Chute, "Frank G. Speck s Contributions to the Understanding of Mi'kmaq Land Use, Leadership, and Land Management" Ethnohistory 46.3 (1999): 481-540. 133 William C. Wicken, "Mi'kmaq Decision: Antoine Tecouenemac, the Conquest, and the Treaty of Utrecht" in John G. Reid, et al., The 'Conquest' of Acadia. 1710: Imperial Colonial and Aboriginal Constructions (Toronto, 2004) 86-99. 124 British acknowledged in the two peace treaties that the Mi'kmaq could govern their own
affairs.134
In the 1740s, the French renewed their military efforts to recapture Acadia, and
encouraged the Mi'kmaq both to become more organized and to join their attack against
the British. They continued to rely on missionaries willing to use their influence to push
the Mi'kmaq towards war. Fr. Pierre Maillard started an annual gift-giving gathering on
He Royale during which he warned of the dangers of British encroachments. The
missionary priest Jean-Louis Le Loutre became a virtual military commander, leading his
followers to both fight against the British and intimidate the Acadians trying to stay
neutral in the 1750s. The Mi'kmaq did not blindly follow these clergy; they usually
fought to defend their own interests. They were already angry and worried because the
new British settlement at Halifax, established in 1749, included large numbers of soldiers
and settlers, and occupied aboriginal territory that had been previously left alone. As a
result, although some Mi'kmaq did not go to war, many fought on the French side until
the second fall of Louisbourg in 1758.13S
134 Plank, An Unsettled Conquest. 70; William C. Wicken, "26 August 1726: A Case Study in Mi'kmaq- New England Relations in the Early 18* Century" Acadiensis 23,1 (1993): 5-21; Stephen E. Patterson, "Indian-White Relations in Nova Scotia, 1749-61: A Study in Political Interaction" Acadiensis 23, 1 (1993): 23-59. 135 Micheline Dumont-Johnson, Apdtres ou Aeitateurs : La France missionaire en Acadie (Trois-Rivieres, 1970) 107-123; Geoffrey Plank, "The Two Majors Cope: The Boundaries of Nationality in Mid-18* Century Nova Scotia" Acadiensis 25,2 (1996): 18-40; Gerard Finn, "Jean-Louis Le Loutre," and Micheline Dumont-Johnson "Pierre Maillard," in DCB, I. 125 The Mi'kmaq and the Acadians
Thus, although they had some interests in common, the links between Acadians and Mi'kmaq in the seventeenth century have sometimes been exaggerated.136 If the
Mi'kmaq and Acadians enjoyed relatively harmonious relations, this was chiefly because they generally stayed out of each other's way. The Mi'kmaq lived in stable coastal villages during the summer, fishing (especially salmon and eels), gathering shellfish, and planting gardens for sustenance. This was also a time to trade with Europeans and other aboriginals. In the winter, the Mi'kmaq dispersed into smaller groups of extended families that inhabited hunting grounds averaging several hundred square kilometers.
They killed moose and caribou, and also hunted fur-bearing animals to trade.137 The main settlements of the Acadians were located separately from Mi'kmaq villages and hunting grounds. Regular trade occurred, but there were few cases of intermarriage or other close social relationships, except in small, isolated communities on Acadia's east coast such as La Heve. Mi'kmaq rarely appear in eighteenth-century parish registers; religious worship and family celebrations did not bring aboriginals and Acadians together. Further, the bulk of the fur trade was between the Mi'kmaq and the agents of the French trading companies, not Acadian farmers. In general, the Mi'kmaq lived entirely apart from the rural society that was forming in the marshlands, and the deep woods remained an aboriginal frontier, one that people crossed only with guides and
See for example, N. E. S. Griffiths, "Mating and Marriage in Early Acadia" Renaissance and Modern Studies. Vol 35 (1992): 109-127; Wicken points out that only one aboriginal woman appeared as the wife of an Acadian in the seventeenth century censuses - and she was an Abenaki, "Reexamining Mi'kmaq- Acadian Relations," 101. 137 William C. Wicken, "Encounters with Tall Sails and Tall Tales: Mi'kmaq Society, 1500-1760" (Ph.D. Thesis, McGill University, 1994) 128-137; Plank, An Unsettled Conquest 23-25. 126 interpreters accepted by the Mi'kmaq themselves. While native good will was a necessary support for the colony, and especially for the continuation of the Acadian style of dispersed settlements, it also seems likely that few Acadians knew aboriginals well, and many may have been afraid of them.139
Europeans certainly disrupted Mi'kmaq traditional patterns. Many aboriginals became so dependent on the fur trade that they needed European food for parts of the year.140 Even more intrusive was the gradual expansion of European settlement along the coasts. Whether due to the establishment of English fishing posts such as Canso, or the development of Acadian farming around the Bay of Fundy, many Mi'kmaq found it harder to get access to the fish and marine life mat formed their summer diet.
Commercial fishing carried away thousands of tons offish, and the Acadian dykes transformed the coastal marshes altogether. Most Mi'kmaq responded by moving away from the main Acadian communities, creating a widening social distance between the two groups. But as Acadian settlement and agriculture continued to expand, the "Mi'kmaq were excluded from ever greater spaces in the landscape." By 1740, there was little contact at all between Acadians and Mi'kmaq, especially around Annapolis Royal and
Minas. Economic and political differences had "driven a wedge" between them.141
Even as Mi'kmaq territories and subsistence patterns were being disrupted, their population was declining. It is difficult to determine the scale of the demographic disaster, in part because we do not know the size of their pre-contact population, but it is
138 Faragher, A Great and Noble Scheme. 48. 139 Rawlyk, Nova Scotia's Massachusetts. 43; John G. Reid, Acadia. Maine, and New Scotland: Marginal Colonies in the Seventeenth Century (Toronto. 1981) 164. 140 Virginia P. Miller, "Aboriginal Micmac Population: A Review of the Evidence" Ethnohistory 23,2 (1976): 117-127. 141 Wicken, "Re-examining Mi'kmaq-Acadian Relations," 93-114; Plank, An Unsettled Conquest. 84. 127 reasonable to assume that there had once been many more Mi'kmaq, perhaps tens of thousands.142 It is generally accepted that during the early seventeenth century, after at least one hundred years of trade with European fishermen and explorers, the Mi'kmaq had been reduced to some three to four thousand people. By 1700, this figure had fallen to 2 000, and by 1740 they had been further diminished to about 1 500 individuals.143
Obviously, this had a significant impact on Mi'kmaq views of Europeans. The Mi'kmaq wars against the British in the 1720s and after 1749 can be partly explained by their increasing realization that their very survival was at stake.144 Some chose to fight, others chose to leave; a growing Mi'kmaq migration to other parts of the Atlantic coast, including Newfoundland, explains some of the population decrease. Like their allies, the
Abenaki, the Mi'kmaq were gradually forced to withdraw in the face of European settlement.145
The changing balance of population had important consequences for the Mi'kmaq relationship with the Acadians. From the founding of the colony, the settlers would have been struck by the sparse aboriginal population, a vivid contrast to the largely saturated countryside of western France with thirty to fiftypeopl e for each km2. Still, before 1700,
Mi'kmaq villages had existed side by side with the principal Acadian settlements, and the
Daniel N. Paul estimates that the seven districts of the Mi'kmaq (which comprised peninsular Acadia and Cape Breton), originally numbered 100 000 persons in We were not the Savages QHalifax, 1993) 5. Miller suggests a more likely figureo f 35 000 in "Aboriginal Micmac Population," 119. 143 P. Biard to C. Balthazar, 1611 in Thwaites, The Jesuit Relations. Vol I; John Daniels, "The Indian Population of North America in 1492" William and Mary Quarterly 49,2 (1992): 298-320; Plank, An Unsettled Conquest 23-24; James Pritchard estimates that there were only 2 000 Mi'kmaq left as early as 1670, In Search of Empire: The French in the Americas. 1670-1730 (Cambridge, 2004) 5; Meanwhile, Jennifer Reid argues a somewhat higher figure of 2 200 Mi'kmaq remaining in Nova Scotia in 1740, Myth. Symbol and Colonial Encounter: British and Mi'kmaq in Acadia. 1700-1867 (Ottawa. 1995). 144 Olive Patricia Dickason, "Amerindians between French and English in Nova Scotia, 1713-1763" American Indian Culture and Research Journal 10,4 (1986): 31-56. 145 Colin G. Calloway, The Scratch of a Pen: 1763 and the Transformation of North America (Oxford, 2006)51-58. 128 overall aboriginal population was twice as large as that of Europeans. But by 1722, few aboriginals remained near Annapolis Royal, Minas, and Beaubassin. In fact, one estimate states that just eight hundred Mi'kmaq remained in all of peninsular Acadia. By 1740, the Acadians in the marshlands alone outnumbered all the Mi'kmaq left in Acadia by at least five to one, and most of the latter had moved far from the Bay of Fundy. In the years that followed, the Acadians made clear that they would not help the Mi'kmaq preserve their remaining territory fromth e British. The Acadian claim that the Mi'kmaq
(or at least certain Mi'kmaq) threatened them with violence is much more credible when we consider the ways in which Acadian population growth and agricultural expansion were a riskt o aboriginal communities and their way of life, as well as the fact that the
Acadians and the Mi'kmaq used very different political strategies to protect themselves.
As late as 1690, the Mi'kmaq had the largest population and the strongest potential military force in Acadia. They held the balance of power.147 Not surprisingly, officials, missionaries, and rural communities negotiated carefully with aboriginals and tried to gain their cooperation. Economic links through trade were very important, and a few Europeans lived closely with aboriginals in far-flung trading and fishing posts. The decline of the Mi'kmaq population certainly affected their ability to preserve this territory in the eighteenth century, but there is little question that they wanted to do so. Indeed, after the Treaty of Utrecht, the situation in the Acadian march was complicated by the overt militarization of the Mi'kmaq. Aboriginals were drawn together by an economic crisis created by the disappearance of fur-bearing animals, and the expansion of English
146 Wicken allows that this figure probably underestimates the remaining aboriginal population, "Re examining Mi'kmaq-Acadian Relations," 98. 147 Reid. Acadia. Maine, and New Scotland. 185. 129 commercial fishing and Acadian settlement. However, like their French allies, the
Mi'kmaq found themselves increasingly isolated from the Acadians, and their attempts to use military influence to change conditions in the colony increasingly ineffective. Their
circumstances became desperate and left them with few options. The deterioration of the
Mi'kmaq position made life more dangerous for rural society in the march. When the
Acadians there refused to join them, Mi'kmaq fighting under the leadership of the abbe
Le Loutre actually burned Beaubassin in 1750, an action inconceivable in 1700.
Acadian Rural Society and the March
Scholars have dubbed the entire Maritime region as the "Northeastern
Borderlands" because no European power could secure it militarily, populate it
extensively, or draw economic benefits from it consistently. Acadia can be even more
specifically described as a march - a region subject to constant uncertainty and conflict
dividing rival powers, cultures, and ways of life. This was partly a function of the
distance between centre and periphery. In general, historians have found that early modern monarchs "lacked the financial resources and coercive power to create overseas empires." Instead, colonies were products of negotiation and constructions of authority on the margins. In borderlands this often led to collaboration across supposed boundaries. The inhabitants of Acadia certainly "knew on which side they belonged and,
equally importantly, who belonged on the other side."148 Yet they understood that
148 John G. Reid, "An International Region of the Northeast: Rise and Decline, 1635-1762" in Stephen Hornsby, et al., The Northeastern Borderlands: Four Centuries of Interaction (Frederiction, 1989) 17; P. A. Buckner, "The Borderlands Concept: A Critical Appraisal" in Hornsby et al., The Northeastern Borderlands. 157; Leslie Choquette, "Center and Periphery in French North America," in Daniels and Kennedy, Negotiated Empires. 194; Elizabeth Mancke, "Negotiating an Empire: Britain and its Overseas Peripheries" in Daniels and Kennedy, Negotiated Empires. 236. 130 imperial designs rarely took their well-being into account. On the one hand, Acadia's perceived strategic importance as a geographic approach to either New France or New
England and as a base for the Atlantic fishery ensured that it would almost invariably be an area of contention during imperial war.149 On the other, Acadia's tactical weakness made it vulnerable to the raids and invasions of poorly organized forces that would otherwise and elsewhere have failed. It was, in effect, an easy target. The only permanent feature of the colony was the lack of consistent sovereignty. Strikingly, even in the nineteenth century, the Bay of Fundy remained a borderland haven for smugglers and refugees between the United States and British North America. The region was a territory "en perpetuel mouvement" because states could not or would not establish effective control.150
Simply defining Acadia's boundaries was a challenge. In 1687, the French claimed that Acadia's boundaries ran from the Cap de Gaspe to the Kennebec River.
West of Gaspe was New France, and south of the Kennebec was New England.151 This was a large territory, composed of the present-day Canadian provinces of New
Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and part of Quebec, as well as part of the state of Maine. The colony extended about 500 km in a straight line north to south, and a traveler would have to undertake a sea voyage of over 1 400 km to get from one end to
Pritchard, In Search of Empire, xx; Laurent Marien, "Le regime seigneurial au Canada: Territoires, pouvoirs et regulation socio-economique (XVlF-XVIIf siecles)" in Frederic Chauvaud et Jacques Peret, eds., Terres Marins: Etudes en hommage a Dominique Guillemet. (Rennes and Poitiers, 2005) 324. 150 Elsa Guerry, "L'Acadie au XVIF siecle, entre la Nouvelle-France et la Nouvelle-Angleterre: Quelle identity? Quel territoire?" in Maurice Basque et Jacques Paul Couturier, eds., Les territoires de l'identit& perspectives acadiennes et francaises XVIIe-XXe siecles (Moncton, 2005) 24. Also see Joshua M Smith, Borderland Smuggling: Patriots. Loyalists, and Illicit Trade in the Northeast 1783-1820 (Gainesville, 2006). 151 Instructions du Roy au Sieur de Meneval, 1687, Collection de manuscrits. 396. 131 the other. Yet after the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) ceded Acadia with its "ancient boundaries" to Great Britain, the French argued that only peninsular Acadia was included, not lie Royale (Cape Breton), the Saint John River, or present-day New
Brunswick. Even this was a sizeable terrain well beyond the ability of the tiny colonial administrations and garrisons to govern. Negotiations with aboriginal people and across
European boundaries were required for security and trade, and even to survive. The
French Commandant Villebon put it best in 1692 writing that "without these compromises it would be impossible to exist in this country."153
Acadian rural society enjoyed considerable independence because of its existence in a march. During periods of peace, such as 1654 to 1689 and 1713 to 1740, Acadians could expand their settlement and their agriculture without much official interference or the burden of taxes. They could trade with aboriginals, French and English. Over time, a distinct "marcher" identity emerged. The Acadians identified themselves with neither empire and simply believed that "they were the rightful inhabitants of the lands on which they lived."154 But living in a march had consequences as well. Raiding and war seriously disrupted the rural economy, particularly between 1690 and 1710, costing many
Acadians their farms, herds, homes, and possessions. A few lost their lives. Trade was inconsistent and unreliable, leaving Acadians without buyers for their produce and without sellers of the material goods they could not make themselves. Tensions with the
Mi'kmaq raised fears and uncertainties and it was impossible to predict when pirates or
152 Saint-Vallier, Estat Present de l'Eglise. 32. 153 Villebon's Journal, 1692 in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 41; Reid, Acadia, Maine, and New Scotland. 141,174. 154 J. B. Brebner, New England's Outpost: Acadia before the Conquest of Canada (New York, 1927) 86; Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 261 and 419. 132 raiders would appear. This was hardly a happy way to live. Above all, the Acadians were isolated from the rest of the New World and from France and even from each other.
There was no one to assist them, no one pursuing their interests. Independence went with isolation to create vulnerability.
Conclusion
The Acadian experience can in part be understood by reflecting on the frontier legacy of the Loudunais. The Loudunais had a long history as a military frontier reaching back to the medieval period. Major battles were fought there during the Hundred Years'
War between English and French, and during the Wars of Religion between Catholics and Protestants. It remained a military/religious frontier for much of the seventeenth century, the periphery of a larger Protestant movement in western France that was eventually dismantled between 1629 and 1685. Not surprisingly, rural communities in the Loudunais were shaped by these conditions. They remained small but centralized, closely connected, and located near natural and man-made places of refuge. Peasants did not participate in these wars and did their best to accommodate whoever threatened them.
By the eighteenth century, however, the Loudunais was merely a borderland in the sense of a space defined by administrative and fiscal boundaries. These were not without importance, but the inhabitants no longer had to fear the descent of armies or raiders on their communities. They had become a secure part of the kingdom of France, and increasingly shared its interests and identity. The peasants who left there for Acadia embarked in the mid-seventeenth century, however, and so had both long-standing and immediate experience of living in a militarized frontier. It was perhaps reasonable for
133 them to assume that similar tactics would see them through in the New World as well.
Religious differences, back-and-forth conflicts, raiders: they had seen all this before.
Further, in both places, rural society prospered during periods of peace. Frontiers could create opportunities as well as fear.
But Acadia was a different and more complex kind of frontier. N. E. S. Griffiths wrote that the Acadians' status moved fromtha t "of a people on the periphery of French power to those of a border people of the English empire." Even so, this understanding is incomplete for it suggests that there was a "solid mass of empire somewhere" on whose edge Acadia existed - a problematic assertion given the weakness of imperial structures in both New France and New England.155 W. J. Eccles effectively captured the various meanings of Acadia, describing it as a border march of Canada, a base for the French and
Anglo-American fishing industries, a French agricultural settlement, a base for missionary and fur-trading activities, and also a hinterland of rival metropolises.156 The
Acadians were certainly part of much larger dynamic which saw Europeans push settlement frontiers across other parts of the world. But the term "march" also captures the fact that, like marches between Christians and Muslims in medieval Spain or the early modern possessions of the Austrian Hapsburgs, like the Anglo-Welsh border and the
Ukraine, like mountain valleys in the Pyrenees, Acadia was a militarized and oftentimes dangerous frontierbetwee n rival and very different populations. As a result, the inhabitants developed their own "marcher" customs and identity.157 This was a
155 Reid, Acadia, Maine, and New Scotland, 183-185; Pritchard, In Search of Empire. 72; Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 184,254. 156 W. J. Eccles. The Canadian Frontier. 1534 to 1760 (Albuquerque. 1983) 3. 157 Peter Sahlins, Boundaries: The Making of France and Spain in the Pyrenees (Berkeley, 1989); Power and Standen, eds., Eurasian Borderlands. 8; Richards, The Unending Frontier. 5-6; David R. Jones, "From 134 significant difference from the Loudunais, whose inhabitants were much like those in the
surrounding areas.
The concept of the march can also be applied to the Mi'kmaq, another population
with a distinct culture and way of life competing to control the region. The deterioration
of their economic and demographic position, and their involvement in the imperial rivalry
between England and France, had important consequences for their relationship with the
Acadians, particularly in the eighteenth century. The Acadians had to accommodate and
negotiate with the Mi'kmaq as well as English and French representatives if their
expanding and dispersed settlements were to survive.
It was no coincidence that the Acadian Golden Age corresponded to the longest
period of peace in the colony. Acadian demographic expansion, discussed in Part II
below, was remarkable when not constrained by war and the disruption of their economy.
But the very march conditions that supported this growth also created the insecurity and
vulnerability that constantly threatened to re-emerge. Those who predicted that the
Conquest of 1710 would lead to still more fighting were proven all too right. The
Acadians were nevertheless confident that their strategy of neutrality and accommodation
would continue to protect them. In the next chapter, we will consider the demands of the
state on rural society in the Loudunais and Acadia. The differences in these requirements
and the state's ability to enforce them can in part be traced back to frontier conditions.
Frontier to Borderland: The Acadian Community in a Comparative Context, 1605-1710" Royal Nova Scotia Historical Society Journal 7 (2004): 15. 135 Picture 8 - Square Tower at Loudun
•iRffi§i
HM^S
158 All photographs taken by the author, summer 2005. 136 i v© I *0 o 3 a.
ao
u> o
a> o
H o
o g
00 i o
<6
53- & o r1 wo <& ct. Ui 3 VO rO en CO Picture 12 - Fort Anne Flag Bastion (Annapolis Royal) and the author
140 Picture 13 - Fort Anne overlooking harbour at Annapolis Royal
141 PART I, CHAPTER 3 -
THE DEMANDS OF THE STATE
Introduction
This chapter examines the state-subject relationship in the Loudunais and Acadia through a consideration of the demands of the state on rural society. In general, the expectations in the Loudunais were primarily fiscal, while in Acadia, service, including military service, was required. The nature and frequency of state demands, and the ability of officials to secure them, depended in large part on the circumstances of both places and the cooperation of the local population. In the Loudunais, the goals and needs of rural society were generally consistent with those of the state, but in Acadia rural and imperial interests were in conflict, and an effective state-subject relationship never developed without the institutions, shared interests, and military power needed to keep it together. After France ceded Acadia to Great Britain by the Treaty of Utrecht (1713), a tense period ensued during which both France and Britain sought to use the Acadians to further their interests while the Acadians themselves tried to stay neutral. As long as the forces of the rivalstate s in Acadia were relatively weak and at peace, this gave the
Acadians a degree of independence. But after imperial war resumed in the 1740s, their competing demands on rural society became more insistent, backed with the coercive power of increasingly large military forces. Both France and Great Britain saw the
Acadians as pawns in their larger struggle and would not leave them alone.
142 The state-subject relationship from a rural perspective
The primary loyalty of peasants was to their family and community, and daily life was centered on the parish.1 Nobles and clergy played important roles, but peasants ultimately looked to each other to ensure their security and economic well-being. From artisans and day-workers to senior ploughmen, most peasants had a stake in the system, and were united in their desire to maintain order.2 Peasants did not like taxes, but they generally accepted them and paid them on time. This was partly because the state was expected to fulfill certain obligations - such as protection and justice, or aid during times of crisis - and partly because, by cooperating, peasants hoped to keep the state out of their own business.3 For their part, the state was usually quite content to govern from a distance, so long as its demands were met. It seems that the state and rural society had largely complementary perspectives and goals. The state needed money and supplies for its wars abroad, and peace and obedience at home. This required the cooperation of rural society. Rural society needed peace and security, but also access to larger structures such as markets and courts, and help during crises.4 This required the leadership and resources of the state.
Henri Mendras, Les societes paysannes (Paris, 1995 (1976)) 41; Robin Briggs, Early Modem France, 1560-1715 2nd Ed. (Oxford, 1998) 46; Alain Croix et Jean Queniart, De la Renaissance a Taupe des Lumieres: Histoire Culturelle de la France Vol 2 (Paris, 2005 (1997)) 52-56. 2 Donald Sutherland, The Chouans: The Social Origins of Popular Counter-Revolution in Upper Brittany. 1770-1796 (Oxford. 1982) 168; James B. Collins, Classes. Estates, and Order in Early Modern Brittany (Cambridge, 1994) 249,288. 3 T. J. A. Le Goff and D. M. G. Sutherland, "The Revolution and the Rural Community in Eighteenth- Century Brittany" Past and Present No 12 (1974): 107. 4 Anette Smedley-Weill, Les intendants de Louis XIV (Paris, 1995) 247; Judith Miller, Mastering the Market: The State and the Grain Trade in Northern France. 1700-1860 (Cambridge, 1998). The state was also involved with maintaining and updating the currency, and helped keep it stable after 1726, T. J. A. Le Goff, "Monetary Unification under the French Monarchy" in Patrick M. Crowley, ed., Before and Beyond EMU: Historical Lessons and Future Prospects (London, 2002) 43-63. 143 In Acadia, the tumultuous history of conflict described in the previous chapter shows that security was elusive not only for the Acadians, but for the officials sent to govern the colony as well. This had important consequences for the state-subject relationship, as we will see. The state could not govern from a distance because it needed labour, produce, and service fromth e Acadians in order to survive. At the same time, it was not strong enough to provide the services or assistance rural society needed.
Significantly, the founding of a lasting rural society in Port Royal in the 1640s occurred
in the middle of a civil war between rival French seigneurs - a civil war that ended with an English occupation in 1654. Of course, the English did no better at asserting their control over the colony. The impermanence of the state in Acadia certainly inhibited the development of an effective state-subject relationship.
State Officials in the Loudunais and Acadia
Why was the state weak in Acadia? We should not jump to conclusions. The claim that the Acadians had "little recourse to the transients sent to govern or garrison their lands,"5 would have been just as true for residents of the Loudunais. It should be no surprise that top officials like governors, intendants, and garrison commanders were not from the local area and were replaced periodically. Continuity in both places was provided by the subordinate officials who often came from prominent local families and served for long periods of time.
5 Naomi Griffiths, The Acadians, Creation of a People (Toronto, 1973) 21. 144 In fact, the French state in Acadia before the Treaty of Utrecht was not in its construction necessarily weak or incapable of leadership.6 After assuming direct responsibility for New France in 1670, Louis XIV ensured that a basic complement of officials was in place and attempted to establish a clear chain of command through
Quebec and the Ministry of the Marine. Military officers directed the garrisons and served as governors but they were aided by a variety of civil and religious officials who worked on justice, finance, administration, and religious supervision. By the first decade
of the 1700s, the rudiments of an effective state machinery were in place in Acadia, one with similar officials and structures to that of the Loudunais.
Table 5 — State machinery in Acadia and the Loudunais in 1700
Loudunais Acadia Government & Justice Governor Loudun Port Royal Royal Court Loudun {bailliage) Port Royal {siege ordinaire) Judge {lieutenant civil Yes Yes et criminet) King's Attorney Yes Yes (procureur du roi) Clerks (greffiers) and Yes (several) Yes (one each) BaillifFs (huissiers) Court of Appeal Tours (presidial) Quebec {cover superieur) Marechaussee Loudun No (but could use garrison)
Administration & Finance Intendant Tours Quebec Subdelegate Loudun Port Royal Election Loudun No (no ordinary taxes) Grenier a sel Richelieu No (no salt-tax) Notary Loudun & rural (several) Port Royal
Church Bishop Poitiers Quebec
6 Elsa Guerry, "L'Acadie au XVTf stecle, entre la Nouvelle-France et la Nouvelle-Angleterre: quelle identite? Quel territoire?" in Maurice Basque et Jacques Paul Couturier, eds., Les territoires de Videntity perspectives acadiennes et francaises XVlP-XX8 siecles (Moncton, 2005) 22. 145 The most obvious difference was the lack of fiscal officials in the colony, but this was because there were no taxes to administer. In both places, the intendant, bishop, and court of appeal were located in larger centers far away, and had little direct connection with rural society. But there was a nucleus of state officials in the locality's main town
(Loudun or Port Royal), one composed of a governor, a subdelegate, many subordinate officials (clerks and notaries), and a royal court. This group could deal with the vast majority of local concerns. There were certainly more state officials in the Loudunais.
For example, Loudun had a much larger royal court, a brigade of the marechaussee, and a large number of notaries distributed across the countryside. Yet the difference in population between the Loudunais and Acadia should be considered. In 1698, the
Loudunais had 4 834 households or just shy of 20 000 inhabitants, while there were perhaps 1 200 people of European descent in all of Acadia.7 Taking this into account, it could be argued that Acadia actually had proportionally more state officials than the
Loudunais. Indeed, Port Royal was a veritable oasis of officialdom - a community no larger than Martaize with state institutions comparable to Loudun!
It might, then, be reasonable to assume that simple geography defeated the state's efforts in Acadia. The Loudunais was approximately 300 km , while peninsular Acadia was over 40 000. But the area actually occupied by the Acadians - the marshlands of the
Bay of Fundy - was much smaller. In fact, this area was also only about 300 km2. It is true that the distance between Port Royal and the other communities was considerable, but both Minas and Beaubassin could be reached in a day by sailing on the Bay of
7 See Part II. 146 Fundy. That geography could be overcome is perhaps best shown by the Acadians themselves. For example, Jacques Bourgeois, the founder of Beaubassin, maintained residences there and at Port Royal until his death in 1701.9 Many families frequently traveled back and forth between communities to visit relatives or trade. Although state institutions expanded slowly, notaries were in place at Minas and Beaubassin by 1710. If not for the Conquest, it is likely that state officials would have eventually followed the
Acadians as their settlements spread out throughout the colony.
Thus the weakness of the state in Acadia can not be attributed simply to a lack of officials or to the size of the colony. Instead, endemic conflict between England and
France and insufficient military force was to blame. To put it succinctly, both states saw
Acadia as a strategic borderland, but not the main one.10 As a result, the colonial government never received the military resources and funding necessary to secure the region and instead was constantly threatened by rivals. Further, during periods of conflict, the Bay of Fundy was unsafe for travel, forcing most people to take the difficult overland routes. From 1690 until 1697, the French commander believed he could not defend Port Royal, and so moved his headquarters to the other side of the Bay, away from the Acadian settlements. In the case of the British, who ruled Acadia after the Treaty of
Utrecht, the threat of Mi'kmaq attack helped restrict their control to the immediate area surrounding Annapolis Royal. As a result, and in the absence of help from the other
British colonies, the only state officials present after the Conquest were the military
"See Part 1,1. 9 Clement Cormier, "Jacques Bourgeois" DCB. I (Toronto, 2000). 16 See Part 1,2. 147 officers of the ruling Council. Eventually, a few Acadians were appointed to minor positions such as justices of the peace to help.
The French and British colonial governments in Acadia were weak, but this was owing to the military circumstances of the region. In contrast, the governors, judges, and administrators of the Loudunais were recognized and accepted by the local population and did not have to fear overthrow by a nearby rival. Under similar conditions, and perhaps with a little more funding from the metropolis, the officials sent to Acadia might very well have built effective state institutions and secured the loyalty of the population.
Instead, they were forced to make demands from a position of weakness, with little to offer and much to lose.
Fiscal Demands in the Loudunais
The most significant state demand on the rural communities of the Loudunais was the consistent and timely submission of tax revenue. Ordinary and extraordinary taxes were the backbone of the state's finances and also served to secure loans without which the state could not fund its wars. It was no exaggeration to state that "without money, there would be no king," and to underline that the paying of taxes was central to early modern concepts of allegiance and the obligations of subjects.11
11 Mireille Touzery, L'invention de l'impdt sur le revenu: La taille tarifee. 1715-1789 (Paris, 1994) xi. 148 Direct Taxation - the taille
The taille was the oldest and most important direct tax, originating in a medieval levy on non-combatants that became permanent in the fifteenth century. By the end of the seventeenth century, the intendants were directly supervising the venal tax officials in its collection. The intendant assigned an amount to each election and his subdelegue at
Loudun then broke the amount down among the parishes. Parish assemblies selected collectors from amongst the habitants, who drew up the tax rolls and gathered the funds, usually on a quarterly basis, turning them in to the official receivers.13 Nobles and many officials were exempt, as were the collectors. By the eighteenth century, a variety of other taxes were assessed with the taille, including public works like bridges and roads, and services like the marechaussee. Statistics for the election of Loudun are available for
1744 and 1760, both years in which France was at war and therefore include wartime taxes like the ustencile (literally implements, collected in principle to support officers on campaign) and the quartier d'hiver (winter quarters, supposedly levied to feed and shelter soldiers when not on campaign).14
12 Marcel Marion, Les impots directs sous l'ancien regime, principalement au XVuT siecle (Geneve, 1974) 3. 13 AN G7 450 Poitiers 1684-1693,28 Aug 1685 declaration du Roy concernant la nomination des collecteurs des tailles; Michael Kwass, Privilege and the Politics of Taxation in Eighteenth Century France: liberty, egalite. fiscalite (Cambridge, 2000) 52. 14 John A. Lynn, Giant of the Grand Siecle: The French Armv. 1610-1715 (Cambridge, 1997) 167-169.
149 Figure 1 - Taille assessment for the flection of Loudun, 1744
• Principal ETaillon BUstencile HQuartierd'hiver • Public Works BMarechaussee OEtapes
Figure 2 - Tailie assessment for the flection of Loudun, 1760"
D Principal ETaillon BUstencile BQuartier d'hiver • Public Works BMarechaussee OEtapes 0 Militia
Between 1744 and 1760, the overall assessment increased by 22.6 per cent, from
51 273 to 62 882 It, but the principal of the taille increased only ten per cent. Clearly, military costs were much higher during the Seven Years' War. In 1760, an additional small levy to support the militia was included (1 487 It). It is also interesting to note the increase to the amount levied for public works. This more than doubled proportionally, from 4.2 to 11.1 per cent, and more than tripled in actual amount, from 2 150 to 6 985 It.
This likely reflects increased attention to transportation and supply networks, as well as
15 AD I-L C512 Estat des Finances, 1744, generalite de Tours. ,6 AD I-L P5818 Estat des Finances, 1760, generalite de Tours. 150 state projects to promote trade and commerce. Overall, these military and accessory taxes as much as doubled the assessment of the taille itself.17
The weight of the taille in the Loudunais varied throughout the eighteenth century. This was partly because its level was set arbitrarily by the government and so did not follow population changes very closely. The available statistics do not permit us to be exact, but we can certainly estimate the average tax rate for a Loudunais household during this period. In 1698, the 4 834 households of the election of Loudun were assessed 32 807 It in taille. At that time, Loudun was not only the smallest election in the generality, but its households also paid on average about ten per cent less.18 In 1778, the amount assessed was actually the same as that of 1698, but there was a much larger population. Despite the claims of some, the burden of the taille was not significantly higher in the years leading up to the Revolution. Indeed, it was less than 1698; if taking inflation into account, it was considerably less.19
Table 6 - Taille assessments and population of the Election of Loudun, 1698-1788'
Year Taille assessed # of Households Average tax rate 1698 32 807 It 4 834 6.79 It 1744 28 142 It 4 000 7.04 It 1760 31 295 It 4 200 7.45 It 1778 32 807 It 5 685 5.77 It 1788 35 580 It 5 574 6.38 It
17 Brigitte Maillard, Les campagnes de Touraine au XVIIf siecle: structures agraires et economie rurale CRennes, 1998)408-09. 18 In 1698, the average household in the gdneralite of Tours paid 7.62 It, AN K-1051, Memoire de la Province de Tours, Miromesnil, 1698; Jacques DupSquier, La population rurale du bassin Parisien a r^poque de Louis XIV (Paris, 1979) 220. The highest tax rates were in major cities like Tours and Angers. 19 Marc Bouloiseau et Andre" Buchoux, Les municipalitfe tourangelles de 1787 (Paris, 1969) 18. While the official assessment went up to 39 920 It between 1786 and 1788, reductions of up to 5 000 It were applied each year. 20 AD I-L C512 Estat des Finances 1744 generalite de Tours; AN P5818 Etat des finances, g^n^ralite Tours, 1760; AD V C849 Tableau de PElection de Loudun, 1789; Dumoustier de la Fond, Essais sur I'histoire de la ville de Loudun (Poitiers, 1778) 69-71; C. Chevalier, Tableau de la Province de Touraine, 1762-1766: administration, agriculture. Industrie, commerce, impots (Tours, 1863). 151 The taille was not normally a major burden in the Loudunais, a "somme quelque peu derisoire," that was regularly paid on time.21 In the seventeenth century, Aulnay, La
Chaussee, and Martaize accounted for about six per cent of the households but eight to ten per cent of the assessment, suggesting a degree of relative prosperity.22 This had changed by 1788, however, as these communities still had six per cent of the election's households, but only bore 5.5 per cent of the assessment. The households of Aulnay and
especially La Chaussee were paying much less, on average, than those of Martaize.
Loudun itself paid far less taille than most of its rural parishes, which is interesting because in the larger generalite, urban areas tended to pay more. Clearly the rural economy was the source of wealth in the region.
Table 7 - Taille assessments and population within the election of Loudun, 1788
Parish Taille Assessed # of Households Average tax rate Loudun 4 919 It 1025 4.80 It Aulnay 266 It 50 5.32 It La Chaussee 420 It 106 3.96 It Martaize 1 272 It 161 7.90 It Election 35 580 It 5 574 6.38 It
Salt-tax (gabelle)
There were few obligations, even quartering troops, which upset rural habitants more than the salt-tax. While in one sense a tax on consumption, the gabelle was in another a direct tax because every household was levied the amount of 1 minot of salt
21 Melika Louet, "Le pays loudunais et mirebelais au XVIIIeme siecle (d'apres les rdles de taille)" (D.E.A. memoire, University de Poitiers, 2000) 82; Smedley-Weill, Les intendants de Louis XIV. 160. 22 In 1645, they were assessed at 819 It (Aulnay), 825 It (La Chaussee), and 1757 It (Martaize), De la Fond, Essais. 70. 23 AD V C849 Tableau de 1'Election de Loudun, 1789. 152 (36-39 litres). Only the poorest families, those which paid less than 30 s of taille, were exempted. In practice, this was administered like the direct taxes described above, with parishes assessed an overall amount and held responsible for its collection. It is possible that the parish assemblies adjusted the assessments of individual families to account for differences in wealth, but in general, the salt-tax was clearly a heavier burden for poorer peasants, as we will see in Part HI. The salt-tax was considered to be arbitrary and unfair taxation because it was applied so unevenly across France. In generalites such as Tours labeled "grandes gabelles," a minot cost as much as 62 It. Poitou was considered a province "r&limee," paying 6-9 It a minot. The price in Brittany, which was exempted from the salt-tax, was 2-3 It.26 Territories on a fiscal frontierlik e the
Loudunais often had their own rates. A 1667 edict set the price of a minot there at 14 It 2 s 6 d.27 This was still double the amount paid in Poitou but far less than that paid in the rest of Touraine. The Loudunais rate was equal to nineteen days work at good wages (15 s / day) or the market value of about 11 boisseaux of wheat (1.2 hi). Not surprisingly, salt-smuggling was a virtual cottage industry in the region.
"Extraordinary" Taxes
From the later reign of Louis XIV onwards, the monarchy increasingly sought to tax the wealth of its privileged and richer subjects to help pay for its wars, supplementing
24 J. Pasquier, L'impdt des gabelles en France aux XVIP et XVftT siecles (Geneve, 1978) 7. 25 Salt-tax collectors were selected by parish assemblies in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize and were distinct fromth e collectors of the taille, AD V 2 C 1932-1941 Contrdle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour; Pasquier, L'impot des gabelles. 16. 26 Rolande Collas, La contrebande du sel entre Touraine et Poitou (Chambray, 2000); Francois Lebrun, Histoire des pays de la Loire: Orleanais. Touraine. Anjou. Maine (Toulouse, 1972) 284. 27 Dupaquier" La population rurale du bassin Parisien, 87. 28 See the previous chapter, Part 1,2, for more information on salt-smuggling. 153 its existing revenues with so-called extraordinary (temporary) levies on all subjects, including the privileged orders, covering wealth from property, trade, industry, and offices. The first of these innovations was the capitation, introduced in 1695. At firstthi s tax was assessed by fitting everybody into a system of twenty-two classes that ran from the high nobility and clergy down to the ordinary workers. Those paying less than 40 s (2
It) of taille were spared altogether. The twenty-second class paid 1 It, while the most prestigious members of the Loudunais, such as the officers of the election, law court, and municipal council, were assessed in the sixteenth class at 30 It. Ploughmen and wine producers fell between the sixteenth and twenty-second classes.29 Later, the assessment base was simplified and made similar to that of the taille. Not surprisingly, there was much opposition to this new tax, particularly among the privileged orders.30
Extraordinary taxes more narrowly related to wealth were developed in subsequent years.
First came the dixieme (one-tenth), levied between 1710 and 1717, 1734 and 1737, and
1741 and 1749.31 The proportionate nature of the tax applied only to the distribution of the tax burden within a community however; the actual total sums levied on regions and parishes were set by royal officials. In 1749, to pay for the recently ended War of the
Austrian Succession, this was reduced to a vingtieme (1/20*) but made permanent, to be collected in peacetime as well as in war. By 1760, France was in the midst of a greater and more desperate war, and had levied two additional vingtiemes, the second in 1756
Francis Bluche and Jean-Francois Solnon, La veritable hierarehie sociale de l'ancienne France: le tarif de la premidre capitation (1695) (Geneve, 1983)98. 30 Jean Tarrade, "Le Centre-Ouest a la find u regne de Louis XTV (d'apres la correspondence des intendants" Bulletin de la Society des Antiquaires de POuest et des Musses de Poitiers 4e serie - tome XV (1980): 333-350; Kwass, Privilege and the Politics of Taxation. 320. 31 A cinquantieme (1/50*) was also levied between 1725 and 1727 to reduce public debt. 154 and the third in 1759. The weight of these newer taxes on poorer peasants in the
Loudunais was modest, but they successfully tapped into the greater wealth of many ploughmen.
The weight of fiscal demands on rural revenues
How much of a peasant's income was absorbed by these taxes? Fortunately, the old regime administrators made it possible for us to answer this question with some accuracy, thanks to the faille tarifee. This was an attempt to rationalize the traditional taille by explicitly linking assessment to a household's property, livestock, and income.34
Attempted and abandoned first under the Regency of Philippe d'Orleans, the taille tarifee was later instituted in several gen^ralites including Tours in 1737. An analysis of four
Haut-Poitou parishes found that the average household taille assessment was between 8
It, 10 s, 2 d and 12 It, 17 s, 5 d.35 Land was counted by boisselee and livestock by head.
The levy was as follows:
32 Almanach de Poitou. 1763 (Poitiers. 1762); Marion, Les impdts directs. 81. 33 A comparison of the budgets of day-workers and ploughmen is conducted in Part III, 2. 34 Marion, Les impdts directs, 33. 35 Jack Pichon, "La taille tarifee dans quatre paroisses du Haut-Poitou: approche statistique d'un essai de repartition equitable de l'imp6t au XVIIF siecle," Revue Historique du Centre-Quest in, 1 (2004): 129. 155 Table 8 - Rate of the taille tarifie on rural property and income Possession Value Tax Per cent Good Land 10-12 It 2 s, 6 d 1.5 Average Land 5-6 It ls,8d 2 Poor Land 2 It 10 d 3 Oxen 100 It 10 s 0.5 Dairy Cows 30 It 8s 1.3 Pigs 30 It 5s 0.8 Sheep 3 It 1 s 10 d Is 1.5 Millers Income 2s/lt 10 Artisans Income ls/lt 5
In general, these statistics indicate that ordinary taxation was hardly a crippling burden on peasants in the Loudunais. The income of the rural elites was taxed at a rate of up to 10 per cent, but the land and livestock of day-workers and ploughmen was taxed at only 1 to
3 per cent.
In the Loudunais, all state taxes taken together in wartime constituted about ten per cent of the annual expenses of peasants. During periods of peace, their burden was considerably less, perhaps six per cent.37 Despite the proportional basis of assessment used with the more recent dixieme and vingtieme, all these direct taxes were set amounts whose impact depended on rural fortunes in a particular year. When crop yields were poor or wheat prices low, taxes took a larger slice of peasant revenue, narrowing profit margins and increasing deficits. We should keep in mind, however, that peasants spent far more on consumption and upkeep, leases and tenancy obligations, and the costs of seeding and ploughing their farms. The state's fiscal demands, even under war finance
Dominique Guillemet, Nicole Pellegrin, Jacques Peret, Le Haut-poitou au XVRT siecle: la soci&e d'une paroisse rurale: la Villedieu-du-clain Q?oitiers, 1981) 111-112. Touzery found the tax on livestock to be somewhat higher in the Paris region - 20 s for oxen, cows, and horses and 2 s for goats and sheep, V invention de l'impdt sur le revenu, 12. 37 Part III, 8. 156 conditions, were not unbearable provided the harvest did not fail. Year after year, rural society in the Loudunais met its obligations.
Fiscal Demands in Acadia
In Acadia, the French colonial state taxed the rural population neither indirectly nor directly. There were no tax rolls, though various censuses were compiled between
1671 and 1707. Soldiers were not usually billeted on the community, nor were peasants expected to pay for the costs of sheltering and feeding them. When food was requisitioned it was paid for, at something approaching market rates, in an effort to secure otherwise rare supplies. The Acadians did pay rents, which were small, token amounts acknowledging the seigneur's eminent ownership of the land. In 1733, the British government purchased the seigneurial rights of Agathe La Tour for £ 2 000 and began collecting these rents as government revenue. This was not really a tax, but the continuation of seigneurial rights now possessed by King George II. After the first year of collection, Governor Phillipps stated derisively that the whole revenue of the province was just thirty pounds sterling.39 Yet the collections continued, and collectors from amongst the Acadians were authorized pay of three shillings for each pound.40 Rent rolls were developed and payments were made regularly, not unlike the administration of the taille. The residents of Annapolis Royal paid 1 492 It annually in the years 1739 through
See Part in, 7 on the seigneurial system. 39 Phillipps to Lords of Trade, 24 Jan 1731 in Adam Shortt, V. K. Johnston, and Gustave Lanctot, Currency. Exchange, and Finance in Nova Scotia. 1675-1758 (Ottawa. 1933) 181. 40 Commission of Alexandre Bourg and Prudent Robichaud as collectors of the quit-rents, 27 Sep 1733 in Macmechan, ed., A Calendar of Two Letter Books and One Commission Book in the Possession of the Government of Nova Scotia. 1713-1741 (Halifex, 1900) 159. 157 1741, a not inconsiderable sum. These rents were potentially the basis for an ordinary
tax system, which would have gone a long way to support the administration and its
garrison, and ultimately the establishment of official institutions and public services.
That the rents remained derisory says much about not just the weakness of the British
regime but also British plans for the colony.
What is most revealing is not that the Acadians paid so little, but that they were
asked for so little, even during wars. With the single exception of contributions ordered
in the immediate aftermath of the Conquest of 1710, at no time were extraordinary fiscal
demands placed on them. Instead, the colonial state demanded provisions, labour, and
service as guides, pilots, and translators. It is probable that Acadian rural society would
have preferred to pay taxes, since this was far less intrusive and dangerous. The British
may have feared that imposing a fiscal regimen would encourage the Acadians to
emigrate, strengthening nearby French colonies and leaving British Nova Scotia with no
population. Their reluctance may also suggest that they feared levying taxes when they
could provide no state services, much less parliamentary representation, in return. Since
they lacked financial officials, the government could not administer or enforce a fiscal
system, and would have been completely reliant on the collaboration of Acadian rural
elites. Yet all of these concerns could have been overcome, if the goal of the metropolis
had been to create a financially viable colony based on the production of Acadian rural
society. Most Acadians would no doubt have accepted a basic tax system if the money
went towards providing security, legal courts and developing markets in the colony.
41 Council Minutes, 16 Mar 1742 in Charles Bruce Ferguson, ed., Minutes of His Majesty's Council at Annapolis RovaL 1736-1749 (Halifex, 1967) 8. 158 But the British were focused on the contest with France, and Acadia was just one strategic area in the larger struggle. The British needed manpower and resources from the Acadians; they did not want to settle for tax revenue to sustain a colony still largely made up of French inhabitants. The British Council hoped eventually to settle an
English-speaking Protestant population that would assimilate or displace the French-
Catholic Acadians entirely. An ordinary tax regime might have given legitimacy to a rural society that the British did not want to continue. In the meantime, the Acadians possessed all the best farmland and pastures and nobody was coming from New England.
A tax system certainly would not have convinced New Englanders to migrate, trade, or invest in Acadia. In the end, the British did not create a tax system in Acadia because it would have created a state-subject relationship the British were not interested in having, and would not have helped achieve any of their imperial goals.
Military Demands in the Loudunais
Winter Quarters and Billeting
Peasants in France expected to shoulder part of the financial cost of provisioning, equipping and housing the King's soldiers. Winter quarters was a permanent direct tax to support France's large standing army, and was much higher during periods of war. The fiscal burden of the tax was one thing, but some had to actually take the soldiers, hardly ideal house-guests, into their homes. The intendant reported in 1711 that it was costing his generalite 18 360 It a month just to feed the troops currently lodged there.42 The government reimbursed communities at a derisory rate for the cost of a soldier's "ration,"
42 AN G7 529 Tours, 1711-1712, Intendant to Controller-General, 19 Nov 1711. 159 but the actual expenses incurred and the space required for a company of dragoons could be extreme. In 1749, a year of peace, twenty-four companies were lodged throughout the generalite of Tours, including in Loudun. This was a large force comparable to the size of that which had conducted the dragonnades in Poitou in 1685.43 The burden prompted the intendant to ask the government for additional funds to reimburse those lodging the soldiers; the request was rather bluntly denied.44 Of course, the social pressures and disruption of troop billeting rivaled the economic burden for rural communities. The intendant tried to help; he recommended imprisonment in 1711 for the soldiers quartered at Loudun who "continued to live with too much license," stealing frommerchant s and harassing the civilian population.45 In the end, as we saw in the previous chapter, he had to rely on military officers to maintain the discipline of their soldiers.
Militia
In 1688, Louis XIV ordered the creation of a state militia, for which every parish would be expected to provide and equip one soldier. This move was extremely unpopular and viewed as arbitrary and disruptive by rural communities. The term of service was three to six years and parishes were expected to replace men whose time was up, had deserted, or been killed or wounded. The wage of a militia soldier was just 2-4 s a day, though he was also fed. This was less than half of even the most derisory general wage paid at home (8-15 s a day). The initial equipping of a militiaman was supposed to
43 See Part 1,2. 44 AD V C3 1706-1789 Instruction pour la repartition en Poitiers g&ieYalite de 1749; Argenson to Magranville, 12 Jan 1749. 45 Intendant to C-G, 14 Jan 1711 in A. M. de Boislisle, Correspondance des Controleurs-G&ieraux des Finances avec les intendants des provinces (Paris, 1874)344. 46 Urban and local militias pre-dated 1688, but this was the first royal provincial militia established for the entire country, Lynn, Giant of the Grand Siecle. 377. 160 cost the parish about 44 It. But the intendant of Poitiers estimated the cost to equip the first 750 militia from his generalite at 53 640 It (71 It each), and advised the Controller-
General that an additional 35 000 It had been spent transporting them to Poitiers, guarding them so that they did not desert, and searching for those that managed to escape.47 This raised the cost to local taxpayers to 118 It each! Parishes were also required to provide an additional 18 It, 10 s each January for further equipping and provisioning of their militia soldier.48
Louis XTV's militia system also created a new and somber event at the local level.
The unfortunate recruit was to be chosen fromal l unmarried men in the parish by a lottery presided over by the delegate {syndic). Instead, peasants searched for ways to beat the system. Some parishes paid regiments directly to recruit their own man from somewhere else. Members of the rural elite paid other young men as much as 90 It to take the place of their own children, giving a cut to the officer involved to avoid any fuss.
Most commonly, those in the recruitment pool rushed to get married. In 1692 the intendant directed that lotteries were to be fair and that the soldier chosen had to be an inhabitant of the parish. Those who had married within the last three years would still be eligible. Corporal punishment was threatened for violations.
If the state's concern had been simply to raise a certain number of troops, it would not have cared where they came from. Perhaps military leaders wanted to ensure that the militia did not snap up men who were likely to volunteer to join the regiments on their own; the point was to create a new pool of recruits. Officials may have seen the militia as
47 AN G7 450 Poitiers, 14 Jut 1689. 48 AN G7 520 Tours 1691-92, Ordonnance du Roy concernant la Solde, Phabillement & rArmement des Soldats de milice, 5 Apr 1690. 161 a way to more actively connect all parts of the kingdom with the state's wars and dynastic policies. The impact of the militia system was certainly wide-ranging across the countryside. One thousand peasants marched off "under arms" in 1691 from Tours, another 1 500 in 1706.49 At the height of the War of the Spanish Succession (1702-13),
200 000 militia were under arms across France. Intendant Turgot noted that of the 300 militia dispatched from Tours in 1702 to join the Regiment of Beam, those fromth e
Loudunais were "very fine."50
In the eighteenth century, the state attempted to reform the militia. First, an ordinance of 1726 set the eligible age range at 16 to 40.51 The total number of battalions was reduced from 122 to 100 in 1733, five of which came fromth e generalite of Tours.
Men of the Loudunais served in the Battalion of Saumur. Each battalion was to be composed of six companies of one hundred men each, and the term of service was set at six years, after which the intendant would provide an unconditional discharge. In an attempt to make service more appealing, the government exempted militia soldiers from all taxes during their service, and for three years afterward. When not required for active duty, they were to drill together just once a year to keep up their skills. At the same time, the state also increased the penalties for disobedience. Simply not showing up to the annual training assembly carried a two-year prison term and a loss of tax-exempt status for one year. On a second offence, the derelict soldier would be sent to the galleys for three years, and subsequently would still have to complete his service. Desertion
49 AN G7 520,21 Apr 1691,21 Mar 1692,15 Mar 1692; AN G7 527, Mar 1706. 50 Turgot to Contrdleur-General, 28 Feb 1702 in Boislisle, Correspondance des Controleurs-Gen&aux. 340. 51 Andre" Corvisier, L'arm^e francaise de la fin da XVIF siecle au ministere de Choiseul: le soldat 2 Vols (Paris, 1964)205. 52 AD I-L 2 MI II - R37 C48,1737 Militia regulations 162 during active service was considered particularly heinous. Urbain Cochard from the
Loudunais was sentenced to the galleys for life when he deserted the Battalion of Saumur in 1761, at that time stationed in Montpellier.53 During the War of the Austrian
Succession and the Seven Years' War, the militia fromwester n France served far from home, on the eastern and southern frontierso f the state, and some served as replacements or attachments to regular units even further away. Unsurprisingly, many young men, not to mention their families, viewed this service with dread. Choiseul reported that several militiamen had gone to the extreme of cutting off their trigger finger to avoid service. Far from showing sympathy, he recommended the culprits be sent to the galleys, since they could still row.54
In 1754, militia upkeep and training represented almost ten per cent of the war taxes levied in the generalities of Poitiers and Tours. Throughout the Seven Years' War, militia service was a real demand on rural parishes including Aulnay, La Chaussee, and
Martaize - several peasants fromthes e places were deployed during the period.55 In all, perhaps 3 000 peasants from Poitou served in the militia up to 1789. We know little about their experiences with the army. In general, the militia formed a sort of replacement pool for regular units, and an unknown number later enlisted with the regular army. Most militia soldiers ended up performing less dangerous tasks than those of regular troops, such as trench digging and watch duty. During the Seven Years' War, militia battalions were used to garrison fortifications on the state's frontiers, freeing more
53 AD I-L 2 MI II - R37 C48, 30 Aug 1761. 34 AD V C20 Intendance: Aflaires Militaires, 1703-1789, 16 Jun 1766; Corvisier, L'armee francaise. 249. 55 AD V C20 Intendance: Af&ires Militaires, 1703-1789,30 Jul 1754. Several militiamen from these parishes appear in the notarial record borrowing or lending money. They included Pierre Cognard, Urbain Terriot, and Rene" Gigon, AD V 2 C 1940-41 Contrdle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour. 163 regular soldiers for campaign elsewhere. Militia soldiers might also augment the forces conducting a prolonged siege.
The militia system's inherent problems were perhaps best demonstrated by the fact that the state did not try to ask for more than a single soldier from each parish, and often let the requirement lapse entirely. The system was controversial, disruptive for the families directly affected, and subject to manipulation. Not surprisingly, the burden usually fell heaviest on the poorest households.56 As with taxes, however, the weight of the state's military demands should not be exaggerated. Mustering a single person in a parish every six years, and providing money to equip him once a year was hardly a major undertaking. In Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, about one in one hundred and ten men might be chosen. Most of the time, the designated militia soldier was required simply to show up once a year for training. Of course, we should not underestimate the physical, emotional, and psychological toll of this service for those few unfortunates (and their families) deployed for extended periods during major wars.
Military Demands in Acadia
Provisions and Requisitions
In Acadia, rural society was also expected to support the state's military. The
French and British governors needed provisions for their isolated garrisons. Neither New
France nor New England were much help; in the eighteenth century the imperial centres of Louisbourg and Boston had to constantly import food just to feed their populations.
Billeting soldiers on the Acadians was not really an option since rural settlement was
56 P. Boissonade, Histoire de Poitou (Paris, 1977) 232; Lynn, Giant of the Grand Steele, 386. 57 Corvisier, L'armee francaise.198 . 164 CO dispersed throughout the marshland, not concentrated in towns or near the fort. In addition to making it difficult to conduct operations, this would have aggravated the high risk of desertion. The British also worried about the Mi'kmaq, who ambushed several small parties of soldiers foraging in the woods after the Conquest of 1710, and fought their own war with the British in the 1720s. The only solution was to get the Acadians to bring their produce to them - and not to the enemy.
The Acadians, for their part, needed manufactured goods, salt, and other commodities and were usually willing to trade. The problem was that officially approved merchants and trading companies were in competition with New England and French traders who went directly to the Acadian communities, offering lower prices or better goods. Many Acadians joined this unofficial trade themselves. While the French governors of the seventeenth century, at least during peacetime, looked the other way and even participated in smuggling, after the Treaty of Utrecht, British officials consistently tried to stop it. Governor Phillipps built a grain warehouse at Annapolis Royal in 1720 and declared it the only official trading centre for the colony.59 At the same time, he confided to his superiors in London that the Acadians outside Annapolis Royal "know very well that they are out of my power" and would continue to trade with the French.60
Lieutenant-Governor Armstrong later estimated that the Acadians took four hundred cattle and at least as many sheep to Louisbourg every year.61 Cargo lists in Louisbourg
58 In New France, billeting was common in the areas near the forts, W. J. Eccles, "The Social, Economic, and Political Significance of the Military Establishment in New France" in W. J. Eccles, Essays on New France (Toronto. 1987) 113. 59 NAC, Nouvelle-France: Correspondence officielle 3e serie (1621-1731), Proclamation de General Phillipps, 28 Aout 1720. 60 Phillipps to Craggs, July 1720 in Thomas B. Akins, ed., Acadia and Nova Scotia: Documents relating to the Acadian French and the first British Colonization of the Province. 1714-1758 (Cottonport, 1972)37. 61 Armslrong to Lords of Trade, 5 Oct 1731 in Akins, Acadia and Nova Scotia. 92. 165 from 1740 indicate that the Acadians were trading livestock and supplies of oats for feed, as well as smaller amounts of peas, wheat, and fish. When war broke out soon after, both the British and the French tried to prevent Acadian supplies fromgoin g to each other. The British also tried to stop the Acadians from trading with the Mi'kmaq. But the state's representatives lacked the strength and reach needed to impose economic controls on the entire colonial population.
Governors and commanders sought at various times to requisition supplies from the Acadians. After the British took Port Royal in 1710, they threatened the nearby community of Minas with plundering and even executions, if the goods were not provided.63 The Acadians claimed that they lived in relative poverty but did come up with half the amount ordered, or about 3 000 It worth of furs and foodstuffs. Five receivers were commissioned from amongst the Acadians to forward further "voluntary" contributions.64 The dependence of the garrison on Acadian produce was apparent in
1714, when the Acadians suddenly stopped trading with the British, perhaps due to
Mi'kmaq threats. The Council needed provisions desperately, sending out messengers to find out "the Reasons why they do not as usuall come into these parts and vend their commodities." In 1731, Armstrong ordered 200 quintals of biscuit (9 072 kg) and 60 hogsheads of peas (132 hi), as well as sheep and cattle.65 In the 1740s, Acadian communities were under significant pressure to provision the imperial forces fighting in the region, with the French operating out of Beaubassin and the British for the most part
62 Christopher Moore, "The other Louisbourg: Trade and Merchant Enterprise in He Royale, 1713-1758," in Eric Krause, Carol Corbin, William O'Shea, eds., Aspects of Louisbourg (Sydney, 1995) 240. 63 Shortt et al., Currency. Exchange, and Finance, xviii. 64 LAC, PRO CO 217 Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island - Original Correspondence Colonial Office, 16 Nov 1710. 65 Council instructions to messengers, Jan 1714; Armstrong to the Acadian Deputies, 30 Aug 1731 in Akins, Acadia and Nova Scotia. 4,89. 166 confined to Annapolis Royal. The French commander Duvivier ordered the Acadian deputies to provide livestock and bread weekly. He also demanded fishing lines, oxen teams, horses, and workers to support his campaign.66 Acadian leaders attempted to
reduce these demands and keep their communities neutral, but certain individuals hoped
to profit by supporting one side or the other. For example, Nicolas Gautier assembled a
large herd of livestock for the French expeditionary force in 1746, provided information
on the British fort's defences, and lent his home to serve as the French headquarters.67
Meanwhile, in Annapolis Royal, the Robichauds carried out work and provisions
contracts for the British garrison.68
Since neither French nor British forces were able consistently to control the whole
region, the colony split into competing spheres of influence, leaving the Acadians with
considerable discretion to trade in their best interest. They could take their goods to the
French at Louisbourg or to the British at Annapolis Royal, or meet the independent New
England merchants willing to visit them. The deputies of Beaubassin advised a British
emissary in 1727 that "they thought themselves at liberty to dispose of their goods to the
first that would pay them for them whether French or English."69 Lacking incentives to
offer and looking only to their immediate needs, the military governments of France and
Britain attempted to secure Acadian produce through military requisitions and threats. In
66 Duvivier's Orders to the Acadian Deputies, Oct 1744 and 25 May 1745 in Ferguson, Minutes of His Majesty's Council. 68,71. 67 Gautier's properly was seized by order of the Council, 14 Nov 1746, Ferguson, Minutes of his Majesty's Council 85. 68 Maurice Basque, Pes hommes de pouvoir: histoire d'Otho Robichaud et de sa famille. notable acadiens de Port Royal et de Neguac (Neguac, 1996)71. 69 LAC PRO CO 217 Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island - Official Correspondence, Phillipps to Armstrong, 29 Mar 1727. 167 effect, they treated the Acadians as an occupied population, not as a rural society that was part of a state-subject relationship.
Service
Peasants in France were often expected to provide labour for public works and common lands, and this was even more important in Acadia, where labour was scarce and expensive. The Acadians worked on roads, bridges, mills, and the walls of the fort at
Annapolis Royal (Fort Anne) on a regular basis. Contracts were offered periodically for specific tasks, such as the construction of Fort Nashwaak in the 1690s. The British also employed the Acadians to work on their fortifications, storehouses, and roads, at least until the founding of Halifax.71 But demands for service soon exceeded simple labour. Villebon employed a group of prominent Acadians as letter-carriers and emissaries to the Acadian communities and also the Mi'kmaq tribes, sending some as far as lie Royale.72 In a region with English, French, and aboriginal societies, the knowledge of languages could make an individual invaluable. In a colony with no roads, some
Acadians served as guides, while others were compelled to pilot ships. Information was also at a premium; Acadians like Abraham Boudrot who had contacts in Boston, were
Edith Tapie, "Les structures socio-economiques de Grand-Pre\ communaute Acadien" (M.A. thesis, Universite de Moncton, 2000) 45; R6gis Brun, Les Acadiens avant 1755: Essai (Moncton, 2003) 20; Christopher Hodson, "Refugees: Acadians and the Social History of Empire, 1755-85" (Ph.D. Thesis, Northwestern University, 2004) 28-90. 71 "Memoir on the present condition of Port Royal, 1699" in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 129; Hodson, "Acadians and the Social History of Empire," 48,64-66. 72 Villebon's Journal, 23 May 1697 in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 104. 168 pressed by both sides to spy on the other, and the British expected the Acadians to keep them informed of Mi'kmaq movements.
Before long, state officials sought to involve the Acadians actively in colonial defence. When Villebon visited Beaubassin in 1692 he organized shooting contests with prizes and ordered the inhabitants to build watch-posts. The French had appointed militia captains in the 1680s, but in 1703 Governor Brouillan expanded the militia to include all
Acadian men, ordering a new census to capture all those capable of bearing arms.74 The
French state demanded that the Acadians en masse contribute military service to the imperial struggle. In this, the French hoped to duplicate the successful militarization of the habitants in Quebec, but the circumstances in Acadia were far different.75 In fact,
Brouillan's militia hardly existed in practice. Most Acadians refused his order to mobilize against raids in 1704. The Acadians who did fight under Governor Subercase at
Port Royal in 1707 received little recognition, and no payment. When faced with a larger invasion force in 1710, they stayed at home.76
The potential threat that the Acadians would assemble and help the French and
Mi'kmaq drive the British out was a perpetual, if far-fetched concern of the British council at Annapolis Royal after 1713. They sought to secure Acadian support with oaths of allegiance, and prevent them from withdrawing to other French territories. Neither the
Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 17; Emerson W. Baker and John G. Reid, The New England Knight: Sir William Phips. 1651-1695 (Toronto. 1998) 160. 74 LAC CO 220 France Archives des Colonies 1703 Recensements des habitans de la Province de Paccadie pour 1703; Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 45; Brun, Les Acadiens avant 1755,1. 5 On the militia in New France see Eccles, "The Military Establishment in New France," 112 and Fernand Ouellet, "Officiers de milice et structure sociale au Quebec (1660-1815)" Histoire sociale - Social History XII, 23 (1979): 37-65. 76 Rene Baudry, "Daniel d'Auger de Subercase" DCB. I; John Mack Faragher, A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of the French Acadians fromthei r American Homeland (New York, 2005) 109; Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian, 183,220. 169 French nor the British state recognized or trusted the Acadians' stated wish for neutrality or their fear of reprisals, seeing it as deception. A disbelieving Lieutenant-Governor
Doucette wrote "they turn their disobedience to his Majesty to a dread of the Indians which is impossible," reflecting a continued association of French, Acadian, and
77
Mi'kmaq alike as enemy. Both sides were convinced that Acadian resources would be decisive in the next round of imperial conflict. Perhaps the idea of several hundred, even thousands, of armed men emerging to turn the tide of battle was just too compelling a dream (or nightmare) for state officials perennially insecure and short of soldiers and resources.
The British also expected the Acadians to help them deal with the Mi'kmaq.
During the British-Mi'kmaq war, the Council complained that they were given no warning when a war-band laid siege to Annapolis Royal. Paul Melanson and Pierre
Leblanc, deputies of Minas, were made prisoner along with the local priest as punishment in 1724.78 After a series of robberies against English traders in 1737, the Acadians were expected to "assemble the Indians and get restitution." In 1743, the Council ordered the
Acadians to take up arms to protect British traders in cases of attack or robbery by the 70
Mi'kmaq. Obviously the Acadians were in no position to force the Mi'kmaq to do anything they did not want to do. But the British could not get past their conviction that the Acadians and Mi'kmaq were in cahoots, and perhaps counter-intuitively expected the
Acadians to provide security in the countryside where they could not.
77 Lieutenant Governor Doucette to Secretary of State, 5 Nov 1717 in Akins, Acadia and Nova Scotia. 13. 78 LAC, France: Archives des Colonies, Correspondance G&ie'rale, Serie CI ID Vol 8, Felix Pain, "Estrait des nouvelles de Faccadie," 1724; On the Mi'kmaq siege see Geoffrey Plank, An Unsettled Conquest: The British Campaign Against the Peoples of Acadia (Philadelphia. 2001) 76. 79 Council Minutes, 20 Jun 1737 and 10 Oct 1743 in Ferguson, Minutes of his Majesty's Council 17,25. 170 When they launched a campaign to re-conquer Acadia in 1744, the French had assumed that the Acadians would jump at the chance to support them. However, after the
War of the Austrian Succession, both the British governor Mascarene and the French commander Duvivier acknowledged that the majority of the Acadians had remained neutral.80 Unfortunately for the Acadians, their neutrality would not much longer be tolerated. In 1749, the British established Halifax on the other side of Nova Scotia, complete with a group of Protestant settlers and a strong military contingent. The new governor, Cornwallis, again insisted that the Acadians swear an unconditional oath of allegiance to the British king and actively support their imperial efforts by having no contact with the French and providing supplies exclusively to the British. Denying
Acadian claims for neutrality, Cornwallis answered "you deceive yourselves if you think that you are at liberty to choose whether you will be subject to the King or no."81 The
French also built up forces, demanded oaths, and again expected the Acadians to serve as militia. The intendant of Quebec directed in 1751 that all male Acadians had to swear oaths and report to militia companies or else be treated as rebels and deported.82 When the Acadians at Beaubassin proved reluctant to support France so aggressively, Mi'kmaq allied to the French burned their community so that they would have no choice but to move into French territory. Three hundred Acadians were found under arms at Fort
80 Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian, 343. 81 Cornwallis to the Acadians, 14 Jul 1749 and 6 Sept 1749, in Akins, Acadia and Nova Scotia. 165,174. 82 LAC, France: Archives des Colonies: Correspondance Generate Serie CI 1A, Vol 97, Ordonnance du Marquis de la Jonquiere, 26 Aug 1751; John B. Brebner, "Canadian Policy towards the Acadians in 1751" Canadian Historical Review 12, 3 (1931): 287. 171 Beausejour when it fell in 1755. This was all the reason that British Governor Charles
Lawrence needed to begin deporting all of them across the Atlantic World.83
Conclusion
A host of state demands were applied to the inhabitants of the Loudunais and
Acadia. These included economic controls on resources and trading, conformity to the state religion and laws, and public subordination and deference. Where the two regions differed most was in the state's fiscal and military demands. In the Loudunais, the goals and needs of rural society and the state coincided comfortably. Even the creation of a minimal militia or large increases of taxes during wartime did not break this relationship, though it certainly caused grumbling and upset. The state's primary demands were fiscal, and it took care that rural society was normally able to pay. But in Acadia, taxes were not instituted and instead the state demanded a variety of services, including the mass involvement of peasants as militia. The state could neither provide the security, institutions and services rural society needed, nor leave the Acadians alone, since its imperial goals demanded an active and militarized colonial population. After the Treaty of Utrecht, the Acadians had to choose between an uncertain migration back to French territory or living under a British government that was still too limited to displace or disrupt them. France had done nothing to secure their loyalty, and they had no reason to believe that there would not be further rounds of conflict, so they remained where they were. By 1740, it was not so easy to uproot.
83 Ronnie-Gilles Leblanc, "Du 'derangement des guerres' au Grand Derangement: la longue evolution d'un concept" in Ronnie-Gilles Leblanc, ed., Du Grand Derangement a la Deportation: nouvelles perspectives historiques (Moncton, 2005) 18. LAC PRO CO 217 Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island - Original Correspondence, Lawrence to the Governors of the Continent, 11 Aug 1755. 172 The Acadians pursued their own interests by trying to stay neutral, leaving war to the imperial powers. For their part, both France and Britain saw the Acadians as pawns: sources of labour, food, information, and service that were otherwise rare in the region.
The Acadians went to great efforts to accommodate these various demands, and worked well with everyone up to 1744. But when war resumed in that year, it was not just a continuation of past struggles but a conflict with higher stakes. Both Britain and France dedicated considerable forces to the region in the hope of settling their rival claims once and for all. The new governors and commanders who arrived in Acadia during this period were not interested in compromise, and did not care about the agreements that previous officials had made. They demanded nothing less but full military support from the Acadians. When they refused to obey, the Acadians were threatened and ultimately deported. We should also remember that the French treated them just as badly.
Eventually, the Acadians found themselves on nobody's side and with nobody on their side. Isolated by their natural environment and vulnerable because of the ongoing march conditions in the colony, the Acadians were, in the end, overwhelmed because of the impossible demands of imperial states and the sudden willingness of those states to enforce them.
173 CONCLUSION TO PART I
So far, we have examined the natural environments, frontier conditions, and demands of the state throughout the early modern period in Acadia and the Loudunais.
In Chapter 1, we learned that the cereal plains of the Loudunais and the marshlands of Acadia were both very fertile, but climatic conditions were more favourable to wheat in the Loudunais, while in Acadia, the vulnerability of the dykes and the threat of an early frost were among the reasons that the settlers there diversified their crops and invested heavily in livestock. In both places, the rural economy and the rate of population growth were significantly affected by climate, either adversely, such as during the period of the Late Maunder Minimum (1675-1715), the most intense phase of cold and variability during the Little Ice Age, or advantageously, as in the following decades, which were warmer and more consistent. In general, peasants adapted their style of settlement and agriculture to make best use of the land, and they stuck with methods that worked. Surprisingly, wolves were a greater threat in the Loudunais than in this part of the new world; there were few, if any, wolves in Acadia. But the settlers would have shared fears of wild spaces, and one of the appeals of using their method of dyking was that it permitted the settlers to stay in relatively open areas on the coast, away from the woods, and transformed wilderness quickly into farms with a minimum of effort. The natural abundance of the colony helped the settlers get started, but resources offish and fur-bearing animals also drew the attention of merchants and officials who soon began fighting over their use. The Acadians, dispersed throughout the marshlands, were generally isolated from France, from other colonies, and even each other, especially once the Bay of Fundy became too dangerous to travel.
174 The comparison of frontier conditions in Chapter 2 revealed that the peasants in the Loudunais had plenty of experience of living in a zone of conflict, and understood well the importance of accommodating rival powers and staying out of the actual fighting. In fact, those who came to Acadia may very well have thought at the outset that they were getting away from such conditions. Instead, they settled in a more complex frontier situation which I have characterized as a march - a zone between rival powers and cultures that neither side could definitively control. Even as the peasants of the
Loudunais entered a time of relative peace and prosperity, migrants to Acadia faced civil and imperial conflicts, raids, and constant insecurity. This prompted many to move away from the official centre, Port Royal, in search of even more isolated marshlands which they hoped would be refuges. But there was nowhere they could go in the colony without being caught up in the larger struggle between English, French, and aboriginals. Over time, the Acadians relied on each other for support, developing a distinct "marcher" identity, and refusing to become committed to one side or another.
In Chapter 3 we saw that one reason that the Acadians were not left alone on their farms was that France and Britain were convinced that their food, labour, and military service could determine the future of the colony, and change the balance in the larger imperial struggle. Each power wanted to secure the region for itself, but since they lacked sufficient military forces, financial resources, or provisions to achieve this vision, they expected the Acadians to help them. Of course, it was not unusual for the state to make demands of rural society. In the Loudunais, peasants regularly paid a variety of taxes. They also provided winter quarters for companies of soldiers, paid additional taxes during wartime for military provisions and equipment, and even supplied one of their
175 own from each parish for Louis XIV's militia system. In general, the demands of the state in both places were focused on support for the military and fighting the King's wars.
But the nature and weight of these demands were greatly different. In the Loudunais, peasants supplied a relatively small percentage of their revenue to the state every year, and less than one per cent of their young men endured some form of militia service. In return, they enjoyed a relatively secure countryside and ready access to royal courts and notaries, steady markets and aid during times of crisis. In Acadia, the state was incapable of providing any of these services, but nevertheless wanted food, wood, labour, information, and the full military support of all adult males when called. As the Acadians routinely told their governors, they could not commit themselves as long as they and their families faced reprisals for "collaboration". They did, however, find a way to work with the various colonial administrations. French and British governors, lacking the ability to impose their own form of allegiance, took what they could get, at least until 1744.
Part I established the key contexts for the development of rural societies in Acadia and the Loudunais throughout the early modern period. Although we saw the ways in which peasants made decisions about how to structure their settlements and their agricultural systems, or how to respond to state demands, much of the discussion concerned the ways in which external factors shaped rural societies over a long period of time. In Part II, we turn to a comparison of demographic practices and patterns during a more narrow time period in the eighteenth century. Factors like climatic variability, frontier conditions, and state demands will certainly appear again, along with others, as we discuss changing mortality rates. But the emphasis in the next section is even more closely on the decisions peasants made - such as when to get married and to whom, when
176 to have children, and whom to ask to be godparents. These decisions shaped family structures and social relationships across communities in both the short and long term.
177 PART n - INTRODUCTION
As we have seen1, many of the original Acadian colonists came from the
Loudunais and more generally from the larger provinces of Touraine and Poitou, which makes this study more significant than simply comparing Acadian experience with overall demographic statistics from early modern France. Part II is composed of three chapters. The first two use parish registers and other primary sources to conduct a demographic description and analysis first of the three Loudunais parishes of Aulnay, La
Chaussee, and Martaize and then of the three Acadian parishes of Annapolis Royal,
Minas, and Beaubassin. The third chapter compares the results from the two regions, emphasizing questions of growth, religious conformity, hierarchy, and continuity. As usual in work with parish registers, burials are used to estimate mortality while baptisms are made to represent live births. A certain proportion of deaths and births is likely to have been unrecorded; as we shall see, this causes some problems in approximating mortality figures in Acadia.
In each region, a 29-year "generation" has been examined. For Acadia, the analysis is of the so-called "Golden Age", the period from 1712 to 1740, during which there was no war between Britain and France;2 it was not entirely a period of peace, however, as the British and Mi'kmaq fought from 1722 to 1725. For the Loudunais, the discussion is of the period 1737-1765. Obviously, a study of the same years as Acadia would have been ideal, but the parish registers for the Loudunais before 1737 are
1 See above, p 4. 2 Naomi Griffiths, "The Golden Age: Acadian Life, 1713-1748" Histoire Sociale - Social History 17,33 (1984): 25. 178 incomplete. Further, the purpose of Part II is to compare the demographic results for two groups of parishes under reasonably stable conditions. The results for Aulnay, La
Chaussee, and Martaize from 1712 would probably have been significantly affected by the aftermath and recovery from the terrible mortality crises of 1693-94 and 1708-10, during which these parishes lost 17.6 per cent of their population. Of course, no period in early modern France was entirely free of conflict, food shortages, or disease. Between
1737 and 1765, France fought the War of the Austrian Succession (1740-48) and the
Seven Years' War (1756-1763), and also experienced a general mortality crisis (1739-
42). But in the Loudunais, the consequences of this crisis were moderate, and although increased taxes and troop movements certainly would have had an impact during the wars, there was no fighting in the region, and no serious disruption to rural society.
Another reason why these two periods make a good basis for comparison is that at the beginning of them - in 1712 for Acadia and in 1737 for the Loudunais - both sets of communities had similar population sizes, though of course the age distribution would have been different. As mentioned, the population of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize fell from 1 340 in 1690 to 1 104 in 1713 as a result of two serious mortality crises that affected much of France. By 1732, the population had recovered to 1 200 and continued to grow gradually up to nearly 1 300 people by 1789.5 Meanwhile, the population of
Port/Annapolis Royal, Minas, and Beaubassin rose from 705 in 1689 to 1 426 people in
3 At the time that I conducted my research(2005) , the only continuous records available began at 1737. Many of the earlier records were unavailable, it turns out, because they were being compiled and scanned into the archive's electronic database. These earlier records are now available, and I will use them for further revision at a later date. 4 John D. Post, Food Shortage. Climatic Variability and Epidemic Disease in Preindustrial Europe: the Mortality Peak in the early 1740s (Ithaca, 1985). 5 AD I-L C337 Etat ou nombre des feux de chaque paroisse de Selection de Loudun depuis 1732; AD V C849 Tableau de 1'EIection de Loudun, 1789. Both sources only give figures in households (feux), so I have estimated one household to equal four persons. 179 1707, and to over 4 500 in 1740.6 Obviously there was a much higher rate of growth in
Acadia, and one concern of our analysis is to determine why.
The Loudunais parish registers appear complete for this period of analysis.7 The
Acadian ones contain some significant gaps, notably for Beaubassin for the periods 1724-
1731, and 1736-1739. The Minas register is missing the burial records of 1716-24,1728-
29, marriages of 1722-1724, and baptisms of 1713-1716.8 As a result, the Acadian demographic results give greater prominence to the experience of Annapolis Royal than they ought. Many historians of Acadia have been reluctant to use the surviving parish registers to answer questions outside of genealogy. In her recent book on the Acadians,
Naomi Griffiths argued that the Acadian population was too small for statistical analysis to yield meaningful results, and ignored the registers as sources entirely.9 This seems remarkably short-sighted. Although they have limits and gaps, the Acadian parish registers are an important source for understanding rural society. They are certainly complete enough to indicate Acadian demographic practices and growth, and large enough to serve as a base of comparison with data from the Loudunais.
Jacques Vanderlinden did use parish registers in his study of Acadian social hierarchy under the French (1671-1710). He identified a quatuor or noyau dur of four families that dominated Acadian relationships, part of a centre of thirteen families that constituted the rural elite. Vanderlinden also identified a periphery often families which occasionally married into this group, and an edge ipourtour) of forty-two families who
6 Andrew Hill Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia to 1760 (Madison, 1968) 100, 129. 7 AD V Serie 9E 82/2 (La Chaussee), 9E 178/2 (Martaize), and 9E 17/1 (Aulnay). 8 Milton P. and Norma Gaudet Rieder, Acadian Church Records Vol I-V (Louisiana, 1976,1977). Results cross-referenced with Stephen A. White, Dictionnaire gen^alogique des families acadiennes 2 Vols (Moncton, 1999). 9 N. E. S. Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian: A North American Border People. 1604-1755 (Montreal & Kingston, 2005) 172. 180 were on the outside.10 In this analysis, I have adopted Vanderlinden's approach, particularly his notion of the "centre", to the question of social hierarchy and marriage alliances in the Loudunais, and taken the study of Acadian family groups down to 1740.
Ten leading peasant families in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize were identified as composing at least part of this centre. The selection was based on their numerical strength in relation to the community, the preponderance of their demographic connections with other families, and indications in the parish registers and notarial records that they were senior ploughmen. Wealthy notables like merchants, estate managers, and millers were excluded from the examination of the centre as they maintained separate demographic relationships fromth e rest of the community.11 An analysis of differences in peasant wealth and the difficulties of applying social categories to peasants is reserved for detailed treatment in Part III, 2.
10 Jacques Vanderlinden. Se marier en Acadie francaise. XVIF et XVflT siecles (Moncton. 1998) 29,92. 11 Angeline Rousseau, "Les 'coqs de village' du pays Loudunais dans la deuxieme moitie" du XVHI6 siecle" (memoire de maitrise, University de Poitiers, 2002) 97. 181 PART II, CHAPTER 4
THE DEMOGRAPHY OF THE LOUDUNAIS, 1737-65
Burials
Francis Lebrun wrote that doing demographic history in early modern France
"c 'est observer le spectacle poignant d'hommes, defemmes et d'enfants qui se debattent ou se resignent desarmes devant la mort." Many studies have emphasized the omnipresence of death in the early modern world, and the constant preparation for it through testaments and religious observance.1 There were 1 177 burials in the Loudunais between 1737 and 1765, an average of 41 per year but with a wide margin between high
(71) and low points (12), and an apparent "short wave-length" cycle of six to eight years.2
With a population of about 1 300 across the three parishes, this translates into an annual mortality rate of 31 deaths / 1 000 people, somewhat lower than the region of Bas-Quercy
(33-40) and than France in general (around 36 / 1000).3
1 Francois Lebrun, Lcs hotnmes et la mort en Anjou au XVH" et XVHF siecles (Paris, 2004) 495; Jacques Marcacte writes "tin fiddledoi t toujours etre pret a mourir" in "Mourir autrefois : Poitiers au XVIIIe siecle" Revue Historique du Centre-Quest III, 2 (2004): 256-269. 2 Susan Scott and Christopher J. Duncan, found short wavelength oscillations of 5 years between 1557 and 1800 in the mortality rates of a market town in northwestern England, Penrith. They also discussed medium and long wavelength oscillations which are beyond the scope of the present study, Human Demography and Disease (Cambridge. 1998)39. 3 Pierre Valmary, Families paysannes au XVIIIe siecle en Bas-Quercy: Etude demographique (Paris, 1965) 85; Cormac O'Grada and Jean Michel Chevet, "Famine and Market in Ancien Regime France" Journal of Economic History 62 (2002): 710. 182 Figure 3 - Burials in Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaize
Loudunais Aulnay La Chaussee Martaize
n—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i
H-«^A^¥A^A¥///V K«' KA' /
The first thing we notice when we look at the evolution of burial statistics in the three parishes is that there was a great deal of similarity between them, as the shared high points of 1748,1763, and 1765 and low points of 1745,1759, and 1764 indicate. There were some exceptions, however. Only Martaize experienced a mortality spike in 1753, while Aulnay was unaffected by whatever caused higher mortality in Martaize and La
Chaussee in 1740. The wide fluctuations in mortality suggest a population living close to the margins, vulnerable to the impact of particular disasters, such as disease, violence, poor harvest results, and high grain prices.4 But they also indicate the resilience of the population, its ability to recover and maintain itself. The term "homeostasis", which is often applied to the history of the early modern French population, is defined as a condition when "demographic parameters act to maintain a stable population at an
4 Paul Raveau, L'agriculture et les classes pavsannes: la transformation de la propriety dans le Haut-Poitou au XVT siecle (Paris, 1926) 127; Roland Sanfacon, Defrichements. peuplement. et institutions seigneuriales en Haut-Poitou du Xe au XIIIe siecle, (Quebec, 1967) 11; Jean Elie "Notes sur 1'eeonomie agricole en Haut-Poitou au X VIIF siecle, La Chapelle-Mouliere: un exemple ou un cas particulier?" Revue Historique du Centre-Quest II, 2 (2003): 231-248; Jack Pichon, "La taille tarifee dans quatre paroisses du Haut-Poitou: approche statistique d'un essai de repartition equitable de l'impot au XVIIF siecle" Revue Historique du Centre-Quest III, 1 (2004): 129-174. 183 optimum size given the established environmental and socio-economic setting." The volatility of the mortality rate demonstrates that, at least in these parishes, homeostasis did not imply a perfectly steady-state. While the overall size of the population did not change much, the experience of families and communities varied considerably.5
A compilation of figures for the age at death given in the burial registers suggests these communities were well-established, with an even range of distribution among age groups. Slightly more than one in five individuals lived into their sixties, some well into their 80s and a few into their 90s.
Figure 4 - Age at death in Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaize
H 2 or less 0 3 to 20 a 21 to 40 0 41 to 60 S60+
1737-1765
About one-quarter of infants (26 per cent) baptized in the Loudunais died there by the age of 2, and a further 18 per cent by age 20. This means that over half (56 per cent) of children reached adulthood, placing the Loudunais at the upper limit of survival expectations for children in nearby Anjou and in line with those of the offspring of the prosperous fermiers of the Ile-de-France.6 The age at death remained broadly consistent
5 David L. Elliott, International Migration and Population Homeostasis: An Historical Study (New York, 1989) 24; Jacques Dupaquier, Histoire de la population francaise. Vol 2: de la Renaissance a 1789 (Paris, 1995) 417; Scott and Duncan, Human Demography. 41. 6 The age of majority from a legal perspective was 25 at this time. My calculation assumes that baptisms remained consistent in the twenty years preceding my analysis, and that a large number of children did not die in other parishes. It does not include the 221 baptisms at La Chaussee which were for people from external parishes. Lebrun estimated that 40 to 60 per cent of children did not reach the age of 21 in the 184 over the period, but there were important variations. The high mortality of the 1760s affected infants and children most, while that of 1739-1741 hit all elements of the population. Far fewer babies died between 1749 and 1754, while fewer children died from 1755 to 1760.
Figure 5 - Age at death broken down by five year periods
1737-1742 1743-1748 1749-1754 1755-1760 1761-1765
Of the total 1 177 deaths, there were 564 men (48 per cent) and 613 women (52 per cent).
While women were more likely to die between the ages of 21 and 40 (92 compared to 68 men), male children were somewhat more likely to die before the age of 2 than female
(188 to 173). Neither of these differences was extreme, however, and it deserves emphasizing that only 15 per cent of women died during their child-bearing years, not much higher than the 12 per cent of males who died in the same age group. Another study of the nearby Chinon region found similar results.7 This suggests that pregnant women received reasonable care, whether from their family, midwives, or local doctors, and that they were generally healthy. Of course, it also suggests that the riskst o middle- aged men in this society were also high.
mid-eighteenth century in Les hommes et la mort, 189; Jean-Marc Moriceau, Les fermiers de Flle-de- France. XVs - XVDf siecle: L'ascension d'un patronat agricole (Paris, 1994) 562. 7 Brigitte Maillard, Vivre en Touraine au XVffl6 siecle (Rennes, 2003) 17. 185 What were the riskst o this population and what caused mortality to rise? At different times it is possible to see or at least suspect the influence of a number of causes, including violence, disease, climate, and high grain prices. In the subsistence crises of the seventeenth century and particularly those of 1693-94 and 1709-10, all these factors interacted and thereby compounded their lethality. In the eighteenth century, there were a series of less deadly crises, at least until the 1770s.8
Violence and accidents only rarely caused death in the Loudunais. The most obvious example comes from Aulnay, where the coup defourche delivered by Charles
Bourdier to Francois Brissault was certified by a doctor to have caused the latter's death at the age of 22. Brissault's burial was held up until his death could be investigated by the lieutenant-criminel of Loudun. Men might also die while under state supervision, such as Francois Ralenest, who died in the prison of Saumur in 1743, and Jean Renault, who died at Brest in 1754, while serving the Ministry of the Marine, probably as a sailor.
Suspicious or accidental deaths were more common among children. A report on the death of three-week old Neosmoise Martineau in 1743 was sent to the law clerk in
Loudun, probably on suspicion of infanticide. Her parents had just married the year before, and her mother died shortly after giving birth. Two illegitimate children from two different fathers but the same mother, Marie Theuillau, died within two weeks of each other in October 1746, at the ages of 6 and 18 months. Marie herself died shortly thereafter at the age of 45, that December. The wife of one of the illegitimate fathers died the following September. The convenient death of illegitimate children, whether deliberate or coincidental, was common, as examples show from 1755 and 1765 for La
8 Lebrun, Les hotnmes et la mort. 373. 186 Chaussee and from 1747 and 1762 for Martaize. The vast majority of abandoned babies died before their first birthday. It has been suggested that parents may have unintentionally contributed to infant mortality by suffocating babies while having them in their bed or bringing a baby out for baptism too quickly after a difficult birth. The law itself may have contributed to the latter problem, as a royal declaration of 1724 directed that those parents who did not have their children baptized within twenty-four hours of their birth would be fined.9
The violence of war did not directly cause death in the Loudunais, but two of the mortality spikes (1748 and 1763) coincide with the final years of major wars. Both the
War of the Austrian Succession, which was mostly successful for France, and the Seven
Years' War, which was not, resulted in massive state expenditures and the raising of large sums of money through taxes, as well as troop billets on the population. The 1760s were particularly difficult for the residents of the Loudunais and the larger province of
Touraine, with many billeted troops, high taxes, and general unrest.10 Most important for a consideration of mortality, the movement of soldiers also contributed to the spread of disease.
Some diseases appear to have been endemic in France throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and the Loudunais was no exception.11 Several clusters of deaths between 1737 and 1765, strongly suggest the presence of epidemics. In Martaize,
9 Francois Lebrun, La vie conjugate sous 1'Ancien Regime (Paris, 1975) 152; Marcel Lachiver, Les ann<5es de misere: La famine au temps du Grand Roi (Paris, 1991) 46; John McManners, Church and Society in Eighteenth Century Prance. Vol 2: The Religion of the People and the Politics of Religion (Oxford. 1998) 3. 10 C. Chevalier, Tableau de la Province de Touraine, 1762-66 : administration, agriculture, industrie. commerce, impdts (Tours, 1863) 175-185; Jean Tarrade, "Le Centre-Ouest a la fin du regne de Louis XTV (d'apres la correspondance des intendants)" Bulletin de la Soci&e des antiquaires de POuest 4e serie - tome XV (1980): 333-350; Eugene Pepin, Histoire de Touraine (Paris, 1991 (1935)) 204. 11 Jacques Dupfiquier, La population rurale du bassin Parisien a I'^poque de Louis XIV (Paris, 1979) 259. 187 three adults and eleven children under the age of four died in August and September of
1737. The fall of 1765 saw twenty-seven deaths in Martaize, including twenty-three under the age often, and another eleven deaths of children under the age of seven (plus one adult) in La Chaussee. Five people, aged 6 to 60, died in a span of two weeks in
November 1759 at Aulnay, which normally averaged only seven deaths each year.
Another eight died between October and December, 1765. These clusters account for 5 per cent of the total deaths during the period. Other incidences of high mortality do not feature these clusters, suggesting other causes. The nature of an endemic cycle was for outbreaks to return once in every generation. That said, just because disease did not kill a number of people rapidly during a certain period does not mean that people were not getting sick. It is also worth noting, as did officials of the time, that the deaths of peasants from epidemics were bad, but the loss to disease of the cattle that powered their primitive agricultural methods could be catastrophic.12
There was a strong connection between poor weather conditions and high mortality in the Loudunais.13 This was seen most dramatically during the nadir of the cold in the Little Ice Age between 1690 and 1710. For the years 1737-1765, it was more typical to see "short periods of relatively stable temperatures regularly punctuated by markedly colder or wetter conditions" that could affect harvests, with potentially deadly results for those living on the margins.14 Specific climate data is sparse for the early part of our period, but larger studies of the region suggest that favourable conditions endured
12 Jean Elie, "La mortality a la Chapelle-Mouliere de 1701 a 1792" Bulletin de la Soci6t6 des antiquaires de 1'Ouest 5e serie - tome VII (1993): 275. On livestock diseases see Jean-Marc Moriceau, Histoire et g&)grapbie de I'elevage francais: Du Moyen Age a la Revolution (Paris, 2005) 84-87. b See Part LI. 14 Lebrun, Les hommes et la mort. 127; Pierre Leveel, Histoire de Touraine (Chambray, 1988) 533; Brian Fagan, The Little Ice Age: How Climate Made History, 1300-1850 (New York, 2000) 102. 188 from 1730 to 1739 with mild, damp winters and cool, dry summers. A sudden, sharp cold lasted from 1739 through 1742, which along with an increased incidence of flooding, contributed to a general subsistence crisis in the nearby Loire Valley that affected the whole province of Touraine. The year 1740 in particular appears to have been a bad time, with a winter cold that was almost as serious as 1709 but lasting even longer, a cool spring that delayed planting and excessive summer rainfall which damaged the crops. Wheat was especially intolerant of heavy rainfall during the summer, though other grain crops could do better. The Loudun subdelegate's report for 1747, for example, notes that wheat production was projected to be only half of a normal year, but oats, rye, and mixed wheat crops were doing well, as were the vines.16 This mattered because wheat was the main commercial crop in the Loudunais; its failure would have a significant impact on rural fortunes in a given year. Generally cold conditions lasted until
1752, followed by a warmer trend from 1757 through 1763, and turning back to cold from 1765 to 1777. This does not suggest a relationship between climate and disease for the 1737 cluster, but the higher mortality of 1740 in Martaize and La Chaussee does correspond to the cold snap and subsistence crisis of the wider region, and the suspected disease clusters for 1765 also can be connected with colder conditions. Fortunately we have harvest reports fromth e subdelegate for 1761-65 to further consider the latter examples.
15 John D. Post, Food Shortage. Climatic Variability and Epidemic Disease in Preindustrial Europe: the Mortality Peak in the early 1740s (Ithaca, 1985) 52; Leveel, Histoire de Touraine, 552. 16 AD I-L C62 Fourrages Estat sommaire du produit de la r&olte annee 1747 Loudun. 17 Fagan, The Little Ice Age. 155-57; Le Roy Ladurie, A History of Climate, 60. 18 AD I-L C83 Etat des recoltes, 1720-1765, Etat des r&oltes, subd<5U$gation Loudun, 1761-65. 189 There appears to be a direct relationship between the quality of the harvests described by the subdelegate in a given year and the mortality rate of the following year.
The 1761 harvest was "passably good," particularly for oats, but the subdelegate asked the intendant to consider that the people had so little money from paying higher taxes that they were in some difficulty. Deaths rose from 26 in 1761 to 44 the next year. The 1762 report was far worse; "tout lepeuple est dans un grand misere." October rains hindered seeding, winter rains drowned the crops, and then the "chaleurs violenttes dejuin" dried it out beyond saving. He estimated oats and barley at two-thirds their usual production, but wheat at only one-half, mixed wheat at one-third, and rye at one-quarter of their normal yields. Sure enough, 1763 saw a peak of deaths at 68. In 1763, a good harvest was expected all around, with wheat at 20 per cent and oats at 30 per cent above normal.
Deaths in 1764 dropped to 27. The 1764 harvest was under dry conditions, which favoured wheat and rye but ruined the oats and barley crop completely. The loss of these secondary crops put significant pressure on rural fortunes.19 There were 71 deaths and distinct disease clusters in 1765. That same year, with projections of another poor harvest due to heavy winter and late spring rains, the subdelegate again asked the intendant for tax relief to help "/a triste situation des habitants de cette election"20
Another possible factor contributing to the mortality rate was the price of wheat.
Higher prices can be connected with increased mortality in the 1740s and in 1753, and lower prices to more favourable conditions, notably for 1743-45 and 1749-51. After
1755, when the prices were less volatile, the relationship seems to disappear.
19 Jean Pitie, Exode rurale et migrations intdrieures en France; l'exemple de la Vienne et du Poitou- Charentes (Poitiers, 1971) 263; Leveel, Histoire de Touraine. 533. 20 See Part III, 8 for rural budgets of these years. 190 Figure 6 - Number of burials each year and average wheat price21
80-.
-Deaths • Price of Wheat
1 **-*-** fr-fl-A I * A A A" A A * T—T—ii i—r—i—i—i—r—i—i—n—i—i—i—i—i—i i i—i
But the connection between wheat prices and mortality was not so simple; overall harvest results need to be considered. Most peasants ate bread made frommixe d wheat, rye, and other secondary grains, so yields and prices for these crops had a more direct impact on their welfare. Day-workers and artisans purchased most of their food on the market, so higher prices reduced the amount they could afford. Meanwhile, high wheat prices benefited ploughmen in the Loudunais, who usually had significant surpluses of the crop to sell. In general, since even the smallest farmers in the region produced wheat for export, high wheat prices were actually an advantage for everyone, so long as they had some to sell, and so long as secondary grains for their own use were readily available and affordable.
21 Ernest Labrousse, Le prix de fromente n France au temps de la monnaie stable (1720-1913) (Paris, 1970) 9,17. For 1737-1755,1 used national averages. For 1756-1765,1 used the averages for the western region. 22 Post found that harvest shortfalls were much more important than higher food prices in raising mortality during the crisis of 1739-42. Food Shortage. Climatic Variability and Epidemic Disease, 23. Scott and Duncan found that both high grain prices and low wool prices were required to create a mortality crisis in Penrith, Human Demography. 7. 191 Baptisms
Baptisms in the Loudunais showed less variation than burials in this period, with a high of 64 and a low of 33 and an annual average of 48 or 37 / 1 000 inhabitants. When taken with the average mortality rate of 31 / 1 000, this supported a small average annual population increase of 6 / 1 000 or 0.6 per cent. Although this does not sound like much, when compounded over a few decades, this added up to significant growth.
Figure 7 - Number of baptisms
70 60 50 •Total 40 •s*J\tys,.^J^. -Aulnay 30 -LaChaussee 20 - Martaize
i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—r—i—i—i—r
A j§> J> <& J? A .& A . A A A <& A<£
The annual number of baptisms increased gradually in Aulnay between 1753 and
1759, before falling off slightly through 1765. La Chaussee had larger annual differences, with a period of less volatility between 1749 and 1757. In Martaize, there was a higher number of baptisms at each end of the period - from 1737 to 1744 and 1762 to 65 - and a somewhat lower number in between.
When compared with the burial data, at first glance there is the expected inverse proportion to the number of baptisms that is consistent with other demographic studies.23
23 Francois Lebrun, Histoire des pays de la Loire: Orteanais, Touraine. Aniou. Maine (Toulouse, 1972) 244; Daniele Rebaudo, "Le movement naturel de la population francaise rurale de 1670 a 1740" Population Vol 34 (1979): 598; Dupaquier, La population rurale du bassin Parisien. 240. 192 Years of high mortality had fewer births (1740,1747, and 1763), while years of low mortality typically saw higher births (1758-1759,1764).
Figure 8 - Number of baptisms and burials
• - - Burials -*—Baptisms
r—i—r—i A A A «& J? A <& A A A> A A A A A
There were also many exceptions. The higher mortality of 1753 was not accompanied by any corresponding drop in baptisms, and while baptisms were slightly down in 1765, this was nowhere near the expected proportion for the highest mortality spike of the period.
Even more striking is that from 1737 to 1749, other than the two high points for deaths, the two series are generally parallel. Only at its peaks did higher mortality appear to affect significantly the birth rate in these communities.
We can estimate the seasonal pattern of conceptions by applying a standard gestation period of nine months to the baptismal record.24 The fewest conceptions occurred during the harvest period of September and October. The most conceptions were in April, followed by November and December.
241 subtracted nine months from each baptismal date, which would lead to some variation both because most gestation periods are not precisely nine months and also because the difference between birth and baptismal date could vary by a day or two. 193 Figure 9 - Number of conceptions by month
200 -,
150 •Loudunais -Aulnay 100 -LaChaussee
SO -Martaize
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Interestingly, the number of conceptions does not appear affected by Lent (March).
Studies of Paris, the Bas-Quercy, and Crulai showed the same low number of conceptions in the fall, and the same high point for May-June, but differed in having fewer conceptions during March. Marital sexual intercourse was not banned by the Church during Lent, but abstention was encouraged. Some communities seem to have abstained more than others. Rural society in the generalite of Tours and the Ile-de-France showed an even stronger congruence with the Loudunais.
Figure 10 - Comparison of number of conceptions by month26
200 i
150 -Loudunais (1737-1765) 100 -Tours (1671-1720) -lie-de-France (1740-1792) 50
0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
While all three shared June as a high point of conceptions, the Loudunais' highest point of April stands out, as does the greater peak in November and December. April
25 Valmary, Families paysannes en Bas-Quercy. 87; Lebrun, La vie conjugate. 39; Dupaquier, Histoire de la population francaise. 400; McManners, Church and Society. 109. 26 Jean Ganiage. Trois villages d'lle-de-Franee au XVUT siecle: etude d&nographique (Paris, 1963) 60; Dup&quier, La population rurale da bassin Parisien. 365. 194 represented the coming of spring (and the end of Lent) and November the end of harvest- related work, but why these should be more compelling times for conceiving in the
Loudunais than elsewhere remains elusive.
There was a general balance between the number of boys (821) and girls (787) baptized in these parishes. In Aulnay before 1760,56 per cent of baptisms were girls, and in two periods, 1743-48 and 1755-1760, the percentage was as high as 60 per cent.
Meanwhile, in La Chaussee, there were somewhat more boys (53 per cent of baptisms overall), especially in between 1743 and 1754 (56 per cent). These were not large differences, but there is an interesting connection with these imbalances and the degree of micro-mobility found for marriage partners. As described below, Aulnay had a higher proportion of grooms and La Chaussee had a higher proportion of brides fromoutsid e the community.
French rural families deliberately restrained their fertility.27 The most obvious method before widespread contraception (the so-called fertility transition in the 1790s) was to delay women's marriage age until well into the 20s. Another way was to lengthen the intervals between children, either through abstention or coitus interruptus, which may have been widely practiced, or to delay weaning to take advantage of the natural contraceptive effect of breast-feeding. These tactics became widespread after 1750
27 David R. Weir, "Life Under Pressure: France and England, 1670-1870" Journal of Economic History 44, 1 (1984): 29; David R. Weir, "New Estimates of Nuptiality and Marital Fertility in France, 1740-1911" Population Studies 48,2 (1994): 307. 28 Lebrun, La vie conjugate. 109 and 161; Pierre Goubert, "Historical Demography and the Reinterpretation of Early Modern French History: A Research Review" Journal of Interdisciplinary History 1 (1970): 43; Thomas A. Mroz and David R. Weir, "Structural Change in Life Cycle Fertility During the Fertility Transition: France Before and After the Revolution of 1789" Population Studies 44 (1990): 63-68; Dup&quier, Histoire de la population francaise.374-382 . 195 throughout the province of Touraine. Historians once thought that a complete family
(i.e. one in which a spouse did not die prematurely) would produce seven to eight
children - one child every two years between the ages of 25 and 40. Regional studies
have shown the pattern of births in complete families to be more variable, with Breton
and Flanders families producing a child almost every year, and families in southwestern
provinces only once every three years.30 The national average for birth intervals in
1740-1789 was for the first child to be born 16.5 months after marriage, and for the
second child to arrive 25 months after the birth of the first. The interval for the third and
subsequent children then slowly grew to 30 months and beyond.
Table 9 - Average birth intervals of first and second children31
PLACE YEARS MARRIAGE - 1st CHILD 1st -2nd CHILD France 1740-1792 16.5 months 25 months Crulai 1674-1742 19 months 24 months Meulan 1660-1739 13 months 19 months Bas-Quercy 18mC 21 months 29 months Ile-de-France 18mC 14 months 20 months Aulnay 1737-1765 14 months 26 months La Chaussee 1737-1765 15.5 months 26.6 months Martaize 1737-1765 17.4 months 30 months Loudunais 1737-1765 16.2 months 28.1 months
In the Loudunais, the age at first marriage was consistent with the rest of rural Poitou; 27-
28 for grooms, and 23-24 for brides. Loudunais families were very close to the
national average for the interval between marriage and first child, but over three months
longer for the interval between first and second child. Of the studies shown above, only
Maillard, Vivre en Touraine. 18. 30 Goubert, "Historical Demography," 42. 31 Ganiage, Trois villages d'fle-de-France. 103; Valmary, Families pavsannes en Bas-Ou&cv, 139; Lebrun, La vie conjugate. 106; DupSquier, Histoire de la population francaise.357 . 32 Most of the marriage registers do not indicate age, but those that do are consistent with me findings of Robert Larin, La contribution du Haut-Poitou au peuplement de la Nouvelle-France (Moncton, 1994) 20. 196 the Bas-Quercy had greater intervals between children. There was a striking difference between Aulnay and Martaize in these intervals, of 3.4 and 4 months respectively.
Perhaps this was related to the size of the communities, as Aulnay was the smallest and
Martaize the largest.
We can examine peasant choices on how often to have children by considering the number of baptisms in the register for couples married in the parish. Of course, some moved after their wedding, so only those with at least one child appearing are considered.
Few women had children at a faster rate than one every two years. In the ten-year period following a marriage, only nine couples (7 per cent) had six births - six of these came from Martaize. The majority of couples (51 per cent) had three or fewer children in the same period, though this includes "incomplete" families which suffered the loss of a spouse. This leaves 42 per cent of couples with four or five children. There was again variation across the parishes; in Martaize 60 per cent of couples had three or fewer children, while in La Chaussee, 54 per cent had four or five. In Aulnay, more families were having children more quickly after 1747. Clearly, peasants in the Loudunais were controlling their fertility, and some families were doing it more than others.
Despite these efforts, the overall number of baptisms (1 387) versus that of burials (1 177) indicates a potential net increase in population of between 1737 and 1765 of 210 individuals or 16 per cent. Since we know that the official population statistics of these parishes show an increase of only 100 or so people between 1732 and 1789, this difference suggests that many people moved away, perhaps in search of a spouse or work opportunities. Some young brides who married in the parish moved and started a family
33 There are a total of 1608 baptisms in the registers. 1387 is the figureonc e the over 200 baptisms in La Chauss6e for families outside the parish are removed fromth e calculation, 197 somewhere else, probably back in the parish of their grooms. Of course, other families and individuals were moving in, but the balance of migration must have been a net loss.
If homeostasis is defined as maintaining a steady state of population, then the methods that Loudunais families used to control fertility were insufficient in achieving it. That so many younger people had to move away suggests that the potential for growth in the local economy, or perhaps the structure of local society, could not support them.
Baptismal registers also permit us to determine the frequency of illegitimate births. These were not common but also not unknown in Old Regime France. Given the late age of marriage, the occurrence of pre-marital sex was a significant concern for families, particular for young women whose future depended on reputation - any deviation from this "purgatory" of abstinence for young people could have serious consequences later on.35 Though encounters in the fields may well have occurred before marriage, "/d/ ou tard, les parents venaient regulariser leur union devant I 'autel? 6 As many as ten per cent of first conceptions for a couple occurred before marriage throughout the Paris basin (which included several cities and large towns), and almost five per cent of those in rural Bas-Quercy, showing that such matters, if ending in marriage, were not considered major incidents. In the Loudunais, 9 of 173 first conceptions occurred before marriage (5.2 per cent). In only three cases were the birth dates so close to the marriage as to suggest a rushed or sudden engagement. Jean
Saulnier married Marie Du Bray on 8 Jan 1754; their first child was born seven weeks
34 Women were normally expected to get married in their home parishes, see below on marriages. 35 Philippe Aries, L'enfant et la vie familiale sous TAncien Regime (Paris, 1975) 269; DupSquier, Histoire de la population francaise. 432. 36 Ganiage, Trois villages d'ile-de-France. 113. 37 DupSquier, La population rurale du bassin Parisien. 367; Valmary, Families pavsannes en Bas-Quercy,, 93. 198 later. Anthoine Fougon married Louise Giroire with only a month to spare in 1748.
Vincent Cotillon cut things very close with a wedding only ten days prior to the birth of his child in 1765.
True illegitimacy, that is, a child born out of wedlock, was a more serious matter.
Marriage was a sort of "permis de reproduction accordepar la societe" and, of course, by the Church, outside of which there could be serious consequences for the children and parents involved, including death. Across eighteenth-century France, less than two per cent of births were illegitimate, though the proportion appears to have increased from a low of about one per cent at the beginning of the century towards the Revolution. For example, in Bas-Quercy, there were eighteen illegitimate births in the parish of Thezels-
Saint-Sernin between 1700 and 1792, but only five before 1747.39 A study of the
Chinonais found eight illegitimate births between 1721 and 1750, and twenty-four more after 1750.40 A related concern was the increasing number of abandoned babies, especially in cities. In the countryside abandonment was far less common, perhaps because it was more difficult to be anonymous. Sometimes women left their community and used a special house in town to hide their illegitimate pregnancy and child.41
In the Loudunais, two examples demonstrate the opposite - that rural communities could be a refuge for urban people, if they had links in the parish. Andre Savigny was from Alonnes, a town south of Poitiers and over fifty kilometers away from the
Loudunais. He spent thirteen months in Angers, north of the Loire, where he lived with
38 Dupaquier, Histoire de la population francaise. 430. 39 Valmary, Families paysannes en Bas-Quercv. 91; Yves Blayo, "Mouvement naturel de la population francaise de 1740 a 1829," Population Special Edition (1975): 30. 40 Maillard, Vivre en Touraine. 57. 41 Lebrun, La vie conjugate. 155; Claude Grimmer, Vivre a Aurillac au XVtiT siecle (Aurillac, 1983) 54. 199 and had an illegitimate daughter with Jeanne Chandoualt, who was originally fromL a
Chaussee. The Bishop of Poitiers eventually ordered them to get married after their priest agreed to baptize the girl. They chose to move back to Chandoualt's home parish and did finally get married 11 Sep 1749. A written annotation on the parish register legitimized their child. A second daughter was born the following year. Francoise Chalumeau left
Loudun and had her illegitimate child, Augustin, baptized at Martaize 29 Aug 1747. A female relative, Renee, apparently lived there, as she also appears as a godmother for someone else in 1739. Afterwards, however, Francoise appears to have returned to
Loudun. Savigny escaped his previous life in Alonnes and Angers, while Chalumeau only temporarily hid her situation; in both cases, their choice reflected their existing ties to these parishes, without which it is unlikely these outsiders would have found much welcome in the community.
Other cases of illegitimacy more directly involved the men and women of these parishes. There were several cases of abandoned children in the Loudunais. A young girl, Marie, was among the most fortunate, being baptized and adopted in 1763 by a miller, Jean Leclere. A baby boy called Jean was abandoned at Aulnay in 1761, and is likely the same unknown child who was buried fourteen months later at Martaize.
Another infant, Jacques, was left at the door of the church at La Chaussee in 1755, and lived only two weeks. Marie Theuillau of Aulnay, widowed in 1737, had two illegitimate daughters by two different fathers, Pierre Mionau and Jean de la Planche, in 1740 and
1745. Both the children and mother died in 1746, when Marie was 45 years old. Since the age of sterility (menopause) was normally around age 40, Marie and de la Planche
(who was married to 58-year-old Anne Mesmin at the time) probably thought it unlikely
200 that they would produce an illegitimate child. This interesting example indicates that some widows and widowers were sexually active without necessarily re-marrying, a phenomenon difficult to track since no illegitimate children would give them away, and also posing no inconvenient inheritance problems. Unfortunately, for the same reason, other examples of this behaviour are very difficult to find.
In La Chaussee, several younger women had illegitimate children during the period, including Louise Flariau (1740), Renee Barbier (1743), Louise Huguet (1746),
Magdelaine Nauton (1762), and Marie Bontemps (1762), who all declared that they did not know who the father was. Their stories seems unlikely. Francoise Fillatreau (1748) and Louise Brys (1754) did declare who the fathers of their illegitimate children were, but since these men were not present at the baptism, it is safe to assume that they did not wish to accept responsibility for the child. One of them, Pierre Roulet, appears as a godfather for three different families in the 1750s, showing that the community did not necessarily ostracize a man for having fathered an illegitimate child. However, as neither woman married in any of these parishes afterwards, they do seem to have borne a stigma among their neighbours.
Two other declarations involved women from La Chaussee and men from Sauves, a parish less than five kilometers away. Marie Herault (1753) declared that her child
Michel was the product of an illicit affair with Charles Renault, a mason, while she was visiting in Sauves. Francoise Queniot (1758) made a similar declaration against Louis
Derigny. The extensive family and economic connections amongst these parishes may well have afforded opportunities for sexual activity. Francoise was able to find a spouse,
Vincent Cotet, in 1760, and promptly had a child with him within ten months. Marie was
201 also married within a year and had a child with Alexis Boyer fourteen months after her illegitimate baby was born. These illicit offspring, it seems, were lucky to find themselves within a legitimate family, though their status with regard to future marriage and inheritance is unknown, Perhaps because the affair occurred outside the parish boundaries, Herault and Queniot suffered less damage to their reputation.
Meanwhile in Martaize, three illegitimate daughters were born to three different unmarried women, Charlotte Briand (1743), Marie Bourg (1747), and Louise Ragotte
(1762). Charlotte married in 1748 and had five children with Charles Quinteau. Marie and Louise do not appear to have been so lucky. Most interesting of all was the case of
Pierre Royer, a prominent merchant and estate manager42 - perhaps the wealthiest man of the community. After seven children with his wife, Marie Jamin, between 1749 and
1757, he also fathered an illegitimate child with Magdelaine Senegon, daughter of a day- worker. The child was born in October, 1757. The month before, Royer and Senegon went to the notary. There, with a priest and a pea-grower as witnesses, Senegon agreed to take complete responsibility for the child and Royer agreed to provide support payments.
First, a one-time fee of 92 It would be paid to her the following Christmas. This would be reduced to 52 It if the baby died before then or to 40 It if stillborn. Next, Royer agreed to provide support payments of four setters of wheat (5.23 hi) each Michelmas that the child lived, up to seven years.43 Each setter was worth about 12 It.44 Assuming the child reached its seventh birthday (there is no burial record), Royer's infidelity would have cost him 428 It. This was a significant sum for Senegon, given that a day-worker's
42 The term "fermier" in the Loudunais denotes an estate manager for a seigneur, rather than a big tenant farmer as in Moriceau, Les fermiers de l'lle-de-France. 43 AD V Serie 4E 110 26,23 Sep 1757 Ren6 Lanlaud, Saint-Clair, 1757-1760. 44 AD I-L C337 Prix des grains dans les marches 1746; Labrousse, Le prix de froment 17. 202 wage was perhaps a dozen sous each day and his personal property worth perhaps 300 It.
For an estate manager family like the Royer this was not a significant setback, and allowed them to put to rest any nature claim Senegon and her child might make.45
In Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, between 1737 and 1765, there were 21 cases of illegitimate births, which constituted 1.5 per cent of all births. This is a misleadingly low statistic, however, since it includes all mothers and all children. If we
consider only new mothers we find that the illegitimacy rate rises to five per cent; if we
include the women with pre-marital conceptions, it brings it close to ten per cent.
Though there is much research left to do on sexual activity in the countryside, the limited
analysis here demonstrates that pre-marital and extra-marital sex were not uncommon, and certainly went beyond the few cases which resulted in illegitimate childbirth.
Perhaps most young people limited their pre-marital sexual contact to mutual masturbation.46 Older people could count on biology to prevent illegitimate children.
Other studies in Haut-Poitou discovered far fewer pre- and extra-marital conceptions, suggesting that the Loudunais was unusual in this regard, perhaps because of frequent contact between nearby communities.47
The baptismal registers also indicate how often "emergency" baptisms, or ondoiements, were carried out by relatives when the child was at risk of imminent death at birth.8 Surprisingly, given the relatively high rate of infant mortality, there were only five cases in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, and all occurred before 1749. In all but
45 P. Boissonnade, Histoire de Poitou (Paris, 1977 (1926)) 235; One study of inventories found day-workers with as little as 27 It in possessions, Marina Dinet, "Culture mateiielle et vie quotidienne a Loudun et ses campagnes (1642-1691)" (memoire de maitrise, Universite de Poitiers, 1998) 61. 46 McManners suggests this theory, Church and Society. 297. 47 Jean Elie, "Conttacter manage a la Chapelle-Mouliere au XVIIF siecle," Bulletin de la Society des antiquaires de TOuest 5e serie - tome XI (1997): 169-194. 48 Lebrun, Les hommes et la mort, 422; McManners, Church and Society. 3. 203 one case, the baby or babies concerned (two cases were of twins) died within twenty-four hours of being born, proving that their fears were justified. Surely other babies were threatened? Perhaps ondoiements were not common because there was almost always a cleric available when needed. Aulnay had a resident priest, and La Chaussee and
Martaize both had a priest and a vicar. Further, there are several examples in the parish registers of priests from different parishes covering for each other when one was absent.49
The baptismal registers also permit an analysis of social relationships because they indicate who the family chose to be godparents for their child. Godparents were important for providing a family support in their religious upbringing of a child, and also could create or strengthen connections between families.50 The spiritual affinity was recognized to the point that the godparents could not marry their godchildren, even if they had no other kinship.51 Becoming a godparent during a child's baptism was a public affirmation and obligation. Godparents might be selected from within the father's and mother's families, providing key support from close relatives. These choices appear more emotionally based, with the godparent playing a significant, continuing, and protective role with the child. Godparents could also be selected from other families, a pragmatic choice which strengthened a family's relationships in the community. Some chose notables as godparents, hoping to add prestige and status to the family's reputation.
In these cases, the benefit to the family rather than a relationship with the child was emphasized. Seigneurs, for example, would not be expected to play a continuing role in the child's upbringing or maintain an emotional relationship with the child, but they
49 See Part in, 9. 50 McManners, Church and Society. 4; Alain Croix et Jean Queniart, De la Renaissace a 1'aube des Lumieres: Histoire Culturelle de la France Vol 2 (Paris, 2005 (1997)) 22. 51 Jacques Vanderlinden, Se Marier en Acadie Francaise. XVIf et XVuT sfecles (Moncton, 1998) 38. 204 might be considered as distant patrons and could potentially at a key moment in the child's development, create an opportunity for their advancement. Since their name was now tied to that of the child, they would want it to do well. In general, families considered very carefully the selection of godparents for their children, knowing that these connections were a resource that could be called upon in time of need, and served to maintain and potentially elevate a family's position in the community.52
In the Loudunais, only 11.8 per cent of godfathers and 9.8 per cent of godmothers shared the father's surname. Even fewer, 9.5 per cent of godfathers and 9.1 per cent of godmothers were part of the mother's family. In total, just 21.3 per cent of godfathers and 18.9 per cent of godmothers came from the immediate or extended families of the parents. The vast majority of godparents, two-thirds of godfathers and over 70 per cent of godmothers, came from other peasant families, demonstrating a preference for using the opportunity to strengthen social relationships across the community. The wide selection of choices by each family, and the sharing of godparents across several families suggest that the communities were not highly stratified, at least among those who worked the land. Each family network was wide, and was not restricted to a small, rigid grouping of other connected families. This could provide stability in times of difficulty, and maximized options for marriage alliances and economic cooperation.
Nobles and notables, including local seigneurs, doctors, merchants, sacristans and priests, and prominent millers and estate managers, as well as their wives, made up the remaining godparent selections -11.8 per cent of godfathers and 10.5 per cent of godmothers. This figure is misleading, though, because it includes those who were
52 Aries, L'enfant et la vie familiale. 268. 205 godparents for other notable families. Overall, just 1 in 20 godparents for peasant children were nobles or notables. Local seigneurial families seem to have made a point of occasionally serving as godparents, and prominent regional nobles also make a few appearances. Men like Louis Gabriel de Rasilly and Georges de Menou were descendants of noble families who had maintained connections in these parishes for centuries. In fact, the Menou and Rasilly, whose lands were in Touraine, had led members of these parishes to Acadia in the 1630s and 1640s.53 Serving as a godparent also appealed to the non-noble elite, reinforcing mutually dependent relationships between millers and their grain suppliers, merchants and their customers, and doctors and their patients. A noble or notable godparent was useful for both the individual concerned and the peasant family involved, a good example of the way that hierarchical relationships in the countryside usually had a basis in mutual benefit.
In both Aulnay and Martaize, there was an increasing trend throughout the period to select godfathers from notables and fromth e father's family. Over 70 per cent of godfathers came from other non-notable families at first, but after 1759, this had diminished to around 55 per cent. This trend was also visible for godmothers in
Martaize, but not in Aulnay, where the proportion of godmothers from other peasant families rose from 63 to 77 per cent. This suggests that families were more actively seeking notable godfathers, and also increasingly looking within, perhaps reflecting a need for stronger support within families during difficult times. It may also reflect a reaching out on the part of notables and nobles to strengthen their links in these communities. In La Chaussee, the opposite occurred. Both godfathers and godmothers
53 Leveel, Histoire de Touraine. 537. For more on the role of seigneurs, see Part III, 7. 206 were increasingly selected from other peasant families, suggesting growth and stronger community connections.
Marriages
Marriage in Old Regime France was a sacrament performed by the church, a household unit of consumption and production (menage), an alliance between families, a permit for sexual activity that produced legitimate children and inheritors, and also a powerful instrument of fertility control.54 As we saw above, the age at first marriage was an important determinant of family size; a later age might also indicate that there were limited opportunities to begin new households within the structures of the rural economy and local society. Across France between 1740 and 1790, the average age at first marriage rose from 27.5 to 28.5 for grooms and from 25.5 to 26.5 for women.
Nationally, the marriage rate also decreased; the celibacy rate rose from5 9 to 136 / 1000 adults between 1675 and 1800.55 In Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, not only the rate but the actual number of marriages was decreasing, from 172 between 1737 and 1750 to
148 between 1751 and 1764 or from an average of 12.3 to 10.5 each year.
54 Alain Gabet, "Les structures familiales dans le CMtelleraudais au XVIIf5 siecle," Bulletin de la Society des antiquaires de l'Ouest 5e serie - Tome XIV (2000): 240. 55 Weir, "New Estimates of Nuptuality," 307; Weir, "Life under Pressure" 33; Dupaquier, Historie de la population francaise.430-432 . 207 Figure 11 - Number of marriages by year
There was considerable variation between annual high (19) and low (4) points, and each parish roughly conformed to the combined trend despite the fact that marriage alliances between them were limited: in Martaize, only three per cent of grooms came from Aulnay or La Chaussee, while in Aulnay, just nine per cent of grooms came from one of the other two. As we will see below, although a majority of grooms and brides were married in their home parishes, a significant minority were not. Since marriage alliances between these three parishes were so rare, it seems that many families established connections within a somewhat wider area.
In general, during the subsistence crises of 1693-94 and 1709-10, the number of marriages in France dropped considerably, bouncing back in better times.56 Between
1737 and 1760 in the Loudunais, however, the number of marriages seems to parallel oddly the number of deaths in the communities. Remarriage of widows and widowers, if it occurred quickly enough, could partly explain the connection. Infant deaths could relate to new marriages, though the interval between marriage and first child was typically 16 months. Whatever the reasons, this changes after 1760, with years of low
56 O'Grada and Chevet, "Famine and Market," 713. 208 deaths (1761,1764) corresponding with more marriages, and years of higher deaths
(1760,62-63) with fewer. As with baptisms, 1765 saw a less proportional dip in the number of marriages despite the highest mortality figure of the period. This may be because it followed so quickly after the high mortality of 1763, giving families less flexibility to adjust.
Figure 12 - Number of marriages, burials and baptisms by year
80 • 70 P _ •*? 60 *A p 50 frA f\ A'\ A V^ r* Y *" • •' Marriages 40 *r Y*\/}\ A/ ^ vV±V*^. - • - Deaths 30 ^ B^«« » rf ^ fi —A—Baptisms 20 10 ^^^^-r^^s*.^^ -/V-**rf *^ JK* 0 r~i—i—i—i —i—i—i—n—i—i—i—i—i—r—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—r-T—i A A> J> J> J? A *& A A A> A A> A A A> N>VN>N>V»OV
Not surprisingly, a high number of baptisms typically followed in the years after a high point in the number of marriages. For example, after 1747-48, baptisms rose to a high point in 1751. After the highest marriage point in 1754, baptisms rose to a peak in 1758.
The number of marriages declined after this peak, particularly through 1759, suggesting the onset of more difficult times that may be related to higher taxation during the Seven
Years' War. Marriage implied the ability to set up a new household that would be economically viable, requiring investments of land, livestock, household goods, and money. Perhaps the war years forced some peasants to wait.
In rural France between 1740 and 1792, marriages occurred most frequently in
January, November, and especially February, almost double that of the next highest month. Marriages were least likely in December, March, and August. This was because 209 marriages were forbidden by church regulations during Lent and Advent, and most
families reasonably avoided the busy harvest season. May marriages were considered
unlucky in many regions. The popularity of the coldest months was due to their many
feast days and the less busy workload of the season. February's popularity was no doubt
partly for families not willing to wait until after Easter.58 Several regions also had a high
number of marriages in the summer months. Bas-Quercy, for example, had a high
number of marriages in June. The large tenant farmers of the Ile-de-France celebrated the
majority of their marriages between the end of May and July. In the g&ieralite of Tours,
June and July were also popular months for marriages.59
In Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, the highest number of marriages was in
February, with July a close second and November third. The summer June-July grouping
was slightly higher than that of January-February, together accounting for two-thirds of
total marriages, which was consistent with the pattern in the generalite, though the
Loudunais had more October marriages and fewer in April. This suggests that most of
the harvest work was completed by the end of September in the Loudunais (Michaelmas,
September 29th, was also the beginning of a new year for most tenancies).60 Since the
Loudunais was located in the extreme southern part of the generalite, and typically had just fifty days of freezing per year, farmers may have wanted to get to work earlier,
avoiding April marriages.61
Gabet, "Les structures familiales dans le CMtelleraudais," 249. 58 Lebrun, La vie conjugate. 37; Dupaquier, Histoire de la population francaise, 295. 59 Ganiage, Trois villages d'ile-de-France. 53; Valmary, Families paysannes en Bas-Qu&cy. 87; DupSquier, La population rurale de bassin Parisien, 296; Moriceau, Les fermiers de Pile-de-France. 157. 60 Angdline Rousseau, "Les 'coqs de village' du pays Loudunais dans la deuxieme moitie du XVIIlieme siecle" (memoire de maitrise, Universite de Poitiers, 2002) 54. 61 Leveel, Histoire de Touraine. 20. 210 Figure 13 - Comparison of number of marriages by month
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Over one-third of all Loudunais marriages occurred in the summer, when ploughman families were more willing to spend and invest. This was also the case for the wealthy tenant farmers of the Ile-de-France, who could make better estimates for dowries at this time of year because of the progress of their crops.62 Day-workers would have been less likely to marry during the summer, as they would have been actively looking for work and may not have had a steady income since the previous harvest. The two groupings of
June-July and January-February may well reflect a divide, with wealthier families marrying in mid-summer and those less well-off in the winter, and a fair number from all groups during the bounty of the fall. A similar seasonal pattern existed in the countryside around Chinon.63
Rural marriage alliances in France were dominated by geographic endogamy.
Brides and bridegrooms were generally born in the same or nearby parishes.64 It was exceptional to have a spouse from more than ten kilometers away. Weddings were expected by their community and the church to take place in the home parishes of the bride. In Bas-Quercy, over 90 per cent of brides married in their home parish, while
62 Moriceau, Les fermiers de rile-de-France. 163. 63 Maillard, Vivre en Touraine, 15. 64 Goubert, "Historical Demography," 46; Duptquier, Histoire de la population francaise, 104. 211 almost 70 per cent of grooms were from nearby parishes. Two-thirds of the husbands
took their bride back to their own communities after the wedding. Connections were
often repeated between certain parishes, creating a family network that corresponded to
geography. Similar conclusions were derived for both peasants and big tenant farmers in
the ile-de-France.65
In Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaize, 188 of 330 grooms (57 per cent) were from
the home parish, while only nine per cent came from further than ten kilometers away.
Twenty per cent of brides did not marry at home, a somewhat surprising statistic that
includes seven per cent who moved ten kilometers or more. Of the 80 per cent who did
marry at home, those who wed a groom from outside the parish usually moved away with
them afterward. There were many recurring connections between parishes. Aulnay had a
number of links to Angliers, Martaize to Angliers and Saint-Clair, and La Chaussee to
Saint-Clair and Saint-Jean-de-Sauves. The village of Moncontour and the town of
Loudun provided a small number of grooms to all three, and surrounding communities
such as Saint-Cassien, Verrue, Ouzilly-Vignolles, and Saint-Aubin also provided
occasional spouses.
65 Ganiage, Trois villages d'ile-de-France, 59; Valmary, Families paysannes en Bas-Ouerey, 109; Alain Collomp, La Maison du Pere: Famille et village en Haute-Provence aux XVH" et XVIIP siecles (Paris, 1983) 212; Moriceau, Les fermiers de l'lle-de-France, 174. 212 Figure 14 - Origins of grooms
QHome m 1-5 kms B 6-10 kms • 10 kms+
Figure 15 - Origins of brides
• Home s 1-5 kms a 6-10 kms • 10 kms+
Martaize, with 92 per cent of brides and 66 per cent of grooms from the home parish, was the most insular as well as the largest community. The other two parishes showed a relatively high micro-mobility. In Aulnay, 30 per cent of grooms came from over fivekilometer s away, 11 per cent from over ten, including two from communities well to the north of Loudun (Rasle and Trois-Moutiers). Just 76 per cent of brides came from the home parish. In La Chaussee, only 52 per cent of grooms originated there and almost 13 per cent arrived from at least ten kilometers away. Only 67 per cent of brides were from La Chaussee, and again almost 13 per cent traveled at least ten kilometers.
The La Chaussee exception comes partly from the fact that almost 15 per cent of marriages celebrated there involved two spouses who did not live in the parish. As with baptisms, many people fromth e Derce and Guesnes area seem to have come to the church at La Chaussee. In Aulnay and Martaize combined, only three marriages (1.5 per
213 cent) did not involve at least one spouse from the parish. Compared to other parts of
Haut-Poitou, more grooms married at home and more brides traveled.66 The higher figures for micro-mobility in the Loudunais could result from a larger proportion of day- workers, artisans, and weavers more likely to move around with little or no property to hold them in one place. They also reflect the scattering of property - many families owned or rented small pieces of land in more than one parish, so that the families themselves transcended parish boundaries and moved across them regularly.
Endogamy based on economic groups was also common; in France generally, between 67 and 88 per cent of day-workers and ploughmen chose spouses from families with the same status. Significantly, despite their relatively small numbers and their integration into rural communities, artisans and weavers still married each other at least half of the time, A similar preference for marriage partners from the same group was visible in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize. Some regions had an even higher rate of endogamy. For example, the tenant farmers of the Ile-de-France preserved and furthered their wealth by concluding as many as 98 per cent of marriages within a single group.
Meanwhile, the poorer families of rural Bas-Quercy showed the same restraint, demonstrating a "caractere assezferme" which was likely attributable to a dearth of alternatives.68
To consider the question of social hierarchy and marriage alliances in the
Loudunais, a group often "centre" families from Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaize
66 Elie, "Contractor marriage," 186. 67 See Part III, 8 for more on landholding and the rural economy, as well as peasant groups. 68 Valmary, Familiespavsannes en Bas-Quercy. Ill; Lebrun, La vie conjugate. 26; Moriceau, Les fermiers de rfle-de-France. 159. 214 involved in 139 marriages was considered. These families were numerically preponderant in their respective parishes. For example, the Moreau and Briant families had thirteen marriages each in Martaiz6 (18 per cent of the parish total), the Turquois and
Renault had sixteen and twelve respectively in La Chaussee (22 per cent), and the Baudu and Sanoyau had seven and six marriages in Aulnay (24 per cent). The Giroire were important in all three communities, with twelve marriages in Martaize, nine in La
Chaussee, and two more in Aulnay. Their marriages in Aulnay were to the Baudu and
Sanoyau, and in La Chaussee included two marriages with the Turquois. But overall, these centre families showed only a modest propensity to marry amongst each other; just one in five of their marriages featured both spouses from the group. An additional one- third of marriages linked a centre family and a ploughman family that married into the centre more than once. In other words, just over half of centre family marriages were within a larger group of ploughmen who shared multiple relationships with each other.
Figure 16 - Marriage alliances of the centre families
B Centre • Shared • Other
Surprisingly, nearly half of centre family marriages (45 per cent) involved a partner from another peasant family outside this group. This suggests the centre families did not isolate themselves from other ploughmen; that indeed there was a rough social equality
691 discuss the concept of the "centre" in the introduction to Part II, p 181. 215 between them. There were some differences in this behaviour among the three parishes.
For example, there were more marriages proportionally between centre families in La
Chaussee, and more marriages with other ploughmen families in Aulnay. Of course, very few centre family marriages involved an alliance with a day-worker or artisan family.
Endogamy mattered between social groups, but there was not a rigid hierarchy within them.
There is no doubt that social hierarchy existed in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and
Martaize.70 Notables like the estate managers, millers, and merchants certainly constituted a social elite, but they originated and often lived in towns and besides were seigneur's men, remaining aloof from rural society. But although the peasants of the
Loudunais practiced endogamy within groups of ploughmen, artisans, and day-workers, this appears to have been a rural society with a more open choice of marriage partners compared with many other parts of rural France. This openness may result from a combination of relatively prosperous conditions, but limited land and other opportunities for individual advancement in the rural economy. These limits made it difficult for a group of centre families to rise too far above the rest of the ploughmen, who were all reasonably well off. It also evened the fortunes among day-workers, who produced some wheat of their own for market, and could normally count on consistent work and reasonable wages. In addition, multiple connections with surrounding parishes presented more choices for both grooms and brides - consider the women who moved several kilometers to get married. Although there were groups within each parish, there was also a wider network of social relationships that connected the region.
70 Rousseau, "Les 'coqs de village,'" 36; Melika Louet, "Le pays Loudunais et mirebelais au XVIIIieme siecle (d'apres les rdles de taiile)" (D.E.A. m^moire, University de Poitiers, 2000) 157-63. 216 Summary
The fertile plains of the Loudunais appear to have provided a reasonable livelihood. Peasants had relatively low mortality rates compared with other areas of rural
France, and the population actually grew by about sixteen per cent between 1737 and
1765, This growth may have put additional strain on the rural economy: demographic results such as fewer marriages and higher mortality in the 1760s indicate times were becoming increasingly difficult at the end of the Seven Years' War, and it is also clear that many young couples were moving away after getting married. The most critical factor influencing rural mortality was harvest results; outbreaks of disease were usually connected to years with poor yields. In many ways, the Loudunais conformed to demographic trends and practices in rural France, but it also exhibited its own seasonal rhythms. Perhaps most interestingly, as many as ten per cent of new mothers had a pre marital or extra-marital conception, while some indications suggest more widespread sexual activity out of wedlock. The selection of godparents and marriage partners and the high degree of rural micro-mobility indicate a relative social openness compared to many other regions of rural France. Families were well connected within these communities and with their neighbours. Social hierarchy certainly existed, but did not lead to dominance by a few. In general, Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize appear to have been stable and growing parishes with strong and wide social networks, but with little room for further expansion.
217 PART II, CHAPTER 5
DEMOGRAPHY OF ACADIA, 1712-1740
Burials
Studies of Acadia have emphasized the population's "forte fecondite, faible mortaliti et nuptualite relativement precoce" The overall impression is one of surviving children and long life expectancy.1 When we try to verify this picture on the ground in
Annapolis Royal, Minas and Beaubassin, we run into difficulties however because the burial registers are particularly incomplete.2 Based on the statistics from the existing records, I calculated estimates of the number of burials for the missing years in Minas and Beaubassin, and then added all of these figures together.3 This provides a total of
470 deaths or 16 each year across the colony and a burial rate of only 11/1 000 based on a population of 1 500. By the end of the period, with a population of 4 500, the mortality rate would have been under 4/1 000, an impossibly low figure, especially when compared to a rate of 39 / 1 000 in New France, and similar results for France.4 It is one thing to note, as one historian has done, that Beaubassin child mortality in the parish registers is under one per cent; quite another to accept this as accurate.5 Infant and child mortality may have been considerably lower in Acadia than elsewhere in colonial or
1 Jacques Houdaille, "Quelques aspects de la de^nographie ancienne de l'Acadie" Population 35, 3 (1980): 599; Naomi Griffiths, "The Golden Age: Acadian Life, 1713-1748" Histoire sociale - Social History 17, 33 (1984): 25. 2 The state of the burial registers in Acadia is discussed in more detail in the introduction to Part II. 3 In order to do this, I calculated the average number of deaths each year from the existing records and then used this figurefo r each of the missing ones. 4 Jacques Dup&quier, Histoire de la population francaise. Vol 2: de la Renaissance a 1789 O'aris, 1995); AndnS Lachance, Vivre. aimer, et mourir en Nouvelle-France (Montreal, 2000) 188; Cormac O'Grada and Jean Michel Chevet, "Famine and Market in Ancien Regime France" Journal of Economic History 62 (2002): 710; Francois Lebrun, Les hommes et la mort en Aniou au XVIIe et XVnT siecles (Paris, 2004). 5 Samantha Rompillon, "La migration a Beaubassin, village acadien, fruit de la mobilite et de la croissance" (m6moire de maitrise, University de Poitiers, 1998) 68. 218 metropolitan France, but children and youth still must have died in numbers greater than this.
With the wisdom of hindsight, it is easy to see why historians have accepted such a low death rate. Just as many early studies of New France underestimated its mortality rate because the parish registers there neglected people who died while traveling and were also often incomplete because of under-reporting, so too the general low mortality of Acadia has been exaggerated.6 Part of the reason for this is that the population of
Annapolis Royal remained relatively stable, while large numbers of young families migrated to other, newer parishes and buried their dead there. Another possible explanation for the low number of recorded burials is the geographic extent of the parishes. In France, families were required to call for a confessor on the second day of serious illness to ensure that the priest could get there in time.7 In the dispersed settlements of Acadia, where the church might have been several dozen kilometers away from the family concerned, many people must have expired before the priest could arrive.
But even if most Acadians could not receive the final absolution, viaticum, and last rites before death, this should not have prevented them from receiving a proper burial; in the Annapolis Royal parish registers when Francois Brossard, aged 70, and
Pierre Leblanc, 58, died in 1716 and 1717 respectively, the priest mentioned in his register that they did not receive the sacrament; in the case of Francois, because his death was sudden. But since these are the only examples of this kind in the register, it seems
6 Hubert Charbonneau, Vie et mort de nos ancetres: Etude demographique (Montreal, 1975) 135; Louise Dechene, Habitants and Merchants in Seventeenth Century Montreal trans., Liana Vardi (Montreal & Kingston, 1992) 59. 7 John McManners, Church and Society in Eighteenth Century France, Vol 2: The Religion of the People and the Politics of Religion (Oxford. 1998)34. 219 that the priests often neither administered the sacraments nor performed the burials. This may be because there were not many priests in the colony and because they were not always available to serve the Acadian population. During the eighteenth century, there
were at most five priests in all of Acadia. As we shall see below in discussing the delay
between the birth and baptism of Acadian children, resident priests might be en route to
remote parts of the region, at the moment they were called upon, or be off ministering to
the Mi'kmaq, or they might have be exiled by the British, or have simply retired and left
the colony entirely. This was nothing new; there were several periods in the seventeenth
century when the Acadians had no priests at all.9
With the habit of receiving the last sacraments broken, it seems unlikely that
families would cart corpses over long distances or keep them indefinitely just so they
could be buried by the priest far from where they lived. The lack of records may reflect
the choices that many Acadians made to bury their loved ones privately, in ground close
to home. Baptisms and marriages were public events held normally in the presence of
many witnesses and accompanied by celebrations. They recognized a union between a
man and a woman, the legitimacy of their offspring, and the creation of bonds between
families through kinship, alliance and godparenting. They also were planned events.
Burials, however, were less programmed and less social in nature. The implications of
burial at home without a priest in Acadia were potentially far-reaching. First, death and
grief would have become more private, confined within the circle of close friends and
family. Second, it was a break from the religious traditions around burial, a desacralizing
8 See Part III, 9 for more on the number of priests in Acadia. 9 Naomi Griffiths, "Mating and Marriage in Early Acadia" Renaissance and Modern Studies 35 (1992): 119. 220 of death. Third, it can be inferred from the continued expansion and migration of families, and the proportionally fewer recorded burials as the population grew, that subsequent generations of Acadians accepted and embraced this new practice.
These developments have some interesting parallels with the choices of peasants in the Loudunais in the eighteenth century. In many areas of rural France, including the
Loudunais, historians have found a certain degree of secularization in the language of testaments which lessened the significance of the last rites and spiritual invocations for the dead.10 But peasants always requested in their testaments to be buried in the sacred ground of their parish church or cemetery, though they sometimes left the choice to their family. Further, it is clear that even if someone died without receiving the sacraments, they would still be buried by the priest with the traditional ceremonies. It appears that the only people in the diocese of Poitiers, to which the Loudunais belonged, who buried their dead privately and at home were clandestine Protestants avoiding the Catholic rites.11 In
Acadia, practical obstacles to Catholic burial such as the distance of families from parish churches and cemeteries and the long absences of priests seem to have accelerated a process of secularization which was only just getting under way in the mid eighteenth- century Loudunais.
10 Jean Qu^niart, Les hommes, l'eglise et Dieu dans la France du XVIII* siecle (Paris, 1978) 281; Jacques Marcade\ "Les sensibilites religieuses au XVIH6 siecle dans le diocese de Poitiers" Bulletin de la Soci&e des antiquaires de l'Ouest 4e serie - tome XVII (1983): 193-206; Helene Mathurin, "Une approche de la pi&e testamentaire en Montmorillonais au XVHF siecle" Bulletin de la Society des antiquaires de l'Ouest 5e seYie - tome III (1989): 33-53; McManners, Church and Society. 28; Cecilia Guiberteau, "Evolutions des sensibilites religieuses et des attitudes devant la mort dans le Loudunais du XVIIieme siecle (1650-1710)" (meinoire de mainise, Universite de Poitiers, 2001) 125. 11 Marcade, "Les sensibilites religieuses dans le diocese de Poitiers," 201-206; Jacques Marcade\ "Mourir autrefois: Poitiers au XVIIP siecle" Revue Historique du Centre-Quest III, 2 (2004): 260.
221 This likelihood and the lack of information available make it impossible to make firm general statements about Acadian mortality. However, an analysis of the surviving registers of Annapolis Royal, and Minas does permit some deductions about mortality during this period.
Figure 17 - Number of burials
25 T
20
i i i i i i i i i i r i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
Not surprisingly, perhaps, we find that there was considerable variation between high points (23) and low (1) during the period. Rather than moving in a regular cycle, mortality seems to shift sporadically up and down. It is interesting to note that this phenomenon was not unique to Annapolis Royal; in the remaining records from Minas we find a similar pattern. As the Acadian population was growing steadily, a gradually increasing number of burials over the period would be expected, but this is not evident from the data. Even if there was a consistent mortality rate of 11 / 1 000, the number of deaths should have tripled by 1740. Taken at face value, this would suggest that mortality was declining and the population growing younger. Was this the case?
The answer should be found in the age structure of mortality. But when we look at the age at death recorded in the burial registers for the entire period, we find a
222 mortality distribution among age groups very similar to that of the Loudunais. Three- quarters of Acadian children may have reached adulthood, but the proportion of infant and child mortality to other deaths was similar to anywhere else in New and Old
France 12
Figure 18 - Age at death in Annapolis Royal and Minas
02 or less S3 to 20 B 21 to 40 B41 to 60 B60+
1712-1740
Further, on closer examination we can see a dramatic change in the age at death from the beginning to the end of this period. From 1712 through 1729, the proportion of deaths generally declines with increasing age. In 1730-1735, a transition was occurring, as death became more likely for all age groups. By 1740, the pattern had completely reversed, with the proportion of deaths lowest for children and increasing up to those older than sixty. This indicates that the population was aging, not growing younger.
12 Griffiths, Contexts of Acadian History. 17; Charbonneau, Vie et morfc 133; Lachance, Vivre. aimer et mourir. 41. 223 Figure 19 - Movement of age at death in Annapolis Royal and Minas
The age at death moved from one extreme to the other, ending with greater longevity.
Estimates of the entire Acadian population on the eve of the Deportation, suggest that this was a very young population, with almost three children to one adult13 But the figures for burials in Annapolis Royal indicate a much older population that by 1740 had the majority of its registered deaths among people over forty. This was no doubt partly because many young people and new families were leaving to join newer settlements, while the overall fecundity in the parish of Annapolis Royal was declining.14 This transition may also have begun in Minas and Beaubassin. Population growth in Acadia was a matter of expansion rather than intensification of settlement. There were no urban areas; groups of families created dispersed hamlets that occupied and dyked marshlands.
New households moved further out to establish farms of their own. On balance, therefore, it seems likely that, as in the Loudunais, the structures of the rural economy and local society could not support further growth. As a result, the population left in the main communities was ageing as younger people moved in search of new opportunities.
Further, since a more youthful population has been shown not to be the cause of a lower
" Stephen A. White, "The True Numbers of the Acadians" in Ronnie-Gilles Leblanc, ed., Du Grand Derangement a la Deportation: Nouvelles perspectives historiques (Moncton, 2005) 49. 14 Hynes, "Demography of Port Royal," 5. 224 mortality rate in these parishes, this adds credence to the notion that the Acadians increasingly chose to bury their dead privately at home.
We can glean a few indications of the causes of death in Acadia from these sparse documents and the data they yield. Two teenagers died suspiciously from drowning in
1714, as did a child of nine in 1726. Drowning deaths were common in Canada.1 In
Annapolis Royal, clusters of twelve deaths in March-June 1715 and October-November
1717 suggest the presence of disease. Considering the population was about 600, and its mortality rate usually low, these clusters stand out. There was higher mortality in 1713,
1715, and 1717, including a modest peak in Minas in 1713, perhaps owing to local epidemics. This was entirely consistent with living near a disease-ridden, desertion- prone, and desperate New England garrison. In 1711, Samuel Vetch wrote the Board of
Trade that the garrison of 449 had lost 116 men to death and desertion, partly due to a recent outbreak of disease. After losing seventy men at the engagement of Bloody Creek, he estimated the garrison had only 200 effectives remaining in December 1714, which suggests a further sixty or seventy soldiers had fallen ill.16 It is likely that the dispersed nature of the Acadian settlements was all that prevented more wide-ranging epidemics.17
The more the Acadians moved away fromth e British garrison, the more they reduced their risk of catching disease.18 The connection between military men and disease
15 DechSne, Habitants and Merchants. 59. 16 LAC CO 217 MG 11 NS "A" Vol 2, 14 Jun 1711 and 20 Dec 1714. This resulted in pleas for support from Boston which were largely ignored, Adam Shortt, V. K. Johnston, and Gustave Lanctot, Currency- Exchange, and Finance in Nova Scotia. 1675-1758 (Ottawa, 1933) xxi. 17 Andrew Hill Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia to 1760 (Madison, 1968) 222. Similar observations are made of the outbreaks of measles (1687) and smallpox (1703) in Canada, which would have been far worse without "the great advantage of not being overcrowded," DechSne, Habitants and Merchants. 61. 18 Barry Moody, "Making a British Nova Scotia" in John G. Reid, et al., The 'Conquest' of Acadia. 1710: Imperial. Colonial, and Aboriginal Constructions (Toronto, 2004) 130. 225 extended beyond this period of analysis, with outbreaks affecting the garrison and those
near it recorded in 1709 and 1751,19
A veritable mortality crisis in Annapolis Royal is suggested by the twenty-three
deaths in 1727; an astonishing number for a population whose recorded burials averaged
less than seven each year. The deaths included the wife of an English sergeant (and
perhaps other soldiers and their families who would not have appeared in Catholic
registers), a mother and child from a Mi'kmaq family (again with potential unseen ripples
in nearby aboriginal communities), the wife of a prominent Acadian merchant, the son of
the notary, and representatives of every age group, including ten infants. The period of
the Mi'kmaq war with the British, 1722-25, including an investment of Annapolis Royal,
did not seem to have a significant immediate impact on mortality in the community. The
Acadian population was not the target of the violence and kept well clear of the
combatants. But the 1727 crisis was almost certainly caused by disease, and the
cumulative effect of soldiers and Mi'kmaq moving through the area, and the increased
trade, movement, and negotiations after the peace, may have contributed to it. Beginning
in 1726, there were also numerous assemblies of the Acadians themselves to negotiate a
conditional oath of allegiance with Lieutenant-Governor Lawrence Armstrong. These
may have been a vehicle not only for discussion but also contagion: it is a strange
coincidence that not until the end of this terrible year did Armstrong report that all of the
principal families had sworn. Disease seems to have added to the motivation of the
7ft Acadians to be done with this oath and left alone.
19 Hynes, "Demography of Port Royal," 8. 20 Governor Armstrong to Secretary of State, 17 Nov 1727 in Akins, Public Documents of Nova Scotia. 80. Armstrong met with the assembled inhabitants in April and September 1726 for negotiations. 226 As the records for Minas in 1727 break off abruptly in June, it is difficult to see if this crisis had an impact outside Annapolis Royal. However, the two communities shared modest mortality increases in 1730 and 1733 and a common mortality pattern. Many families had members in both parishes and there was plenty of trade, since Annapolis
Royal had the only authorized market and grain warehouse in the colony. A more complete record from Beaubassin could have shed light on the impact of Mi'kmaq and
French movements and trade in that area. Demographic and economic connections
between Beaubassin and the other two Acadian communities, however, were much more
limited. In the 1730s, every indication is that the Acadians enjoyed consistently bountiful
harvests, based both on grains and livestock, and that there was relative peace throughout
the colony.21 In 1740, another increase in mortality may have been particular to
Annapolis Royal, a harbinger of greater disruption as imperial forces built up in the
colony for another confrontation.
As in Acadia, so too the French settlers of Canada also enjoyed a low mortality
rate during their early years of expansion. The abundance of the natural environment
mitigated famines, and the dispersion of the population prevented epidemics. But
mortality rose gradually, if irregularly, from 17.4/1 000 in the 1690s to 39.6 / 1 000 in
the 1750s as the population grew and aged. A smallpox epidemic, again connected to
military activity, contributed to the high mortality of the 1750s. Veritable mortality crises
occurred in 1687 and 1703 on account of disease and compounded by crop failures
caused by Iroquois raids in the years 1688-1694. In Montreal, deaths peaked at 48.5 /
1000. Food shortages caused mortality to rise again from 1729 through 1731. In rural
21 Clark, Geography of Early Nova Scotia, 170-230. 227 areas, mortality was highest during epidemics in 1703 and 1733, the cold winter of 1729-
1730, and the Seven Years' War. In general, the growth of the population in Canada and its increasingly mature structure led to rising mortality rates that soon equaled or even exceeded those of rural France.22 As we saw above, the breakdown of the age at death in the main Acadian communities suggests an older population was developing there as well, but up to 1740 at least, an increasing mortality rate is not shown by the records. It seems unlikely that the Acadians managed to avoid the trend of rising mortality completely as their population also grew and aged; the difference may again be owing to a practice of private burial that went unreported.
Baptisms
Other than a gap in the Minas record from 1713 to 1716, Annapolis Royal and
Minas have what appear to be complete baptismal registers. They indicate a total of 2
349 recorded baptisms with little variation between high (108) and low (68) points, except for an unusual trough and peak in 1729-30. In Annapolis Royal, an equal number of boys and girls were baptized (695), and both Minas and Beaubassin also had a nearly perfect gender balance. This no doubt aided future expansion and stability in the colony.
The term "Canada" refers specifically to the French settlement in the St. Lawrence valley, Jacques Henripin, La population canadienne au ddbut du XVIlP siecle: nuptualitl. f&ondite\ mortalite" infantile 0?aris, 1954) 15,49; Charbonneau, Vie et mort. 147; Dechene, Habitants and Merchants. 66; Sylvie Depatie, "L'evolution d'une society rurale: 1'ile Jesus au XVIIF siecle" (PhD. thesis, McGill University, 1988)61. 228 Figure 20 - Number of baptisms by year in Annapolis Royal and Minas
160 140 120 100 •Total 80 -Minas 60 -Annapolis Royal 40 20 0 —I"VAIAI»I—i—«—i—i—i—i—i—r—i—r i—i r i' i—i i i ** 4> 4? 4? <<* Since the Acadian population tripled during this period, it is surprising that the overall number of baptisms increased only slightly, from 830 in the period 1718 through 1727, to 880 from 1731 through 1740. In Canada, by contrast, the birth rate accelerated as the population grew, from 47.3 / 1 000 in the 1680s to over 60 / 1 000 in the 1750s.23 In Annapolis Royal and Minas, the birth rate slowed down dramatically from about 75 / 1 000 in 1720 to about 40 / 1 000 by 1740. One likely explanation is that new families were increasingly moving away from these parishes, leaving behind an aging population. In addition, the low infant and child mortality rate certainly helped power net population increase, as fewer births were needed to repair losses when three out of four survived. But the number of recorded baptisms could not have sustained the demographic growth experienced by the Acadians even with their impressively low mortality. If the population in Annapolis Royal and Minas grew from 1 150 to 3 500 people, then the number of recorded baptisms covers this exactly - but only if nobody died. Even if we use the highly conservative estimated mortality rate of 11 / 1 000, about 725 Acadians should have died during this period, including about 23 Henripin, La population canadienne. 39; Allan Greer found a birth rate of 50 /1 000 in Peasant Lord, and Merchant: Rural Society in Three Quebec Parishes. 1740-1840 (Toronto, 1985) 61; Gauvreau identified a rate of 58 / 1 000 in Ville et sa population. 38; The birth rate in the communities studied by Colin Coates averaged around 60/1 000 in the 1760s, "The Boundaries of Rural Society in Early Quebec: Batiscan and Sainte-Anne de la Perade to 1825" (Ph.D. thesis, York University, 1992) 256. 229 500 of the new children. Under-reporting by the priest may have been as high as five per cent (124) which together with Minas' gap (133) accounts for some of the difference. Immigration may also have played more of a role than previously considered.24 Regardless, the growth rate and population figures have been exaggerated, perhaps because of the potential for double-counting and simple errors with such a dispersed population.25 The population estimate for the two parishes in 1740 is at least five hundred people too high, and probably more than that. Both British and French authorities had reasons to inflate the figures in their efforts to convince their metropolitan masters to use their limited resources, whether to support a re-conquest of the colony or an expulsion of the Acadians. This inflation does not mean that population growth did not occur, but in Annapolis Royal and Minas it was slowing rapidly as the population became more established, more saturated, and older in its age distribution. This is interesting because, as we saw above, the population was growing and ageing in New France, yet the birth rate continued to increase. The major slow down of the birth rate in the main Acadian communities indicates a strong and perhaps strengthening movement of young families to newer settlements. Baptisms in Annapolis Royal showed little correlation with mortality, save for the crisis of 1727, after which baptisms hit their low point in 1729, only to rebound quickly in 1730 - a classic reaction to a spike in mortality. 24 Houdailie, "Demographie ancienne de l'Acadie," 590; White calculates 3-5 per cent under-reporting across the region in "the True Numbers of the Acadians," 31. 25 White, "the True Numbers of the Acadians," 55. 230 Figure 21 - Comparison of baptisms and burials in Annapolis Royal —X— Baptisms —•—Burials i if n. 1 m.lf ».| liMiifu jnm yn, ** ** «* ** A closer look shows that while the British-Mi'kmaq conflict of 1722-25 did not directly affect mortality, it did have a dampening effect on the birth rate, which then rose after the peace, ratified at the end of 1725. This was then immediately followed by the decline and rebound after 1727. There was an effect on births in Minas as well, with a decline after a high point in 1723 right through to 1730. Clearly, the "Golden Age" was not as blissfully consistent for these communities as the term would suggest. Beaubassin, however, at a greater distance from Annapolis Royal, appeared unaffected by the Mi'kmaq conflict. Baptisms there rose significantly between 1721 and 1723. Though the subsequent gap makes definite conclusions impossible, the partial data available-for that parish suggest a largely uninterrupted rise in the number of baptisms between 1717 (14) and 1740 (68) that was consistent with its population growth and the stimulation it received from the growth of its major trading partner, Louisbourg. The seasonal pattern in Acadia (the parish registers record both the baptismal and the birth date in almost all cases) was for most conceptions to occur in the summer and winter, but with a reasonably even distribution throughout the year. The low number of 26 An armistice was agreed to in the summer of 1725, followed by negotiations in Massachusetts that led to the ratificationo f a peace treaty in December. Mi'kmaq communities in Nova Scotia were required to sign this treaty at Annapolis Royal in 1726, Geoffrey Plank, An Unsettled Conquest (Philadelphia, 2001). 231 conceptions in May and September-October could certainly reflect the intensity of agricultural work at those times. The peaks in July and January-February correspond to times of the year when couples would have had extended time together and fewer responsibilities. Annapolis Royal's conceptions peaked in July and then fell off sharply in August, while in Minas and Beaubassin, conceptions rose through the summer to a more gradual peak in July, finally falling off in September. This indicates differences in the summer work routine, perhaps caused by the greater dependence on livestock in Minas and Beaubassin. Figure 22 - Conceptions by month in Annapolis Royal, Minas and Beaubassin Jan Feb Mar April May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec This seasonal pattern varied from that of Canada, where the most conceptions occurred in June and the fewest in October, February and especially March. In general, there was more seasonal variance in Canada, and the dramatic fall-off in March suggests many habitants there were abstaining from sexual relations during Lent. 232 Figure 23 - Comparison of conceptions by month in Acadia and Canada27 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Summer work in Canada was not, as one historian put it, "unfrein a I 'ardeur sexuelle" any more than in Acadia, but the high point for conceptions occurred earlier, in June. There were higher numbers of conceptions in January in both colonies, perhaps reflecting that couples spent more time together then and had less work to do.28 In general, the comparison with the Canadian pattern shows that most Acadian couples were not as concerned about the time of year that their babies would be born, a possible indication of relative prosperity. It might also reflect, as discussed in Part HI, that many Acadian households invested heavily in livestock while cultivating relatively small areas, and so were not as tied to the cycle of seeding and harvesting crops. Yet an examination of birth intervals reveals that Acadian couples did control their fertility with regard to how often they had children. In fact, the average time between children was as long as in the Loudunais, with the intervals between the birth of the first and second child about four months longer than in Canada. 27 Henripin, La population canadienne. 42; DechSne, Habitants and Merchants. 55. 28 Henripin, La population canadienne. 43. 233 Table 10 - Average birth intervals of first and second children' PLACE YEARS MARRIAGE - 1st CHILD 1st-2nd CHILD Canada 1650-1729 16 months 22.6 months Canada 1700-1750 18 months 23 months Quebec 1700-1759 14.5 months Montreal 1650-1715 23 months Beaubassin 1717-1723, 16 months 1732-1734 Minas 1718-1740 16.8 months 30.7 months Annapolis Royal 1712-1740 16 months 25.9 months Acadia 1712-1740 16.5 months 27.1 months Loudunais 1737-1765 16.2 months 28.1 months The interval between marriage and first child was reasonably consistent across the three Acadian parishes. Minas experienced considerably longer intervals than Annapolis Royal, especially between first and second children, despite being a younger community. Over their first ten years of marriage, over 50 per cent of families in Minas and over 44 per cent of those in Annapolis Royal had three or fewer children. Only about five per cent of families in both parishes had six or more children. This indicates that Acadian demographic growth was not fuelled by shorter intervals between births, but rather a more precocious age at first marriage and low mortality rates. As a result, more children reached adulthood and fewer couples lost a spouse during their child-bearing years. There was great variation in the rate of reproduction among families, and at least once contributing factor to this was the socio-economic group to which the couples belonged. Centre families had fewer children. In Minas, this trend was particularly marked, with the vast majority of centre families having three or fewer children over their Henripin, La population canadienne. 84; Charbonneau, Vie et mort 220; Dechene, Habitants and Merchants. 55; Gauvreau, Ville et sa population. 142. There was not enough information to calculate the interval between first and second child in Beaubassin. 234 first ten years of marriage, while exactly half of non-centre families did. This suggests that the oldest, most established and successful families of the parish, having dominated demographically through numbers and alliances from the beginning, were now consolidating their wealth and holdings, while those on the periphery continued to grow and spread out in the countryside. Many of the couples who married at the parish church did not reappear in the baptismal registers with their children, indicating that many young people were moving away. This was simply more of the same sort of expansion that had been going on since the seventeenth century, but, as in the Loudunais, it also indicates that there was not enough land and opportunities for those couples to stay where they 30 were. Many Acadian babies were baptized first by a family member or a notable. Given the relative health and favourable economic conditions of this period, it is difficult to believe that one in five babies was in danger of imminent death.31 A total of 263 ondoiements were performed in the parish of Annapolis Royal, with the doctor, Denis Petitot, accounting for 50 (19 per cent) of them. Another 32 (12 per cent) were performed by midwives or wives and widows related to the parents. Five Acadian men accounted for another 92 (36 per cent), while the remaining 89 (33 per cent) were conducted by a variety of individuals. Over two-thirds of ondoiements were not performed by the doctor or midwife assisting with the birth, indicating that the role of baptizer also reflected social relationships. For more on landholding in Acadia, see Part III, 8. 31 In 1667, the bishop of Quebec threatened parents who did not bring their babies to church for baptism with excommunication, but the custom of baptizing at home by family members also remained common in Canada, Dech&ie, Habitants and Merchants. 58. 235 In Annapolis Royal, ondoiements were widespread until 1730, accounting for 29 per cent of all baptisms, but after this it occurred only twice, in 1733 and 1736. The practice appears directly related to the availability of the priest. The large number of ondoiements in 1712 was certainly connected to the displacement of the priest after the Conquest. In 1729, after years of difficulty with Lieutenant-Governor Armstrong, Governor Phillipps confirmed Rene-Charles de Breslay as an acceptable priest for Annapolis Royal and after this date ondoiements practically disappeared.32 In Beaubassin, twenty-seven were performed in 1722-23 at a time when the priest was away fulfilling his missionary responsibilities to the Mi'kmaq. As in Annapolis Royal, ondoiements were performed by men of important social status, including Jean Sire, Michel Poirier, and the notary Jean Veco. In Minas, only a single ondoiement was performed, for Eustache Lejeune, who was born in 1714 but not formally baptized until 1717. It was not for a lack of clergy. Minas appears to have continuously had a priest in residence during the period, and perhaps as importantly, one who could not easily be displaced by the British or distracted by responsibilities to the Mi'kmaq. Rather it seems that Eustache was given this ondoiement by "Benois, a savage" because his parents lived at some distance from the rest of the parish. Lejeune's first wife was a Mi'kmaq named Jeanne Kagigconiac, and while it is difficult to speculate on such sparse information, this seems a rare example of a close ongoing family relationship between an Acadian family and a nearby Mi'kmaq community, forged during the initial settlement of Minas in the N. E. S. Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian: A North American Border People. 1604-1755 (Montreal & Kingston, 2005) 304. 236 1680s. This case aside, the Acadians showed themselves perfectly willing to give up ondoiements when a priest was available; this practice was not a permanent part of Acadian culture, but a pragmatic response to the priest's absence that ensured that the baby's soul and legitimacy were protected. An examination of the delay between birth and formal baptism provides a concrete measure of how accessible priests were to Acadian families. The vast majority of baptismal records (92.6 per cent) give both the birth and the baptism date. Figure 24 - Length of delay between birth and baptism at Annapolis Royal Q2 days or less 03 to 10 days B11to30days • 1 to 3 months • 3 to 6 months 06 to 12 months B1 year-*- In Annapolis Royal, the average delay was thirty-eight days, but the median was just one. In fact, over half of Acadian babies born at Annapolis Royal were baptized within forty- eight hours, perfectly in accord with Catholic tradition. Yet others had to wait weeks, months, or even longer. We might assume that longer delays were caused by the absence of priests. But unlike the ondoiements, these delays before baptism did not stop after 1730; the summers of 1733,1735, and 1737 were particularly marked by them. This suggests that something else was happening, particularly during busy times of year. Even centre families in Annapolis Royal showed no greater propensity for quicker baptisms. 33 Stephen A. White, Dictionnaire genealogique des families acadiennes Vol 2 (Moncton, 1999) 1049. He lists the Mi'kmaq performing the ondoiement as "Bon". Martin married his first wife in 1684, and Marie Godet in 1699. He married a third time, to Marie Arnault, a widow, in 1729. 237 Table 11 - Delay between birth and baptism among selected centre families of Annapolis Royal Family # of Births Avg Delay (days) Bourg 32 43 Landry 45 19 Leblanc 22 78 Melanson 42 46 Robichaud 40 28 In Minas, the average wait was shorter, twenty-five days, and the median was also just one day. Over three-quarters of Minas babies were baptized within one month. In addition, there were proportionally fewer really long delays (three months or more). Figure 25 - Length of delay between birth and baptism in Minas • 2 days or less S3 to 10 days B11 to 30 days • 1 to 3 months •3 to 6 months 06 to 12 months B1year+ These results seem to show that having a priest consistently in residence reduced delays, but there were again considerable disparity between families, with many baptisms taking longer than one month. This time the centre families had much shorter average delays than those of Annapolis Royal, but some, such as the Hebert and Landry, still took a long time to get their children baptized. 238 Table 12 - Delay between birth and baptism among selected centre families of Minas Family # of Births Avg Delay (days) Babin 36 1.33 Hebert 61 31 Landry 77 23 Leblanc 165 5.5 Melanson 29 4.8 In Beaubassin, the most isolated Acadian community, long delays can more explicitly be tied to the absence of priests. The average was fifty-fourday s and the mean was twenty-six. When a priest arrived, a flurry of baptismal activity over a short period of time is evident. Figure 26 - Length of delay between birth and baptism in Beaubassin Q 2 days or less S3 to 10 days • 11 to 30 days • 1 to 3 months • 3 to 6 months 06 to 12 months B1 year* Still, over three-quarters of Acadian children born at Beaubassin were baptized within three months, and none experienced a delay of over a year. It is clear that baptism was an important practice for Acadian rural society. But given the lengthy delays that could occur between birth and baptism, it is surprising that there were not more ondoiements. For some, physical proximity to the church may have been the cause of the delay. Those who lived further away may have waited longer before traveling in order to protect the baby's and the mother's health, particularly during the winter. But delays were not just the experience of more distant families; they were 239 common among the centre group as well. If it took, on average, one month or more for many centre families to formally baptize their children, this raises the question of how often Acadians went to church at all. How important were the sacraments to Acadians who, even when a priest was available, seem to simply not have bothered for a time? This certainly supports the notion that many Acadians, if they worshipped at all, did so at home, and may have buried their dead privately as well. Historians agree that it is difficult to find illegitimacy among the Acadian population between settlement and the Deportation.34 Of course, the delays between birth and baptism created opportunities to obfuscate the records. Still, there were no clear cases in the limited documentation available for Beaubassin, and only five cases of obvious pre-marital conceptions in Minas and Annapolis Royal, though several were borderline. One example seems to have led to a hasty marriage. Louis Fontaine, 23, a recent immigrant and son of a town clerk in France, was the domestic servant of the local priest, Breslay. In 1730 Fontaine married Marie Roy, 29, in the presence of many members of the bride's family. A child emerged eight months later. It was highly unusual for the bride to be six years older than the groom, particularly when that groom had a certain amount of status in the community. As in the Loudunais, it seems a marriage could quickly efface worries caused by an affair. There were four other cases of true illegitimacy in Annapolis Royal, including the daughter of Anne Marie La Bauve, the son of the Mi'kmaq Catelinoche, and two abandoned children. It is interesting that 34 Houdaille found only 4 of 85 marriages included a pre-marital conception, "Demographie ancienne de 1'Acadie," 593; Hynes sees this as evidence of the strength of the authority of the Catholic church, "Demography of Port Royal," 14; Jacques Vanderlinden adds that under die French regime, 1671-1710 there were few signs of pre or extra-marital sex, Se marier en Acadie francaise.XVI P et XVIIT siecles (Moncton, 1998) 22. 240 Catelinoche chose to seek refuge at Annapolis Royal to give birth and baptize her illegitimate child, another rare example of close relations between particular Mi'kmaq and certain Acadian families. Perhaps the unknown father was Acadian. Antoine Brault and Cecile Commeau stepped forward to be godparents for the infant Antoine. Meanwhile, in Minas, just one illegitimate child was baptized, Jean Baptiste Auriseau, in May 1734. His mother Anne left Annapolis Royal to have the child in Minas, without declaring the father's name. The most remarkable case of illegitimacy in Acadia, which no doubt carried much notoriety in the community, was that of the Corporon sisters, Isabelle and Marguerite. Isabelle had a daughter named Marie on 9 September 1713 and would not declare the father. She ended up marrying two British soldiers in succession, first William Johnson in 1714 and then John Davis in 1731. Marguerite had no less than three illegitimate children between 1709 and 1715. Two were to French soldiers, Jean Lecul and Jean Clemenseau. She did not declare the father of the third child in 1715. Later on, she also married a New Englander in 1725. Outside a couple of marriages of Acadian noblewomen to the British officer class, these were among the only marriages between Acadian women and British soldiers recorded. Unfortunately, the documentary record suggests nothing about the motivations of these rare examples. The illegitimate children of the Corporon sisters, their close relations with soldiers, and their exclusion from the Acadian community strongly suggest that these women were prostitutes, which would be consistent with the self-policing world of rural France where "the local whores were few and well known."35 35 McManners, Church and Society. 290. 241 There was certainly ample opportunity in the wide spaces of Acadia for sexual affairs, but the nature of the communities, with few public places and isolated family households probably reduced their incidence. The size of family land holdings and the barriers created by dykes and rivers would have reduced the chances for coincidental meetings a la campagne. The evidence for pre-marital sex is so slim that it also suggests a great degree of family control over young men and women, no doubt all the stronger because the age at marriage was relatively low (see below). There is even less evidence for extra-marital affairs. Similarly, in Canada, while there were children abandoned at the garrison of Montreal, and proportionally more pre-marital conceptions, true illegitimacy was less than two per cent.36 Acadian families, starting early and moving to settle new areas, simply did not produce many illegitimate children because they did not have the occasion to. Godparents were an important part of the family in Acadia and the selection of them was an important decision. Acadian parents seemed to prefer godparents from within their own families. For example, one-quarter of godfathers shared the father's surname, and another 19 per cent came from the mother's family. Notables made up just 8 per cent of godfathers and 6 per cent of godmothers. These included merchants, notaries, immigrants from France with bourgeois or official backgrounds, and old seigneuiial families such as the La Tour, the LeBorgne de Belle-Isle, and the Mius de Pobomcoup. Without a true seigneuiial and/or military elite, however (at least, not a Catholic one), Acadians had fewer notables to choose from, and the advantages of having 36 Henripin, La population canadienne. 80; Charbonneau, Vie et mort. 216-18; Dech6ne, Habitants and Merchants. 57; Greer, Peasant. Lord, and Merchant 60. These historians place the proportion of pre marital conception between six and eight per cent, and also note that eleven per cent of widows re-marrying were already pregnant. 242 a noble sponsor were less evident. Forty-four per cent of godfathers were direct relatives, twice as high a proportion as in the Loudunais, reflecting an emphasis on close relationships within families instead of wide social networks. Similarly, 46 per cent of godmothers were direct relatives of the father or mother. There were different trends in each parish. In Annapolis Royal, more godfathers were selected from direct relatives as the period went on (from 37 to 46 per cent), while in Minas the opposite occurred, with more chosen from other families (from 39 to 48 per cent). The centre families in the Acadian parishes were even more selective in their choice of godparents. In Annapolis Royal and Minas, over 60 per cent of godparents were selected from the father's or mother's families. In Beaubassin, centre families selected two-thirds of godfathers and one-half of godmothers from such direct relatives by the end of the period. This reveals the constitution of an elite, an evolving trend that intensified as these principal communities became more established. With growth slowing down and many new families moving elsewhere, the prominence of these centre families and the extent of their property was greater than ever. Centre family members were willing to serve as godparents for other families' children, but increasingly did not choose non-centre people to sponsor theirs. In part, they were taking over the role that notables used to play in providing protection and opportunity for a poorer child. Despite overall prosperity, or perhaps because of it, Acadian society had an emergent rural elite that was developing distinct demographic practices, such as having fewer children, and selecting godparents from direct relatives. This is nowhere more evident than in the formation of marriage alliances, discussed below. 37 Coates found a similar proportion of godparents who were direct relatives in "The Boundaries of Rural Society," 307. 243 Marriages The number of marriages celebrated each year varied a good deal in Annapolis Royal, Minas, and Beaubassin during this period, from a high of thirty-six to a low of five. Unlike the numbers of baptisms and burials, the total number of marriages increased, reflecting the growth of the population. In Annapolis Royal and Minas, the number of marriages increased from 192 between 1712 and 1725 to 279 between 1727 and 1740, a 45 per cent increase. In addition, the annual movement of marriages, including the peak of 1726, was similar in both communities. Figure 27 - Number of marriages by year in Annapolis Royal, Minas and Beaubassin38 •Acadia - Beaubassin -Minas -Annapolis Royal K K*W* * V* N^V" <<>W* & Like the movement of baptisms and burials, the number of marriages was affected by the turmoil in the 1720s. Marriages declined considerably in 1723-24 at the height of the Mi'kmaq-British war, and then rose to their highest point after the peace treaty, in 1726. This was similar to practice in Canada during the wars of 1690-97 and 1702-13 - a lower number of marriages during the conflict followed by a spike after the peace treaties.3 9 38 Beaubassin numbers are not included in the total value to avoid an inaccurate impression due to lack of consistency in the data series. 39 Henripin, La population eanadienne. 16. 244 Figure 282 - Comparison of marriages, baptisms and burials 100 - Marriages -Baptisms - Burials 4? ^ After the 1727 mortality crisis, marriages crashed to a low point in 1728, and then recovered by 1730. A smaller dip and recovery after heightened mortality occurred between 1715 and 1718. In the 1730s, marriage numbers appear to have been less volatile, though there were lows in 1733 and 1736 that could be related to somewhat higher mortality around those years. Marriages appeared to move with baptisms and burials as families responded to events and conditions around mem. The most popular times for a wedding in Acadia were late fall, especially November, and mid-winter (January-February). Church restrictions against marriages in Lent and Advent were observed, and the Acadians also held fewer marriages during seeding and harvest times.40 ' Hynes, "Demography of Port Royal," 14. 245 Figure 29 Number of marriages by month "••"* Acadia -•— Beaubassin -*r— Minas -•—Annapolis Royal Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec The abundance of the late fall and the relative inactivity of the coldest months seem to have provided the occasion for many marriages. The lack of summer marriages could have several explanations. First, many priests in Acadia traveled extensively in the summer to fulfill their responsibilities to Mi'kmaq communities and more isolated parts of their parishes. Second, and more importantly, the growing season in Acadia appears to have been significantly shorter than in France, with only four or five months of frost-free time. l As a result, Acadian farmers had a shorter period of time for agricultural activity between seeding and harvest. They also typically had large herds to tend in addition to their crops, and summer was no doubt also the best time to build and repair dykes. Most Acadian households may simply have had no room for weddings in June and July. This seasonal pattern almost exactly matches that of New France, except that proportionally November was even more prominent. Louise Dechene suggests that the large number of November marriages in seventeenth-century Montreal was due to the scarcity of available brides. Grooms got married as soon as possible after harvest rather than wait through a winter during which a bride's family might get a better offer. See Part 1,1. 246 Figure 30 - Comparison of monthly marriage patterns42 -•—Acadia, 1712-1740 -*— Canada, 1700-1750 -A—Montreal, 1650-1715 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec The pattern in all three locations shows the effects of Lent and Advent and the relatively low number of summer marriages. The timing of marriages could be more effectively managed by the priests and families than that of births and baptisms. Whether occupied in dyking or clearing land, or just with the regular, often hectic routine of the short summer growing and harvest season, it seems both Canadians and Acadians had too much work and too short a window to accomplish their tasks in, to allow for a large number of summer marriages. The origins of Acadian grooms and brides indicate that most couples were from the same parish, though it should be remembered that each Acadian parish constituted a wide geographic area. In general, sixty per cent of grooms and almost ninety per cent of brides hailed from their own parish. Church law prescribed marriages be performed in the parish of the bride, and this was almost always the case. 42 Henripin, La population canadienne. 45; Dechene, Habitants and Merchants. 53; Greer had similar findings for tiielowe r Richelieu, Peasant Lord, and Merchant. 50. 247 Figure 31 - Origins of grooms • Home G3 Other Acadia Figure 32 - Origins of brides • Home E3 Other Acadia B New France Beaubassin, closer to French-controlled territory, had a higher proportion of grooms from France and New France (15.5 per cent) than Annapolis Royal (10 per cent) and Minas (9.3 per cent). This differed greatly from Quebec, where almost half of grooms married in the city between 1680 and 1759 were from outside the colony, though some rural communities in Canada were more isolated.43 French immigrants continued to be a small but significant proportion of Acadian bridegrooms during this period, though they constituted somewhat less than one in five grooms on average throughout the colony's entire existence.44 These immigrant grooms hailed from all parts of France, including Nantes, La Rochelle, and Paris, but also such disparate regions and cities as Lorraine, Flanders, Anjou, Lyon, and Auvergne. In all these parishes, just four grooms came from 43 Gauvreau, Ville et sa population. 85; Louis Lavallee, La Prairie en Nouvelle-France. 1647-1760 (Montreal, 1992) 147. 44 Houdaille, "Deinographie ancienne de l'Acadie," 597. 248 lie Royale, showing that demographic links with this new French colony were not strong. This is surprising given how short Louisbourg was of suitable brides.45 Minas, with enduring links to Annapolis Royal and new ones to Pisiquid and Cobequid, had the highest proportion of grooms from other parts of Acadia (28.4 per cent) compared to Beaubassin (12.4 per cent) and Annapolis Royal (17.8 per cent).46 Links to each other were also proportionally small, with only eight to ten per cent of grooms at each community coming fromon e of the other two. Significantly, this was not unlike the pattern in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, which had wide links to neighbouring parishes but comparatively few to each other. In Acadia, however, the most important explanation for this was the apparent preference for repeated and reciprocal marriage alliances within groups of families in the same parish. A related factor is that as Acadian grooms and brides were typically younger, they may have had less opportunity to settle or travel, and were perhaps less involved in actual spouse selection than children who had usually reached the age of majority in old France. There is no doubt, however, that Acadians were looking inward for marriage partners, as consanguinity, even what little was recorded in the parish registers, was clearly on the rise after 1720.47 It is clear that an earlier marriage age was one of the most important sources of Acadian demographic growth. Canadian couples also married at a young age, with grooms averaging 26.8 years and brides 21.9 at first marriage. By contrast, the average 45 Josette Brun, Vie et mort du couple en Nouvelle-France: Quebec et Louisbourg au XVIlP siecle (Montreal & Kingston, 2006) 10. 46 Clark also discusses this, commenting that Minas had a "high rate of circulation" and "a great many visitors" making it the "precise opposite of bucolic isolation," Geography of Early Nova Scotia, 204. 47 Hynes, "Demography of Port Royal," 8; Vanderlinden notes that under the French Regime, Acadian families went to some efforts to avoid consanguinity, ensuring that second and third generations married into different families within a larger "endogamie villageoise," Se marier en Acadie. 42. 249 French groom was 28, the average bride 25 or 26. In Acadia during the period 1712- 1740, average ages were even less than this, though they varied from one settlement to another.49 Annapolis Royal, the oldest community, also had the oldest average ages of 24.9 and 20.6 with new grooms and brides clearly getting older by the 1730s. In Minas the ages were 23.7 and 19.9, again with an overall trend of increasing age throughout the period. In Beaubassin, however, the grooms were getting younger and the brides were getting older, with average ages of 23.8 and 19.2. This latter trend was also seen in Canada between 1640 and 1729, once a certain level of settlement had been established and a gender balance reached.50 Beaubassin also had the largest average age difference, though not that much larger than in Annapolis Royal - 4.6 and 4.3 years respectively. Several brides at Beaubassin were under 18, which was unusual elsewhere. In general, a low age at first marriage is a sign of the availability of both suitable spouses and land for establishing new households. The gradual increase in the age of brides and grooms at first marriage in the principal Acadian communities suggests that opportunities for settlement locally were shrinking by 1740; potential couples who were not willing to move away increasingly had to wait. The marriage registers provide a clear picture of the networks and social hierarchy in play within these Acadian parishes. These structures originated in the seventeenth century, surviving and even intensifying in the period 1712-1740.51 Each Acadian community developed its own centre, periphery, and edge. The centre was composed of 48 Henripin, La population canadienne, 91; Gauvreau found even higher averages for brides (24) and grooms (29) in eighteenth-century Quebec, Ville et sa population, 101; Josette Brun notes that brides were younger and grooms were older in Louisbourg, Quebec et Louisbourg. 12. Dupaquier, Histoire de la population francaise. 304. 49 Vanderlinden, Se marier en Acadie, 26-28. 50 Charbonneau. Vie et mort. 158-165. 51 Vanderlinden, Se marier en Acadie, 29,92-94. 250 those who had the largest families, provided deputies, notaries, and other officials for the communities, offered brides for incoming notables from France and New France, and prospered most economically as well. Within this group, Jacques Vanderlinden identified a "quatuor" of families - the Boudrot, Bourg, Dugast, and Melanson - who were the most prominent up to 1710.52 We can examine the alliances of this group, and similarly powerful groups ("triads") in Minas and Beaubassin, to see to what degree an elite identity had developed among them. In Annapolis Royal, the quatuor families continued in the eighteenth century to show preference for marriage alliances amongst themselves (34 per cent), and with centre and notable families (30 per cent).53 Including the families of the immediate periphery, about three-quarters of their marriage partners came from this core group. Figure 33 - Marriage alliances of the Annapolis Royal quatuor •Quatuor 0 Centre B Notables B Periphery BOther Many families of the centre also followed this trend. The Leblancs and Landrys had twenty marriages in the period, and only two involved a spouse from outside the core group. There is also evidence of families moving in and out of the centre. Over three- quarters of the marriages of the Robichaud family, previously on the outside, were with 521 discuss Vanderlinden's concept of the "centre" in more detail in the introduction to Part II. 53 See above on godparents for a definition of Acadian notables. 251 the core group. Success as merchants, farmers, and links with the British colonial administration led to their acceptance into the centre.54 The Tibaudeau, a family previously in the periphery, had experienced such success as millers and settlers that over half of their marriages were into centre families, including two marriages of Boudrot sons to Tibaudeau daughters in 1730 and 1731. Meanwhile, some centre families, such as the Commeau, Hebert, and Doucet, seemed to be going in the other direction, with over half of their marriage selections from outside the core group. In general, however, access into the core group was difficult, and undoubtedly was one of the reasons that certain families on the outside, or centre families that resented the dominance of the quatuor, left Port Royal in the 1680s to start new communities. Much as the original Port Royal elite had been composed of the earliest and most successful settlers, these families found themselves at the centre of the new communities. They actively sought alliances with each other and with the old quatuor and centre representatives that followed after, making Minas and Beaubassin no less hierarchical. These centre families were also numerically preponderant. In Beaubassin, 43 of 97 marriages involved at least one spouse fromth e triad of Bourgeois, Poirier, and Cormier families. Leblancs and Landrys from Minas, Melansons from Annapolis Royal, and new migrants from France were all welcomed into these families. In Minas, over one-third of 215 marriages involved at least one spouse from the Leblancs and Landrys. Adding the Heberts to complete another triad brings the proportion up to almost half. The choices of certain key families in these new communities demonstrate their commitment to each other. In Beaubassin, well over 80 per cent of marriage partners 54 Maurice Basque, Pes hommes de pouvoin histoire d'Otfao Robichaud et de sa famille. notables acadiens de Port Royal et de Neguac (N6guac. 1996). 252 were from amongst the triad, the centre (composed of the original centre and the Sire, Kessis, Arseneau, and Chiasson families) or involved notables. Figure 34 - Marriage alliances of the Beaubassin triad (Poirier, Cormier, Bourgeois) •Triad EJ Centre D Notables BOther Many of the Annapolis Royal centre families, and almost all of its periphery families were not present there at all. The Landrys and Leblancs, so numerous elsewhere, first appeared only in 1740. This underlines the distinctiveness of Beaubassin, with its own pattern of alliances and its own core group. Figure 35 - Marriage alliances of the Minas triad (Leblanc, Landry, Hebert) •Triad E3 Centre B Notables •Periphery •Other In Minas, the alliance patterns had a greater degree of overlap with those of Annapolis Royal. The triad was composed of three original centre families, and there were also many members of the quatuor families living there. While Beaubassin appears to be 253 have been a settlement formed by families breaking away from the old Port Royal elite, Minas was more of an outgrowth of that group. Its links to Pisiquid, Cobequid, and other Acadian settlements also seem to have provided more opportunities for both periphery and edge families to gain access to the core group, though the triad alliances still mostly preferred their centre and notables as partners. This was the conscious behaviour of a social elite, pursuing repeated and reciprocal marriages to strengthen its internal network.55 In the absence of a strong seigneurial elite, aided by its own millers and estate managers, the top peasant families of Acadia were able to control the best marshland and achieve a degree of social dominance unmatched elsewhere in rural France. Once they had, they then proceeded to behave demographically like other elites. A final note is that while alliances with Mi'kmaq women may have occurred occasionally in the French period, they were extremely rare from 1712 to 1740.56 There is simply no documentary basis for the claim that close demographic links were maintained between the Mi'kmaq and the principal Acadian communities.57 The few Mi'kmaq present in the registers were usually marrying each other and had traveled from the East Coast or other woodland regions. For example, Pierre Cheg8ean and Marguerite Baptiste were Mi'kmaq from Cap Sable married at Annapolis Royal in 1726, perhaps as part of the celebration around the British-Mi'kmaq peace treaty. They were married the same day as an Acadian couple from Cap Sable. None of the centre families established 55 Vanderlinden discusses at length the double, triple, and even quadruple alliances that occurred amongst these centre families during the French period, which he argues emerged from a shared communal origin, Se marier en Acadie. 75-80. 56 Griffiths, "Mating and Marriage," 119. 57 William C. Wicken agrees, noting that contact between Acadians and Mi'kmaq in the Acadian villages was more frequenti n the early years of settlement, and that the few appearances in the registers of the eighteenth century do no indicate closeness or a "pattern of contact" in these principal settlements, "Encounters with Tall Sails and Tall Tales: Mi'kmaq Society, 1500-1760" (Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, 1994) 113,346. 254 a marriage alliance with a Mi'kmaq. Where close relationships with aboriginals did exist, they were with Acadians who lived outside the principal communities, or on the edge of them. Summary The Acadian population was growing at a remarkable rate during this period, as a result of a low age at first marriage, and favourable conditions which saw three-quarters of children reach adulthood and four out of five marriages remain complete throughout their child-producing years. Yet Acadian society was not invulnerable to external factors like disease and conflict, which caused a mortality crisis in 1727, and created smaller ripples throughout the period. Further, historians have probably exaggerated Acadian population growth in this period. In Annapolis Royal, Minas, and Beaubassin, the rate of growth slowed considerably by 1740, indicating that the limits of land expansion there were being reached. Many young couples left these centers after marriage, producing children elsewhere in the colony, while the population of these parishes aged. Further, Acadians in these parishes were producing children at a rate well below biological maxima, and even somewhat slower than in Canada. This was particularly true of centre families, which indicates that efforts to control fertility and preserve property were being undertaken. The Acadian population in Annapolis Royal, Minas, and Beaubassin was more established than settlers in newer communities like Cobequid or Chipoudy, and moving fromall-ou t growth and expansion towards a more homeostatic demographic regime which might have been reached if imperial conflict and the deportation had not intervened in the 1750s. The selection of godparents and marriage partners, as well as the 255 origins of brides and grooms, indicate that Acadian society was parochial and inward- looking, maintaining the relatively closed social hierarchy with a core group of families at the centre that had characterized the region since the seventeenth century. Not surprisingly, these Acadians sought to maintain and preserve their gains in the principal communities. 256 PART II, CHAPTER 6 - COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION Growth and Homeostasis It seems evident that Acadian society was in a dynamic state of growth, while that of the Loudunais approached a static state of homeostasis. Closer inspection of the demographic results, however, suggests that these characterizations should be more nuanced, and the meaning of these notions explored. What were the demographic trends of a stable or a growing population? How different were these communities from each other as a result? Peasants in the Loudunais, like most of their counterparts across rural France, took active measures to control their fertility, such as delaying the age at first marriage, and observing extended intervals between children. Indeed, the average interval between the first and second child in the Loudunais was three months longer than the national average (28.1 months versus 25). As a result, almost two-thirds of couples had three or fewer children in their first ten years of marriage.1 Yet is seems that these measures could not maintain the population in a homeostatic steady-state in the period 1737 to 1765, as it increased by over two hundred people or about sixteen per cent. To get some notion of the change occurring, we can split up the years covered by this study into two equal periods, 1737-50 and 1751-64. When we do this, we see that the number of marriages actually declined (from 172 to 148), while the number of baptisms stayed steady (672, then 679). It was decreasing mortality, rather than marriages or births, that 1 French peasants were not unique in the early modern world in this regard. John Richards found that peasants in Europe and also in Japan successfully restricted their fertility at certain times through "the decisions made by millions of fertile couples," The Unending Frontier: An Environmental History of the Early Modern World (Berkeley. 2003) 181. 257 fuelled growth, as the number of burials, despite fluctuations, dropped from 601 to 505 in the second half of the period. Indeed, this decline in mortality accounts for most of the drop in the number of marriages. In the first period, there were fifty-seven marriages in these three parishes involving a widower and/or widow. In the second period, there were only thirty-eight. Figure 36 - Number of baptisms, burials, and marriages in Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaizg 800 700 600 500 a Baptisms 400 m Burials 300 200 H Marriages 100 0 -ii 1737-1750 1751-1764 On the one hand, more complete families (i.e. those not losing a spouse early) would have contributed to stability in these communities. On the other hand, growth, or at least this much growth, was not necessarily positive. More survivors strained the very regime that had created them - more land was needed for children, more production from that land to feed more people. More surviving children and seniors meant more dependents for working families, though of course dependents would have contributed in some way to the household economy. The taille records for the Loudunais suggest that the proportion of poorer people was increasing in the second half of the eighteenth century; a trend that was even stronger in more densely settled parts of the generalite of Tours.2 2 Melika Louet found that the proportion of day-workers on the taille rolls rose from 45 per cent in 1722 to 52 per cent in 1784, while that of ploughmen dropped from 32 to 26 per cent. She also found that the number of day-workers paying at least six It of taille dropped from one-third in 1722 to one-tenth in 1784, 258 We know that a high rate of growth did not continue, or at least that there were outlets for this growth, because in 1789 there were only about 1 300 people in these parishes.3 One possible explanation is that officials underestimated the size of the population in 1789, though it seems unlikely that this would have been by a wide margin. Another more likely explanation is migration. It was common for some young couples to leave their communities altogether in search of land and/or work; a few probably tried their luck in Loudun.4 We can estimate one type of migration out of these communities by determining how many of the local men who married there also stayed and had children that appeared in the baptismal register. In Martaize, twelve men from that parish moved elsewhere to start their family between 1737 and 1750, but at least another fifteen did so between 1751 and 1762.5 But it seems that fewer people were leaving La Chaussee and Aulnay, and there were also some new couples moving into all three parishes. It seems that there was a net migration out, but not enough to account for two hundred people. Since migration cannot fully explain the results, and it is clear that the population had not greatly expanded by 1789, the period from 1737 to 1765 must have been a relatively brief oscillation, a phase of a longer homeostatic system. This has important consequences for our understanding of homeostasis. It did not necessarily mean stability; "Le pays Loudunais et mirebelais au XVfflieme siecle (d'apres Ies rdles de taille)" (D.E.A. metnoire, University de Poitiers, 2000) 135-140; Brigitte Maillard, Les campagnes de Touraine au XVHIeme siecle: structures agraires et economie rurale (Rennes, 1998) 21. See Part HI, 8 for more on differences in wealth. 3 AD V C849 Tableau de l'filection de Loudun, 1789. 4 Most historians argue migration outside the area remained limited. Gabriel Debien, "Les defrichements en Haut Poitou sur la fin du XVM* siecle" Bulletin de la Soci&6 des antiquaires de POuest 4e s&ie - tome XVI (1981): 283-328; Brigitte Maillard, Vivre en Touraine au XVIir siecle (Rennes, 2003) 289. 5 It is likely that the number in the second period is somewhat higher. As I can only determine the number who stayed based on their children being bom in the parish register, those getting married in 1763 and 1765 could not be evaluated as the analysis does not extend past 1765. 259 in fact, the population in these parishes was not stable at all. True homeostasis would have been virtually impossible to attain without the contraceptive methods of a later age. It was not a kind of ideal for rural society. Nor was it a collective goal. Senior heads of household did not meet to decide on a demographic policy for the community. It is difficult to imagine peasants observing, over a drink at a tavern, that too many people were living longer and that this made more people poor. Rather, peasants and their families chose when to have children in response to their own particular economic circumstances and, of course, factors such as individual health and fertility were also important.6 For example, in La Chaussee, the prosperous blacksmith Pierre Courtilly and Louise Masereau chose to have their first child soon after they were married (ten months), and their second just eighteen months later. Meanwhile, the ploughman Pierre Baudu and Marguerite Caillault waited a considerable amount of time for their first child (thirty-eight months), and forty-five months for the second. A key difference in these choices between the Loudunais and Acadia was the availability of land for expansion. In Acadia, population growth did not necessarily have to strain existing agrarian structures, as new couples could establish new farms further out in the marshland. The metropolis, if such a term can be used for the scattered agglomerations that made up these Acadian parishes, was stabilizing, while dynamic growth continued in the hinterland. This should not be a surprise. As early as 1679, 6 David R. Weir, "Life under Pressure: France and England, 1670-1870" Journal of Economic History 44, 1 (1984): 44. 260 families were leaving Port Royal in search of open marshland where they could create new households.7 Low mortality, particularly among children, was important in fuelling this growth, although historians have overemphasized its role, as indeed, they have exaggerated the overall size of the Acadian population, to a greater or lesser degree, in this period. Adjusting for missing and unrecorded deaths brings the Acadian mortality rate closer to that of the Loudunais than previously assumed, certainly up to at least 15-20 /1 000. When we break this period down into two halves, as we have with the Loudunais, everything suggests that the growth in Annapolis Royal, Minas, and to a lesser extent, Beaubassin was actually slowing down. The number of baptisms rose only from 830 to 880 between the two periods. The movement of the age at death suggests an ageing population, with fewer children and more seniors. The average age at first marriage was increasing for both brides and grooms, except for grooms in Beaubassin. Average intervals between marriage and first child, and first and second child in Minas matched those of Martaize back in the Loudunais! But unlike what happened there, the key factor behind the continued growth in Acadia was the increasing number of marriages, which rose by 45 per cent from 192 to 279. Of course, more surviving children led to more marriages. In the end, was Acadian demographic growth so incredible? Was it uniquely Acadian? Or would any group of French rural-dwellers, given access to land and abundant resources, have done equally well? Many other populations in newly settled areas had temporarily higher rates of fertility because there were fewer effective 7 N. E. S. Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian: A North American Border People. 1604-1755 (Montreal & Kingston, 2005) 180. 261 restraints.8 Jean-Marc Moriceau's study of the big tenant fanners of the Ile-de-France shows that these large households during their period of expansion in the fertile lands around Paris also benefited from "une demographie conquerante", featuring average ages for first marriage at 25 for grooms and 19 for brides, a rate of endogamy surpassing 90 per cent, and far more surviving children than the average rural household. By the end of the seventeenth century, because of rising taxes and increased competition between the families for land, they deliberately slowed their demographic growth; the average age at first marriage rose to 27-28 for grooms, and 22-24 for brides, more in line with the figures for the eighteenth-century Loudunais. What would have happened if Acadian demographic expansion had not been interrupted and the marshlands had continued to fill up? Would we have seen a similar deceleration deliberately applied by forward-thinking heads of household? The results here indicate that the process was already under way in Acadia's oldest parishes. If the Acadians were deliberately shaping their demographic practices to resemble those of other parts of rural France, it is worth remembering that outside events and external factors also had an impact on peasant choices. In the Loudunais and in Acadia, peasants were vulnerable to disease and experienced veritable mortality crises. In the Loudunais, poor harvests periodically reduced peasant income, making it harder for them to pay their taxes and rents, and also to nourish themselves with a balanced diet. Distant wars could raise taxes and bring on troop billets, which had both economic and social consequences. In Acadia, although we think harvests were consistently productive, conflict was often closer to home, and military forces and political assemblies were the 8 Susan Scott and Christopher J. Duncan, Human Demography and Disease (Cambridge, 1998) 4. 262 instruments of contagion and displacement. Their more scattered population served to reduce the impact of any particular outbreak, but the reduced exposure to disease over the long-term (over one hundred years) may have contributed to a greater vulnerability later, as epidemics devastated the population when they were packed together onto ships during the Deportation.9 It also seems that some of the thousands of Acadian refugees who eventually made it to Quebec had contracted a particular tuberculosis mutation.10 During their Golden Age, the Acadians suffered fewer periods of high mortality, but it should be remembered that eventually war would destroy their colony and sickness would ravage the survivors. What the inhabitants of Acadia and the Loudunais had most in common was the demographic practices they could modify to achieve their goals. Mortality may have been largely outside their control, but nuptuality and fecundity could, to a degree, be regulated. Whether preserving a collection of small bits of land or a large marshland farm, both Loudunais and Acadian families sought to maintain their property and their way of living. Both shared a perspective and understanding of how adjusting and adapting demographic practices could help them achieve individual and family goals. Acadians were moving towards homeostasis, while the peasants of the Loudunais took steps to maintain it - both were controlling their fecundity well below biological maxima through later marriages and larger birth intervals. 9 Christopher Hodson, "Refugees: Acadians and the Social History of Empire, 1755-85" (Ph.D. thesis, Northwestern University, 2004) 92. For example, the Acadians sent to Boston suffered from a deadly smallpox epidemic. A more detailed discussion of Acadian experiences during the Deportation can be found in John Mack Faragher, A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of the French Acadians fromthei r American Homeland (New York, 2005). 10 Sherry Olson, Paul Brassard and Kevin Schwartzman, "On the move: a long view of tuberculosis in Quebec" conference paper, Disease in Global Environment History. York University, 2007. 263 Conformity Lent Peasants did not conform to particular practices unthinkingly. There were a wide variety of possible motivations, from responding to coercion (or the possibility of it), to maintaining order through tradition, to sticking with something that worked. With regard to demography, peasants had an obligation to conform to church regulations and community expectations that fit within larger regional models. The most obvious example was their observance of the Church's ban on marriage during Lent and Advent. This was easily enforced since the priests could simply not conduct marriages during these times. There were a few exceptions, however. In Annapolis Royal, two Lenten weddings were celebrated on 15 March 1715, and both involved urban French grooms and prominent local brides. Joseph-Nicolas Gautier, from Aix-en-Provence, married Marie Allain, a merger of two powerful merchant families. Nicolas La Vigne of Paris married Magdeiaine Doucet. Since in neither case was a pre-marital conception an issue, the reason why they could not wait until after Easter is unclear, nor was there any indication of a dispensation from the Bishop of Quebec. Interestingly, the only two Lenten weddings in Minas also occurred in 1715, also involving new immigrants - Francois Pichot and Jean-Baptiste David. None were recorded in Beaubassin. In the Loudunais, a single March wedding occurred in Martaize, in 1737, when a groom from Moncontour married a bride fromSt-Jean-de-Sauves . There seems to be a connection to Lenten weddings and outsiders, and something specific to the year 1715 in Acadia, among these very rare and unusual cases. 264 Unlike what was practiced in some rural French communities, including those of Canada, neither Acadians nor the peasants of the Loudunais refrained from sexual activity during Lent, as demonstrated by the numerous conceptions in March. Though not explicitly prohibited, some communities including those of Paris, Crulai, and rural Bas-Quercy, clearly abstained as part of their Lenten observance. It is tempting to argue that the strength of the Catholic Church in Canada allowed priests to demand abstinence during Lent fromthei r parishioners, while in Acadia the low number of priests would have made any degree of supervision difficult. However, in the Loudunais there was no shortage of priests. Indeed there were two resident clerics in many parishes, so this simply seems to be a question of practice, which varied within France. The wider generality of Tours also had many conceptions in March, so perhaps the Acadians were following a tradition from their largely western French origins. Similarly, the Canadian laity may have observed Lenten abstention because this was traditional in the more northern and urban areas fromwhic h many of them originated.11 Seasonal Patterns The seasonal patterns of conceptions and marriages suggest a certain amount of conformity to long-standing tradition, but also adaptation to particular conditions. 11 Leslie Choquette, Frenchmen into Peasants: Modernity and Tradition in the Peopling of French Canada (Cambridge, 1997) 134. 265 Figure 37 - Seasonal pattern of conceptions -Loudunais, 1737-1765 -Acadia, 1712-1740 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec There was a remarkable congruence in the pattern for conceptions in the Loudunais and Acadia, particularly from August through December. The main difference was the proportionally higher number of summer and winter conceptions in Acadia. Loudunais families may have been deliberately trying to avoid January conceptions that would have led to October births at the height of market time and the beginning of new tenancy leases. More significantly, the greater number of conceptions in July/August in Acadia undoubtedly reflects the fact that most couples were together, working on a single, large farm during the summer months, while in the Loudunais most day-workers and artisans were working wherever they could, at home or abroad, and even ploughmen were often working several plots, sometimes in several parishes, to bring as much as possible in for harvest. 266 Figure 38 - Seasonal pattern of marriages -Loudunais, 1737-1765 -Acadia, 1712-1740 i 1 1 1—»—i 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Of course, the month of marriage also had an influence on the timing of conceptions, and again there was an overall congruence between the two sets of parishes. January/ February and October/November were important for both. The main difference was the peak of June/July marriages in the Loudunais, followed by a sharp low in August/September. There was simply too much going on in late summer and early fall, and the results too critical for survival, in a society living closer to the margin, for there to be a high number of August/September weddings. But the end of June and early July was a brief time of respite fromwork , and also an opportunity for the wealthier to accurately forecast the year's harvest for the purposes of calculating dowries.n In Acadia summer marriages were rarer, no doubt because a shorter growing season and larger land and livestock holdings afforded little chance to celebrate in the summer, though a consistent minority of couples did marry from May through September. Illegitimacy Most peasants conformed to both religious and social conventions that excluded pre-marital and extra-marital sex. Yet in the Loudunais, as many as five per cent of new 12 Jean-Marc Moriceau, Les fermiers de Pf le-de-France. XVe - XVIIf siecle: L'ascension (Tun patronat agricole (Paris. 1994) 163; Maillard. Vivre en Touraine. 244. 267 mothers had illegitimate children and at least another five per cent had a pre-marital conception. In general, at least one in ten new mothers did not conform to the expectations laid out by church and community. This is a significant minority. Considering that records were generated only when a child was produced, the potential unseen amount of pre-marital and extra-marital sexual activity in these communities could be large indeed. The example of Marie Theuillau, the widow who had two illegitimate children in her forties with two different fathers, at least one of whom was married, suggests that extra-marital sex may have been more frequent than anticipated, particularly among older people. Certainly sexual activity past the age of sterility would not leave the tell-tale sign of an illegitimate birth. The examples of women having illegitimate children from affairs while visiting other parishes also seem clues to what may have been a more widespread practice. In the case of pre-marital sex, all could be made legitimate by a wedding, as those few rushing to the altar several months pregnant could attest. It would be unwise to suggest that pre-marital and extra-marital sex were rampant in the Loudunais. But clues in the parish registers suggest that affairs were far more frequent than previously believed, or than authorities wished to believe. It would be naive to assume that sexual activity was entirely guided by popular belief, faith, or community supervision.13 In Acadia, examples of similar behaviour were more difficult to find, beyond the no doubt notorious case of the Corporon sisters, so ostracized by their community that they ended up marrying English common soldiers. The dispersed nature of the communities, the earlier age at first marriage and the trend of remarriage among widows 13 This claim is argued by Jean Elie in "Contractor mariage a la Chapelle-Mouliere au XVIIf siecle" Bulletin de la Socia<5 des antiquaJres de l'Ouest 5e serie - tome XI (1997): 177. 268 and widowers may well have negated some of the urges that led to affairs in the Loudunais. However, that very openness created opportunities for encounters that would have gone unrecorded. It would have been much easier in Acadia to conceal an illegitimate pregnancy and birth by simply staying at home. But the clues are less clear and the conditions merely create the opportunity, not a verifiable practice. Religious Life The scarcity of priests in Acadia, the disruption to the ministry that invariably occurred during war, and indeed the complete absence of clergy for a long decade in the seventeenth century seem to have led Acadian communities to become less reliant on the church and its rituals. Ondoiements were certainly in part a response to the absence of the priest. Thirty per cent of baptisms between 1712 and 1728 in Annapolis Royal were preceded by an ondoiement. Many other baptisms, including among centre families, did not occur for weeks or months after birth, even if a priest was available. Similarly, the fact that many Acadians were simply unable to receive the last rites before death because of the distances and number of clergy involved seems to have led to a practice of burying the dead in individual and family plots without the involvement of the priest at all. In this, the Acadians were certainly not conforming to clerical expectations. A certain pragmatism seems to have pervaded most of rural society with regard to the sacraments and religious celebration, just as it did with reproduction. Communion at Easter was the expected minimum, and significantly was one of the few requirements placed on the abjured Protestants (nouveaux convertis) left in France after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes (1685). Beyond this, many families appear to have attended Mass 269 only on major feast days. Respecting these minimal criteria was certainly not "/e signe d'une vie religieuse bien developpee."15 It is doubtful that most Acadian families living far from the church would have regularly attended Mass, particularly during the busiest or coldest seasons. In the Loudunais, while one study found that those giving a last will and testament on their sickbed in the second half of the seventeenth century were very concerned with their salvation, another found that in the eighteenth century very few people bothered with a testament, and those that did made fewer and shorter intercessions to God, Christ, Mary, and the saints.16 If the Acadians left testaments, these have been lost along with any other documents drawn up by their notaries during this period. The priests for the most part tolerated less than perfect religious observance, insisting only on the minimum. In the case of the Loudunais, this was no doubt because they were loath to demand too much in a region where Protestantism was still potentially strong, while in Acadia, they were afraid that the inhabitants might abandon a Catholic religion that was one of the few remaining formal ties between the population and the King of France. In these circumstances, it seems hardly worthwhile asking how the physical impossibility for most of receiving the last rites or baptism in a timely fashion affected Acadian belief in the sacraments and the finer points of the theology of grace that so preoccupied French elites in their time. Perhaps it may be suggested that their daily conditions pushed the Acadians towards a more pragmatic view of the temporal church and the afterlife. 14 John McManners, Church and Society in Eighteenth Century France. Vol 2: The Religion of the People and the Politics of Religion (Oxford, 1998) 101; Yves Krumenacker, Les Protestants du Poitou au XVIA" siecle (1681-1789) (Paris. 1998). 15 Jean Qu^niart, Les hommes. I'gglise et Dieu dans la France du XVIIf siecle (Paris, 1978) 205. 16 QuSniart, Les hommes. realise et Dieu. 281; Aurore Honsel, "Les attitudes face a la mort et les mentalites religieuses a Loudun, 1702/1731 et 1752/82" (memoire de maitrise, University de Poitiers, 1997) 156; Cecilia Guiberteau, "Evolutions des sensibility religieuses et des attitudes devant la mort dans le Loudunais du XVIIieme siecle (1650-1710)" (mSmoire de maitrise, University de Poitiers, 2001) 184. 270 In their own ways, the peasants of Acadia and the Loudunais were non conformist, or at least minimally conformist with regard to religious observance. But in a host of other ways, they continued to follow the seasonal cycle and demographic practices of their ancestors, with few adaptations. This was no doubt partly because these rhythms made sense and supported their social and economic activities. Conformity was not blind; peasants followed traditions that made sense in their world and changed (or avoided) those that did not. Social Hierarchy Marriage alliances and the selection of godparents were two of the most important ways that families could create and develop social networks within their communities. The demographic results point to groups of ploughmen and day-workers with wide relationships in the Loudunais, and a more stratified and parochial social structure in Acadia dominated by the oldest and richest families. There was a landed elite in the Loudunais as well, but it was composed of the seigneurs and their men, including merchants and officials. These were the so-called "coqs de village" who "dominent les campagnes d'un point de vue economique." They controlled access to the market, ran the lord's mills and ovens, issued loans, bought land from impoverished peasants and developed tenancy relations with local ploughmen on the seigneur's behalf as well as their own. Studies of the taille records have indicated that this group of notables made up as much as five per cent of the overall population in the Loudunais, defined as those who paid more than 30 It. Yet together they paid only about 271 twenty per cent of the parish tax assessment. The nobles, of course, were exempt. Five per cent of the population paying twenty per cent of the taille is not a huge preponderance, quite the contrary. That ninety-five per cent of the population (all the peasants) paid eighty per cent of the taille suggests, on the whole, a rather even distribution of wealth and a relatively prosperous peasantry, though potentially still with significant differences between groups of ploughmen and day-workers. The group of notables in the Loudunais was a demographically closed body of people; not surprisingly, the richer seigneurial families only married amongst themselves (or with other nobles). Ploughmen and day-workers, however, married widely within the community and in neighbouring parishes, developing large social networks. This was especially the case among the "centre" families. It seems that within the groups of day- workers and ploughmen there was a fair degree of integration, both in marriage alliances and godparent selection. Occasionally, choices linked families across these boundaries too. While some ploughman families were certainly wealthier and more numerous than others, no sub-group of rural families emerged to dominate, probably because there was no room, no resources for them to do so. The Acadians did not pay the taille or any other tax. They did pay rents to then- seigneurs and later the British administration (who bought out the seigneurs), but there was no landed elite in control of the rural economy as there was in the Loudunais.19 British governors talked of land surveys and charters, but they had no way to control the 17 Angeline Rousseau, "Les 'coqs de village' du pays Loudunais dans la deuxieme moitie' du XVIIIieme siecle" (memoire de maitrise, Universite de Poitiers, 2002) 36, 90. For more on the seigneurial elite, see Part in, 7. 18 See Part III, 8 on the weight of taxes on day-workers and ploughmen in the Loudunais. 19 See Part III, 7 on the seigneurial system in Acadia. 272 expansion of the Acadian population onto new land and their setting up of new farms. They also sought to restrict Acadian trade to official warehouses and markets in Annapolis Royal, but New England traders circumvented this, visiting the Acadian communities directly, and many Acadians in Minas and especially Beaubassin took most of their goods north to the French at lie Royale. The dispersed nature of the Acadian communities certainly made it harder for authorities effectively to control the economy, but colonial governments lacked the resources to do so in any case.20 As a result, there was considerable room for territorial expansion, but not necessarily for everyone, everywhere. If the ultimate goal of rural families was to spread out over generations, eventually forming their own hamlets, in Acadia this was actually possible, as the numerous settlements named for the dominant resident family there testify.21 By the beginning of the eighteenth century, centre groups composed of the oldest and most numerous families had consolidated large holdings on the best land - other Acadians had to look elsewhere. From this dominant position, these families continued to reinforce themselves through selecting marriage partners fromeac h other. Only a few families on the periphery, like the Robichaud and the Thibaudeau, were able to penetrate their ranks thanks to their wealth and connections. At the same time, a few less successful families were pushed out. The centre group even chose most of their godparents fromamongs t themselves and especially direct relatives. Already present in the seventeenth century, Acadian endogamy actually intensified in the period from 1712 to 1740. The majority of Acadian families remained on the outside looking in, as they 20 See Part 1,3. 21 Alain Croix et Jean Queniart, De la Renaissace a l'aube des Lumieres: Histoire Culturelle de la France Vol 2 (Paris, 2005 (1997)) 52. 273 had since 1671. The limited immigration into the colony and the lack of a true urban centre, contributed to the seemingly closed state of this centre group. In effect, they behaved very much like the seigneurial elite of the Loudunais. The resources and conditions of the New World created the opportunity for success, but success unevenly shared and distributed. Continuity and Change Despite important continuities in outlook and practices, the demographic results also make clear that both these societies were changing in important ways, and not just in response to external stimuli like war. Parishes interacted with the larger world, but were also profoundly self-regulating, "une cellule de vie qui s'administre elle-meme, sans aucun agent du roi."22 This was particularly true of Acadia, where change occurred without much influence from officialdom at all. In the Loudunais, mortality had been easing since the great subsistence crises of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, and particularly so fromth e first half to the second half of the period from 1737 to 1765. Although this was a positive development, a growing population could put serious strain on agrarian structures that were not designed to accommodate more people. Land was expensive; purchasing or leasing it, as well as bearing the costs of cultivation (seed, equipment, labour) required a major investment of capital beyond the means of most peasants. It was also difficult to increase production on existing holdings, at least with contemporary methods and technology. Peasants could not greatly change the limitations of their system, and they Croix et Qu&iiart, Histoire Culturelle. 56. 274 also could do little to increase the effectiveness of demographic practices they already followed to reduce fecundity. Some people waited even longer to get married, others further lengthened the intervals between children, and a few new couples left entirely, though it is unclear how far they would have to go in order to find available land or work. In general, the demographic results indicate that the peasants of the Loudunais were trying to achieve homeostasis, but falling short of it, at least in the short term, and that this increased die vulnerability of those living closest to the margin. Perhaps the most important continuity in the Loudunais was the network of connections among families both within the parish and with the wider region. Marriage alliances continued to be made among a wide variety of families, no doubt for individual reasons and benefits. Grooms, and, to a lesser extent, brides sought in nearby parishes spouses whose resources and status would match well with their own. These networks would help these families make the most of their property and opportunities. Their celebrations, of baptisms and marriages, as well as religious feast-days, would continue to provide an important rhythm to rural life. In short, the peasants of the Loudunais strove for continuities, even as they actively sought to survive and prosper in a changing world. The rapid expansion of the original Acadian families in the seventeenth century was not like anything that we saw in the Loudunais, of course, but this demographic success was not a radical break from French rural practice, and not indicative of some sort of New World egalitarianism. It was also temporary. Our examination of the period from 1712 to 1740 has shown that, after reaching a certain size and sophistication, the Acadian parishes of Annapolis Royal, Minas, and Beaubassin demonstrated remarkable continuity with the rural society of the Loudunais. This may have been partly a 275 continuity of memory and tradition among the families whose origins lay in western France, but it was also clearly a result of these communities reaching the limits of demographic and territorial expansion. Population growth had to be reduced, and the Acadians deliberately slowed their birth rate, seen in the rising age at first marriage and the increasing intervals between children. Many new couples took their fertility elsewhere, marrying in their home parishes but then migrating to new, burgeoning settlements on the periphery. Meanwhile the population remaining in the main communities grew older, which we can see by the statistics on the age at death. At the beginning of this period, by far the most deaths were among infants and children in Annapolis Royal. By the end, seniors were the highest proportion. This transformation into a more steady-state community was led by the families of the centre group, who began to have fewer children than other Acadians, increasingly selected direct relatives as godparents, and tended to choose marriage partners from among their own kind. In this they behaved demographically like a social elite looking to reinforce and maintain their predominant position. In general, Acadian society in these original parishes was settling down, becoming less dynamic, even as growth continued unabated on the periphery. This would affect French, British and Mi'kmaq plans for Acadia. After the Treaty of Utrecht, it had been thought that most of the Acadian population would simply move to French-controlled territory. By 1740, this was no longer feasible, as Acadia had become a settled colony with deep roots, the weight of generations of labour and life inscribed on the land, complete with its own social structures and hierarchy. 276 Conclusion In an article on rural society in the Haute-Maine, A. Fillon refers to the period 1750-1780 as trente arts d'ArcadieP The idea of a "Golden Age" is powerful, suggesting some sort of ideal society nearing its apogee. In that example, many peasants had achieved a modest degree of comfort and began to emulate elites in certain material ways, acquiring dining utensils, clothing, toys and furniture for babies. 4 Better-off Acadians did this too, purchasing such luxuries as glass for windows, porcelain dishes and metal cutlery, and building their own mills and ovens.25 In the absence of a strong seigneurial, merchant or official elite, a centre group of families emerged, taking a predominant position in Acadian society through its control of the best marshland and, as we saw here, a clear demographic strategy. In the seventeenth century, they created large families and wide social networks with other prominent Acadians to expand their farms and their influence. Between 1712 and 1740, however, they gradually changed their focus to maintaining their position, through controlling their fertility and intensifying endogamy and also godparent links within the group. They were doing well, and they sought to keep it that way. In this, the Acadians were again like the big tenant farmers of the Ile-de-France, who moved from a phase of great growth and expansion in the seventeenth century to one of consolidation of their gains at the beginning of the eighteenth century. But, also like their French counterparts, the Golden Age was not something shared in equally by all the inhabitants. 23 A. Fillon, "La Culture villageoise dans le Haut-Maine (1750-1780)" in La culture paysanne (1750-1830) Colloque du Centre d'Histoire culturelle et religieuses Universite Rennes 2, Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l'Ouest 100,4 (1993): 609. 54 Fillon, "La Culture villageoise," 619. 25 See Part III, 8 for more on Acadian material culture. 277 Of course, there was no collective demographic policy. The trends and changing results discussed in these chapters reflect thousands of choices by individual peasants and families trying to make the best of their particular circumstances. But in general, the centre group was leading a larger transformation, which saw Acadian demographic practices converge with those of the Loudunais. This change may have had its origins in the period between 1690 and 1710, during which the rate of Acadian population growth slowed down considerably in response to difficult environmental and political conditions.26 But even with the return of peace, as families became established on particular parcels of land, through generations of living and working, and as opportunities for further expansion moved further away, the population in the principal communities shifted from a focus on growth to a preoccupation with consolidation and ultimately preservation of the existing state of things. The fertility rate, increasing age at first marriage, and age distribution of the population all indicate this trend. Of course, growth continued on the periphery, and in new communities around the Bay of Fundy, but the impetus from the centre was slowing down. In time, it is likely that this transformation would have affected the entire population. We tend to think of Acadia as a place of boundless opportunities, but the demographic results demonstrate that peasants believed change had become necessary. These chapters also contain some potentially surprising results on the demographic practices of the Loudunais. The inhabitants appeared to have relatively open and wide social networks. Although ploughmen and day-workers remained largely separate, marriage alliances and godparent selections inside these groups do not reflect a See Part I, land 2. 278 rigid hierarchy and ranged across many surrounding parishes. Certainly no sub-group of peasants dominated to the degree that the centre families did in Acadia. Further, although the available statistics indicate that the population was growing very slowly in the eighteenth century (2.5 /1 000 each year), between 1737 and 1765 we saw an average annual growth rate of 6 / 1 000 or a total increase of sixteen per cent. Perhaps this was a short-term phase in a larger cycle of homeostasis, but the declining number of marriages, the large intervals between births, and the number of young couples moving away demonstrates that peasants were taking active measures to try and control this growth. Of course, this was a trend composed of individuals determining the right time to create and increase their families, and suggests that there were real limits on expansion. Like the Acadians, peasants in the Loudunais were seeking ways to control their fertility. Finally, a significant number of peasants in the Loudunais engaged in pre-marital and extra marital sex, far more than in Acadia, where we might have thought that wider spaces and less religious supervision would lead to such activities. Demographic trends can be very tidy, encompassing in charts and figures a collection of individual and family decisions, made from a variety of motivations. While continuity is certainly visible in many aspects of their demographic practices, each of these communities was also changing, was always changing. Mortality rates, shaped by a number of external factors, fundamentally affected demography - reduced mortality rates fuelled both the gradual increase in the Loudunais population and the dynamic growth of Acadia - but these results could not be planned or negotiated. Rather it was through controlling the age at which they got married and the frequency with which they had children that rural families sought to achieve their goals. Perhaps the greatest similarity 279 visible in these parishes was their resilience, adapting their practices to changing conditions while sticking with seasonal patterns that worked. These chapters show that demographically, through their vulnerability and their resilience, through their customs and their adaptations, the rural families of Acadia and the Loudunais shared a way of living, a set of expectations and goals, and a pragmatic outlook to achieving them. The results of Part II show some of the consequences of the natural environment and frontier conditions discussed in Part I, such as the impact of external factors on mortality rates, but also emphasize the choices peasants made in response to changing conditions. They also reveal the contours of social hierarchy among peasant groups and the cycle of the rural economy, which affected these groups differently. What were the practical limits on farming and trade that underlay attempts by peasants to control their fertility in both Acadia and the Loudunais? What economic and political structures defined these rural societies, and to what degree could peasants change their circumstances? How extensive were the differences in wealth, status, and opportunity between peasant groups? Part III takes up these questions. 280 PART III, CHAPTER 7 - THE SEIGNEURIAL SYSTEM Introduction "No land without a lord." The seigneurial system provided the main framework for landholding in most of France. Seigneurial tenure was extended to New France as well, intended not only to be the organizing principle for landholding in the new colony, but also as the vehicle for expanding its settlement. The royal government applied the same concept to Acadia. In 1606, only two years after he commissioned Pierre Du Gua, Sieur de Monts as viceroy and captain-general for the region, King Henry IV confirmed de Monts' grant of a seigneurie to Jean de Poutrincourt, the man who was to become the first seigneur of Port Royal. This was the first of many such grants, and their purpose, always stated in the documents, was to provide a means to settle and develop the awarded land. Thus in the 1640s, Charles Menou Aulnay de Charnisay, seigneur of Port Royal, recruited about forty fanning families from his family's lands in the Loudunais and Touraine, and hired several tradesmen as indentured servants (engages) to assist with construction and farming. His achievement was in many ways exceptional - in 1647 he was named seigneur and governor of the whole colony.1 However, it was not to last. Aulnay died in 1650, and while rival claimants fought for his rightsan d offices, the English took advantage of the situation and captured the colony. 1 Aulnay's letters patents, 1647 in Collection de manuscrits. 121; Leslie Choquette, Frenchmen into Peasants: Modernity and Tradition in the Peopling of French Canada (Cambridge, 1997) 263. 281 Historians have tended to diminish and even ignore the seigneurial system as an institution in Acadia after Aulnay's death and the English takeover of 1654. After that, Acadia remained under English control until 1670, and was captured again in 1690 and in 1710; finally, the Treaty of Utrecht ceded Acadia to Great Britain in 1713. This turmoil and successive English administrations could have ended the seigneurial system in Acadia, but instead, it survived under British control until 1755, when the Acadians were deported. This chapter focuses on the significance of the seigneurial system in rural society in the Loudunais and in Acadia after 1650. In general, the forms and dues of the seigneurie remained comparable and justice was administered in similar ways in the two regions, but the geography of the seigneuries and the background of the seigneurs were quite different. As a result, the political importance of the seigneurs was stronger in Acadia, but they had greater economic importance in the Loudunais. Who were the seigneurs? There were a lot of seigneurs in the Loudunais. It has been possible to identify at least fourteen different seigneuries of varying size and value in the land surrounding the three villages of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize alone. Clearly, seigneurial boundaries did not correspond to those of parishes, and the larger seigneuries included land in many other communities besides these. The lords in the Loudunais ranged from 2 For example, John Reid wrote that after 1654 "the seigneurial system became an annoyance rather than a social institution" in Acadia. Maine, and New Scotland: Marginal Colonies in the Seventeenth Century (Toronto, 1981) 141; N. E. S. Griffiths similarly argued that the English shut down the seigneurial system in The Contexts of Acadian History. 1686-1784 (Montreal, 1992) 20. 3 See Part 1,2 for more details on political developments in Acadia. 282 powerful men with national prominence, such as the Due de Richelieu, a close friend of Louis XV, to local nobles of very modest fortune and influence. Table 13 - List of seigneurs in and around Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaize, about 1750 Seigneurie Seigneur Size4 Remarks Saint-Cassien Louis Francois Large marshal of France (barony) Armand de Plessis, due de Richelieu Doismon Michel de Dreux, Large chevalier, governor of Loudun, marquis de Brez6 mareehal de camp, grand maitre des Ceremonies de France Moncontour Gabriel Louis de Large governor of Lyon, also Baron (barony) NeufVille, marquis de Cursay in Loudunais de Villeroy Angliers Charles Francois Medium chevalier, Parlement de Paris Henry de Reval Aulnay Louis Marie Medium chevalier Modeste de Lomeron Bourg Claude Francois des Small conseiller du Roy, Chinon Breuilles Chateau-Gannes Jean Ferrand Small conseilier du Roy, controleur au grenier a sel de Loudun Epinay Florimont Nicole de Small widow of Seigneur de St Clair la Grange La Bonnetiere Louis Marreau Small chevalier La Roussellerie Daniel Richelot Small ecuyer La Chaussee Rene de Mauvat Small ecuyer (sub-fief of Doismon) Mouslandrault Abbey of Pin Small abbey is in Poitiers Prieure de La Abbey of St Jouin Small abbey holds other property Chaussee further west Prieure de Renove Abbey of Small abbey holds many territories all Fontevrault over Loudunais Sautonne Andre Lyon Eynaud Small conseiller du Roy, president et grand commissaire, Cour de Monnayes de Paris 4 The terms "large" "medium" and "small" refer to geographic size and not population or revenue. No specific measurement standards have been applied, the terms are simply used to compare seigneuries in their own region - that is, among the seigneuries of the Loudunais or among those of Acadia but not to each other. The Acadian seigneuries were generally significantly larger than their French counterparts. The largest, such as Beaubassin or Port Royal and Minas, were equivalent in size to the entire Loudunais. 283 The great lords and abbeys held many other territories outside the region, and rarely visited those in the Loudunais. They relied on a range of appointed representatives including estate managers, judges and lawyers, receivers and clerks to run their seigneuries. Some of the smaller lords were office-holders in other places and also relied on appointed representatives. In fact, only four of the seigneurs listed above (Lomeron, Marreau, Richelot, and Mauvat) appear to have regularly been in residence. In Acadia, seigneurial rights and political office continued to be intertwined after Aulnay's death in 1650. His rival Charles Saint-Etienne de la Tour was named governor by the King, and married Aulnay's widow to solidify his position. La Tour enlisted his friend Philippe Mius d'Entremont, a military officer from Normandy, to help, awarding him the seigneurie and barony of Pobomcoup. But Aulnay's chief creditor, Emmanuel Le Borgne, a merchant from La Rochelle, after having already seized some of Aulnay's lands in France, arrived at Port Royal in 1651 claiming Aulnay's seigneurial rights in Acadia as well. Before long, La Tour and Le Borgne were fighting each other, leaving the colony defenceless against an expedition by Robert Sedgwick, a New Englander, who captured Port Royal in 1654. Acadia did not return to French rule until 1670, and neither of the two rivals saw it again, though Le Borgne was named titular governor between 1657 and 1667. La Tour died in 1666, leaving several children with claims to both his and Aulnay's inheritance. In 1670, the King appointed a new royal governor to reclaim Acadia, Hector d'Andigne de Grandfontaine, a military officer, but Le Borgne's second 284 son, Alexandre, arrived with Grandfontaine to resume the family's seigneurial rights and solidified his claim by marrying one of La Tour's daughters.3 Meanwhile, both Acadians and Canadian settlers fromth e St Lawrence valley were settling on the isthmus of Chignecto. In 1676, the Governor of New France gave the seigneurie of Beaubassin to Michel Le Neuf de la Valliere, a native of Trois- Rivieres. La Valliere quickly became commandant of Acadia in 1678 and governor in 1683. His disputes with the Compagnie de la peche sedentaire de l'Acadie, which claimed a monopoly on trading and fishing in the colony, led to his removal from office the following year, and he returned to Canada in 1687 to pursue a successful military career. A fourth small seigneurie at Cobequid was awarded to Mathieu Martin in 1689 because he was the first child born in the colony. He held it until his death, without heirs, in 1724. Around 1690, then, when Port Royal was again captured by the English, the seigneurs of Acadia were as follows: Table 14 - List of seigneurs in Acadia, about 1690 Seigneurie Seigneur Size7 Remarks Port Royal and Alexandre Le Large merchant family from La Minas Borgne de Belle-Isle Rochelle Beaubassin Michel Le Neuf de Large son of prominent Canadian la Valliere seigneur and official Pobomcoup Philippe Mius Medium ecuyer, military officer (barony) d'Entremont Cobequid Mathieu Martin Small weaver, fur-trader 5 J. F. Bosher, "The Lyon and Bordeaux Connections of Emmanuel Le Borgne" Aeadiensis 23, 1 (1994): 137. 6 Concession of seigneurie of Beaubassin to La Valliere, 24 Oct 1676 in Memoires des commissaires. 575. 7 See note 3. 285 All four were resident in their seigneuries and made some effort to develop them (as mentioned, La Valliere returned to Canada in 1687). Both Le Borgne and La Valliere appointed agents such as Pierre Melanson and Michel Hache to collect dues, assign concessions, and maintain order in their large territories. But their social and economic ambitions lay mainly outside the seigneurie and its lifestyle. Only d'Entremont was actually a noble. La Tour came from a merchant background and he, like all the others, were men whose fortunes and status were completely tied up with their colonial business ventures. In any event, the role of the seigneurs in the colony became increasingly unclear, as the colonial political structures broke down. After 1690, neither England nor France effectively governed Acadia. After capturing Port Royal, Sir William Phips set up a council of Acadians (which included Le Borgne) and then departed for Quebec, never to return.8 This council was the only official body at Port Royal until a new French governor arrived in 1699. Nor were the seigneurs a source of stability or leadership in the colony. Alexandre Le Borgne had been a member of the council, but died in 1693. His seigneurie of Port Royal and Minas was divided into seven pieces among La Tour's heirs and Le Borgne's only son, another Alexandre, in 1696. La Valliere was serving in Canada during this period. In 1705, he returned to France and received royal recognition of his rights as seigneur of Beaubassin and the new settlement of Chipoudy, but died on the return trip to Acadia. Both of his sons served the military in New France, but neither returned to take up the seigneurie. 8 For more on Phips and the capture of Port Royal see Emerson W. Baker and John G. Reid, The New England Knight: Sir William Phips. 1651-1695 (Toronto, 1998). 286 With the deaths of Le Borgne and La Valliere, the situation became even more confused in the two largest and most important seigneuries. La Valliere's son was recognized as his father's heir, but never returned to Beaubassin, while the seigneurie of Port Royal and Minas was now split among many lords with little influence and wealth. When Port Royal fell to the British in 1710, there was no seigneur present at the negotiations, as there had been in 1654 and 1690. Yet although the remaining lords appear to have had little influence, seigneurial dues continued to be collected, for the new British masters quickly claimed these dues for themselves. In 1724, the seigneurie of Cobequid reverted to the Crown after the death of Martin. In 1733, the British paid Agathe de la Tour, who had successively married two English officers, £ 2 000 for the seigneurial rights of all Acadia. Though it was unlikely that she actually possessed all these rights, the government simply ignored any other claims except for Pobomcoup, which was left in the hands of the d'Entremont family, and Beaubassin which simply disappeared, since there was no seigneur, but also no effective British administration there. To manage the estates, the British appointed prominent Acadians as receivers. Thus, by 1735, there were only two seigneurs in Acadia - the D'Entremont family and the King of Great Britain. This discussion of the seigneurs in Acadia may give the impression that there was no continuity to the institutioa But all four lords - Le Borgne, La Valliere, d'Entremont, and Martin - pursued their rights for extended periods of time, from twenty-three to fifty years. When they were absent or after they died, their heirs and agents continued to administer the system, and the notaries continued to register new concessions to the 287 inhabitants.9 For the Acadians who lived there, signing for land and paying dues, the seigneurial system was a real, if light burden, and certainly necessary to keep landholding in order. The division of the seigneurie or the absence of the lord certainly did not change the obligations peasants met when they acquired, sold, or exchanged land, any more than it would have in the Loudunais. Even the change in colonial rule did not disrupt the system, since the British not only maintained it but in large part took it over. Two main differences emerge from this consideration of the seigneurs and seigneuries of Acadia and the Loudunais. In the Loudunais, the seigneurs were nobles or clerics, whereas in Acadia the majority were colony men of bourgeois or humbler backgrounds who made (and lost) their fortunes through trading. The geography of the seigneuries was also very different. In the Loudunais, many seigneuries shared a relatively small area, while in Acadia, only a handful of seigneuries covered a much larger, undeveloped area. Seigneurial Rights and Dues The seigneur's relationship with his censitaires was feudal. In return for a concession of land, a peasant swore fealty to the seigneur. This involved a simple expression of allegiance invoking God as witness performed at the lord's manor. Fealty or a "feudal declaration" was not required regularly, only upon acquiring the concession through purchase or inheritance, or when a new seigneur took over. Censitaires were not serfs. They could sell or exchange their land and move at any time. They did not 9 LAC Notaires d'Acadie (Etude Loppinot) 1687-1710. Unfortunately, few documents survived a fire, but those that did indicate that seigneurial rightswer e consistently recorded. 10 Pierre Le Proust. Commentaires sur les coustumes du pavs de Loudunois (Saumur. 1612) 186,217. 288 need the seigneur's permission to marry, and the seigneur did not interfere in their inheritance, so long as the successors observed the act of fealty and the required dues. Peasants agreed to pay the cens et rentes annually, the lods et ventes if they should sell or exchange their land with someone else, and a variety of other dues. Most such dues were derisory, collectively perhaps two to five per cent of a peasant's gross income. The lods et ventes was more significant, equivalent to one-twelfth (8.3 per cent) of the value of the land sold or exchanged.11 The symbolic significance of the cens et rentes was more important than its economic value. Even the payment of a single denier of cens was an acknowledgement of seigneurial rights. Often these dues were in kind: a capon, eggs, or a cake made from the best wheat and garnished with butter. They were symbols of luxury and subservience, delivered on important feast days to the lord's manor. Since the date was usually the same for most censitaires, the delivery of these items became a sort of village procession, reinforcing common social relations among peasants, and emphasizing a hierarchy headed by the seigneur, followed by the men under him - his receivers - and then the senior heads of household. The seigneur had other important symbolic rights, which worked to the same purpose, including sitting in the front pew in the parish church, receiving communion first, and being named in prayers of intercession. This was the society of orders, a deferential community in its ideal forms, built on the relationships of 11 Donald Sutherland estimates the rate at fivepe r cent of gross income for peasants in Brittany in The Chouans: The Social Origins of Popular Counter-Revolution in Upper Brittany. 1770-1796 (Oxford, 1982); Gerard Beaur argues that on average about two per cent of rural land was sold or exchanged in a given year in Histoire Agraire de la France au XVIHe siecle: Inerties et changements dans les campagnes francaises entre 1715 et 1815 (Paris, 2000) 36. Also see Part III, 8 for tiieweigh t of seigneurial dues on peasants. 289 lords and vassals. These dues and rights were common to both the Loudunais and Acadia, as well as New France.13 The seigneur enjoyed certain economic rights as well, which were connected to his broad responsibilities in the seigneurie. He had to ensure local roads and bridges were maintained, and could exact days of work (corvee) from his censitaires, though this was often turned into a simple payment in cash or kind. He also provided mills and ovens for flour and bread, charging a percentage of the grain processed (banalite - usually one-fourteenth). The seigneur normally leased out his mills and ovens to dependable local ploughmen (laboureurs) at fixed terms and rates, but he was responsible for supervising his miller and could punish him with detention or seizure of his livestock should he abuse his appointment. Many of the seigneurs in New France appear to have been lax in setting up mills for their censitaires. As a result, a 1686 arret of the Conseil du Roi at Quebec directed that anyone could build a mill and earn the rights of banalite. In the seigneurie of La Prairie, the seigneur's biggest difficulty was finding a trustworthy On the society of orders and seigneuries in western France see T. J. A. Le Goff, Vannes and its Region: A Study of Town and Country in Eighteenth-century France (Oxford, 1981); Annie Antoine, Fiefs et Villages du Bas-Maine au XVIII" sfecle (Mayenne, 1994); James B. Collins, Classes. Estates, and Order in Early Modern Brittany (Cambridge, 1994); Jean Gallet, Seigneurs et pavsans en France. 1600-1793 (Rennes, 1999). 13 On seigneurial rights in New France see Fernand Ouellet, "Officiers de milice et structure sociale au Quebec (1660-1815)" Histoire sociale-Social History XII. 23 (1979): 37-65; Allan Greer, Peasant. Lord, and Merchant: Rural Society in Three Quebec Parishes. 1740-1840 (Toronto, 1985) 123; Sylvie Depatie, "L'evolution d'une soci&6 rurale: l'ile Jesus au XVIIf siecle" (Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, 1988) 34. In Acadia, the typical seigneurial rent for a concession in Le Borgne's Minas seigneurie appears to be 1 denier, 1 capon, and 1 boisseau of fine wheat worth together about 40 s or 2 lc. The surviving documents of the notary Loppinot provide examples of seigneurial concessions in Port Royal and Beaubassin along similar lines: LAC Notaires d'Acadie (Etude Loppinot), concession to doctor Denis Petitot at Belleisle in 1693, and land sales mentioning seigneurial rents at Beaubassin and Minas in 1700 and 1701. See also Regis Brun, Les Acadiens avant 1755. Essai (Moncton, 2003) 22; Jacques Vanderlinden, Le lieutenant civil et criminel: Mathieu de Goutin en Acadie franeaise (1688-1710) (Moncton, 2004) 97. 290 and knowledgeable miller to operate the mill that had been constructed. In Acadia, families like the Tibaudeau who became millers gained great wealth from their operation. Perhaps they made some sort of payment to the seigneur for the opportunity. There are also several indications that the Acadians used individual bake ovens. A 1649 concession by Charles Aulnay included the right to use an individual oven for twelve years, and archaeological studies have found these ovens attached to several homes throughout the colony.15 It is not clear whether use of these became widespread before or after 1713.16 In the Loudunais, hunting and fishing were rights reserved to lords in the few woods and streams of the area. In Acadia, and in New France generally, most concessions permitted habitants to hunt on Sundays and throughout the summer; no doubt hunting was practiced more extensively until such time as enough land was cleared for adequate cultivation. Fishing for individual use was treated in a similar matter; certainly the seigneurs lacked the coercive power to prevent the Acadians from fishing on or around their lands. But the commercial fishing rights were a different matter and particularly important in Acadia, for both coastal and offshore fisheries. Here seigneurs were often in dispute with the various French trading companies. La Valliere, for example, enjoyed exclusive fishing rights in his seigneurie, and chose to exercise them by selling permits to New England ship captains, a practice loudly denounced by the 14 Between 1689 and 1756 there were sixteen different millers for the windmill, and a number of recorded complaints by habitants about the inconsistent service, Louis Lavallee, La Prairie en Nouvelle-France. 1647-1760 (Montreal. 1992)88-90. 15 Edith Tapie, "Les structures socio-£conomiques de Grand Pr& communautd acadienne" (M. A. thesis, University de Moncton, 2000) 43; Brun, Essai. 22; Marc Lavoie, "The Archaelogical Reconnaissance of the Beaubassin region in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, 1986" Reports in Archaeology 7 (1990); Andrde Crepeau and Brenda Dunn, "L'&ablissement Melanson: un site agricole acadien (vers 1664-1755)" Pares Environnement Canada. Bulletin de Recherches, 1986; Marc Lavoie, "Belleisle Nova Scotia, 1680-1755: Acadian Material Life and Economy" (M.A. thesis, McMaster University, 1987). 16 In the more dispersed areas of Bas-Maine, Antoine also found that ovens were owned individually or collectively by the inhabitants; only in larger and more densely settled areas were they controlled by the seigneurs, Fiefs et villages du Bas-Maine. 231. 291 Compagnie de la peche s&ientaire who claimed their own monopoly on the fish of the colony.17 Though not specifically a seigneurial privilege, lords in Acadia were also awarded trading rights on their lands - indeed this was often what attracted potential candidates in the first place. All of the early seigneurs relied on the fur trade as their primary income. In 1647, Aulnay was awarded complete control of the fur trade in Acadia, though it is unclear whether this was in his capacity as seigneur or as governor. The colony's English lords between 1654 and 1670 similarly noted that the only income from the colony was furs and skins.18 The fur trade brought diminishing returns after 1670 in peninsular Acadia - most of the large fur-bearing animals were quickly hunted down - though it continued in the largely unsettled mainland through Beaubassin right up to the end of the 1740s. The loss of fur trade profits greatly reduced the revenue of the later seigneurs, including the British Council.19 Some seigneurs interpreted their concessions as also giving them the authority to negotiate trading privileges. For example, Le Borgne sold permits to New England merchants for the rightt o trade on his lands.20 This was flagrantly in excess of their power and had no equivalent in the Loudunais - but it appears to have been more of an opportunistic cash grab at the expense of gullible New Englanders than an attempt to actually control Acadian commerce. In the Loudunais, few seigneuries had significant wildlife or fish populations, but rights to woods could be very lucrative. There were few trees in the region and so 17 Concession of seigneurie of Beaubassin to La Valliere, 24 Oct 1676 in M6moires des commissaires. 575; See Part L 1 for more on commercial fishing disputes and the seigneurs. 18 Thomas Temple to Council, 24 Nov 1668 in M&noires des commissaires. 298. 19 Philipps to Lords of Trade, 24 Jan 1731 in Adam Shortt, V. K. Johnston, and Gustave Lanctot, Currency. Exchange, and Finance in Nova Scotia. 1675-1758 (Ottawa, 1933) 181. 20 For more on the for trade in Acadia see Part 1,1. Le Borgne charged 501c / trading vessel, Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century (Saint John. 1934) 121. 292 firewood and timber cost dearly. Heating their home was one of a typical peasant's greatest living expenses.21 But in Acadia, trees were everywhere. Most concessions included a section of marshland for cultivation and an area of wooded upland which the peasant could draw upon freely for his own use. As in France, oak trees were reserved for use by the King's navy. But it was acknowledged that seigneurs in the colony could exercise their landed rightso n woods used for commercial purposes. For example, in 1687 Le Borgne conceded the land around a projected saw mill to Louis Allain for a rent of 100 twelve foot planks.22 In general, the same framework of seigneurial rights and dues was common to France, New France, and Acadia. The respective environments made certain privileges more valuable than others, such as fishing rights in Acadia and woodcutting rights in the Loudunais. The most significant difference was that the bulk of seigneurial revenue in the Loudunais was based on the land and its agricultural products, while in Acadia the seigneurs drew most of their income from the trading rights that came more or less explicitly with their fiefs. But as the Acadian population grew and the fur trade diminished in importance, the seigneurs paid more attention to increasing landed revenues there as well. Seigneurial dues might only provide limited amounts of money, but they were all the lords had. In 1683, Le Borgne filed a complaint against La Valliere that the latter was preventing him from developing and settling his lands in the part of his seigneurie near Beaubassin.23 The British Council, who controlled only the area around 21 Francois Lebrun estimated heating costs at up to 14 s each week in La vie conjugate sous l'Ancien Regime (Paris. 1975)68. 22 Concession of seigneurie of Beaubassin to La Valliere, 24 Oct 1676 in Memoires des commissaires. 575; CEA, Etude Loppinot, 3 Jul 1687. 23 Ordonnance directing La Valliere to permit Le Borgne to exercise his seigneurial rights, 22 Mar 1683 in Vanderlinden, Le lieutenant 287. 293 Annapolis Royal and could not trade with the generally hostile Mi'kmaq, were, if anything, more committed to enforcing the cens et rentes and the lock et ventes, appointing prominent Acadians as collectors and requiring annual reports from them; Justice In France, the seigneur's most considerable powers, at least in theory, were those of local justice, divided among high, middle, and low jurisdictions. Most Loudunais seigneurs had all three in their fiefs. These privileges exalted the seigneur's role as both protector and arbiter. As arbiter, bis court dealt with a wide scope of civil matters including property disputes, debts, inheritances, and family law. As protector, he had the right to try criminal cases, including those carrying the death penalty excepting murder and rape. The lord's powers of punishment also included banishment.25 The effectiveness of seigneurial justice in France has been widely debated.26 In the Loudunais, only the largest seigneuries had courts - the other seigneurs deferred these rights to the royal court (bailliage) at Loudun27, no doubt because of the expense of maintaining courts of their own for such small populations. Seigneurs like Louis Marie Modeste de Lomeron, seigneur of Aulnay, happily used the royal court to enforce their 24 19 Jan 1739 and 26 Jan 1739 accounts of rent-collectorsJea n Duon and Prudent Robichaud for Annapolis Royal in Charles Bruce Ferguson, ed., Minutes of His Majesty's Council at Annapolis Royal. 1736-1749 (Halifax, 1967) 8. 25 Pierre Le Proust, Commentaires. 96; Sutherland, Les Chouans, 183. 26 Nicole Castan, Les Criminels de Languedoc: les exigencies d'ordre et les voies du ressentiment dans une soci&<5 prenreVolutionnaire (1750-1790^ (Toulouse, 1980); Olwen Hufton, "Le paysan et la loi en France au XVIIf siecle" Annales: feconomie.SocteftS . Civilisations 38,3 (1983): 679-701; Zoe A. Schneider, "The Village and the State: Justice and the Local Courts in Normandy, 1670-1740" (Ph.D. thesis, Georgetown University, 1997); Jeremy Hayhoe, "'Judge in their own cause': Seigneurial Justice in Northern Burgundy, 1750-1790" (Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland, 2001); Anthony Crubaugh, Balancing the Scales of Justice: Local Courts and Rural Society in Southwest France. 1750-1800 (University Park, 2001). 27 There was also a municipal court (privote) which was subordinate to the royal court and dealt with general police matters in the city. AN G7 519 25 Feb 1690; Auguste-Louis Lerosey, Loudun: Histoire Civile et Religieuse (Loudon. 1980(1908)) 51. 294 seigneurial rights, prosecuting those who defaulted on their dues or neglected to pay the lods et ventes when selling or exchanging land. Sometimes, even the larger seigneurs used the royal court when their own courts failed to overawe opposition or secure payment.29 Similarly, a seigneur's censitaires always had the right of appeal to the king's justice - there are several examples of this in the surviving records.30 The royal court was staffed by a president, civil and criminal lieutenant-generals, attorneys (procureurs), lawyers (avocats), clerks (greffiers), and bailiffs (huissiers).31 Significantly, many of these officials also served in seigneurial courts. Louis de Villiers, a lawyer at the royal court of Loudun, was the senior attorney at the seigneurial court of the Baron of Moncontour. Given the overlap, it is not surprising that judicial institutions generally supported the seigneurs. Perhaps most striking is the large number of cases at the royal court involving ordinary peasants as both plaintiffs and defendants. The vast majority appear to have dealt with financial matters and property disputes, sometimes involving truly derisory sums. From this it is clear that peasants were just as willing as the seigneurs to use the royal court to pursue their economic interests. The court encouraged this, perhaps 28 AD V 5 B 3 through 5 B 6, Bailliage du Loudun, plumitife d'audience, 21 Jan 1750,2 Sep 1750,3 Feb 1751,8 Mar 1752,12 Jul 1755,28 Jan 1758, and 20 Jun 1759 forexample s involving the seigneur of Aufaay. 29 AD V 5 B 3 through 5 B 6. See for example the efforts of the Dreux, seigneurs of Doismon, 19 Jan 1752,12 Feb 1752, and 6 Feb 1754. In a case mat had clearly dragged on since the land sales in question were from the 1720s, Rene" Charles de Maupeou, seigneur of the demesne of Loudun secured a royal court judgment against Jean Champion, ploughman, for immediate payment of the lods et ventes (4 Mar 1750). Records from the royal court exist only from 1750. AD V 5 B 5 and 5 B 6, in 1759, Francois Giroire successfully appealed a judgement from the seigneurie of Doismon on outstanding dues. The seigneur was directed to return the money and also pay back the fine to which he had sentenced Giroire. The other appeals in the record foiled, including Giroire's second attempt on another matter with the seigneur of Doismon in 1763. 31 AD V 5 B 3 through 5 B 6; Lerosey, Loudun. 51. 32 Few cases involved theft, insult, or assault, AD V 5 B 3 through 5 B 6. They often involved employers and their domestic servants, such as cases of 18 Feb 1750,15 Jan 1751, and 31 May 1752. In Jan 1750, the merchant Louis Robert took a miller, Jean Gaultier Saloman, to court for 46 s (just over 2 It). 295 recognizing that seigneurial courts in the countryside were few and ineffective. Charges or claims could be made locally, registered in the local office of the controle des actes (in the case of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, the bureau of Moncontour), and then referred to the royal court for action. Many peasants, however, appear to have submitted their complaints directly to one of the court's bailiffs at Loudun. Since the court held its sessions in a city that many peasants traded in or visited regularly, and since the court routinely cleared cases in a matter of weeks or at worst, months, the only obstacle to dissuade peasants from using royal justice was the potential court fees. Fees could be considerable, and rose accordingly with the gravity of the matter or size of the claim. The potential for court action was often sufficient to convince someone to settle. In 1762, the ploughman Jean Prinet and several associates threatened another ploughman, Jean Bizard, with a court action "qui pouroit estre couteux et dont l'evenement est douteux" if he did not settle a debt of 30 It and 18 bx of wheat by next Christmas.33 The cost of justice could also empower the wealthy to take advantage of the poor. For example, Anne Cailleteau of Martaize, a domestic servant, settled a complaint with her employer, estate manager Pierre Henry Jamin, when the expense of pursuing it at the royal court proved beyond her means. Jamin agreed to pay 20 It of wages and 80 It in return for her agreement to renounce any further action against him.34 Of course, seigneurial courts charged fees too. Seigneurial justice, where it existed at ail in the Loudunais, mainly exercised low justice - the enforcement of seigneurial rights like the censive. Less wealthy seigneurs 33 AD V 4E109/66 Pierre Rivereau Martaizd, 8 Jul 1762; For example, the official seal on judgments cost 10 s, AD V 5 B 3 26 May 1751 Tarif des depens des sieges royaux de Loudun. 34 AD V 4E 109/66 Pierre Rivereau, Martaize\ 28 May 1761. 296 used the royal courts for all matters. Most peasants held land in more than one seigneurie, and the jurisdictions of the few seigneurial courts did not match parish or community boundaries. As a result, they did not feel particularly connected to one seigneur or another, and were generally quite happy to take their disputes to royal justice officials. The administration of local justice was similar in New France. There were royal courts in all the major centres, including Quebec, Montreal, Trois-Rivieres, and later in Louisbourg and New Orleans. Most seigneurial grants included rights ofjustice . The seigneur of the island of Montreal, the Societe de Notre-Dame, gave up its high justice rights in 1693 but retained the low in order to enforce the payment of seigneurial dues. Most of the other two hundred lords of New France took similar measures, and many, like the smaller seigneurs of the Loudunais, referred all their judicial powers to the royal courts.35 An exception was the seigneur of Batiscan, who exercised low and middle justice rights between 1726 and 1758. Less than 10 per cent of the cases there involved seigneurial dues, indicating that peasants were mainly using the court to resolve other matters. This might also suggest that the court was established on the initiative of the state, seeking to improve access to lower-level justice in certain regions, rather than on that of the seigneur seeking to enforce his rights. In places where royal courts were more accessible, such as in Montreal, peasants were regularly bringing their concerns to 35 Andre" Lachance, Crimes et Criminels en NouveUe-France (Montreal, 1984) 18; Greer, Peasant Lord. Merchant. 12; Louise DecMne, Habitants and Merchants in Seventeenth-Century Montreal trans. Liana Vardi (Montreal & Kingston, 1992) 140; Lavaltee, La Prairie. 87,100; Alain Laberge et al., Histoire de la CdteduSud (Quebec. 1993) 133. 36 Colin Coates, "Hie Boundaries of Rural Society in Early Quebec: Batiscan and Sainte-Anne de la Perade to 1825" (Ph.D. thesis, York University, 1992) 385. 297 them. A superior court was established at Quebec as a court of final appeal for all New France, though few could afford the court fees at that level. Acadia also had officials of justice, though the small population (about three hundred people in 1650)38 did not justify a full royal court. In his role as governor, Charles Aulnay appointed a lieutenant-general (Michel Boudrot) and a lieutenant (Jacques Bourgeois) at Port Royal in the 1640s. He also had been given full powers of seigneurial justice in his letters patent of 1647, but there is no indication that he set up a separate seigneurial court. There was certainly a need for local decisions at a time when a small population was expanding into the surrounding marshlands. It seems reasonable to conclude that all such decisions were made by Aulnay as governor/seigneur, or by one of his appointees. No records of judicial appointments or decisions have survived the first period of English rule (1654-1670). Since Boudrot and Bourgeois continued to live at Port Royal, it is likely that they, along with the community delegate (syndic), Guillaume Trahan, resolved any disputes on an informal basis. In 1670, with Louis XIV's assertion of direct royal government over New France, the powers of governor and seigneur in Acadia were separated, creating potentially two judicial authorities. Alexandre Le Borgne clearly intended on exercising his seigneurial justice rights but may have gone a little mad with power. The governor, Grandfontaine, denounced Le Borgne to the King for exiling three people and ordering the death of another.39 Meanwhile, Grandfontaine confirmed d'Entremont, seigneur of Pobomcoup, as king's attorney for the colony. There are no further mentions of Le Borgne's 37 DechSne, Habitants and Merchants. 206-207; Lachance, Crimes et Criminels. 18. 38 Population estimates before the census of 1671 are speculative at best, Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 65. 39 Letter of Grandfontaine, 1671 in Vanderlinden, Le lieutenant 280. 298 seigneurial court in action, though the paucity of documents makes it difficult to see what, if any, cases were dealt with anywhere in the colony. One record, a 1679 lease granted by Le Borgne, was recorded by his procurator fiscal (procureur fiscal), Jacques Courard, and witnessed by his agent for Minas, Pierre Melanson.40 This suggests that at the very least, Le Borgne had appointed legal and administrative officials for his seigneurie. La Valliere's grant in 1676 again included high, middle, and low justice rights, but his authority was initially disputed by the Acadians who had already settled at Beaubassin. This quarrel was apparently resolved by 1682 when many of the Acadians acknowledged La Valliere as their seigneur.41 In 1685 La Valliere took action against a reputed sorcerer, Jean Campagna. He was arrested by the seigneur's policeman (archer), Michel Hache, and witness statements were gathered from fourteen peasants. La Valliere decided to send Campagna to Quebec for trial, both because sorcery exceeded his discretion and because the community was united in its desire to be rido f the man. The motivation for this arrest may have had as much to do with Campagna's claim for unpaid wages against La Valliere as concern for community safety, but it was consistent with the seigneur's responsibility to protect his censitaires.4* Although no other records of justice in Beaubassin have survived, it seems reasonable to conclude that La Valliere judged any disputes over concessions he had issued and enforced his seigneurial rights. During his visit to Acadia in 1686 the intendant of New France, Jacques de Meulles, noted the need for new judicial officials in Port Royal, including a lieutenant- 40 Bail d'un terrain a Port Royal, 1679 in Vanderlinden, Le lieutenant 289-291. 41 Assignation de La Valliere a ses censitaires, 20 Mar 1682 in Vanderlinden, Le lieutenant. 292. 42 For more on Michel HacM, see Samantha Rompillon, "La migration a Beaubassin, village acadien, fruit de la mobility et de la croissance" (M.A. thesis, University de Poitiers, 1998) 55. 43 Myriam Marsaud, "L'dtranger qui derange: le proces de sorcellerie de Jean Campagna, miroir d'une communaute acadienne, Beaubassin, 1685" (M.A. thesis, University de Moncton, 1993) 140. 299 general, a king's attorney, a clerk, and a bailiff. The previous Acadian officials, like Boudrot, were octogenarians. A year later, a new governor (Meneval), king's attorney (Pierre du Breuil) and lieutenant-general (Mathieu de Goutin) arrived. The appointments refer to the siege ordinaire de I 'Acadie - a royal court was now formally if not practically in existence. De Goutin was further named judge at Port Royal in 1701 and seems to have been the intendant's subdelegate.45 It does not appear that the intendant wanted the royal court to replace seigneurial justice. For example, de Meulles' ordonnance prohibiting the liquor trade with aboriginals specifically assigned the seigneur of Beaubassin, La Valliere, the task of adjudicating these cases and fining the guilty 46 parties. There was, however, a clear effort to assert royal authority over the seigneurs. In Port Royal, Meneval arrested Le Borgne in 1687 and placed him in prison for several days because of continuing complaints of his drunkenness and incompetence. He was not stripped of his seigneurie, however. Only in 1694, a year after Le Borgne's death, was a royal judge appointed for Minas (Pierre Terriot).47 In 1688, Meneval took over responsibility for Louis Morin, a 26 year-old Acadian accused of having an affair with La Valliere's daughter, and effectively sentenced him to exile, making him a sailor in the King's service in France. He wrote that he made this decision because there was not a suitable court to follow the normal forms (it was only a year after his arrival), it was impractical to send him to Quebec, and it was dangerous to leave him in the colony. 44 M^moire de 1'intendant de Meulles, 1686 in Vanderlinden, Le lieutenant. 304 45 Jacques Vanderlinden, Histoire du Droit en Acadie et en Nouvelle-fecosse aux XVlT et XVIir siecles: Cartes Documents et Tableaux. 1603-1755 fMoncton) 122-123. 46 Ordonnance de M de Meulles, I Feb 1686 in Vanderlinden, Le lieutenant. 305-6. 47 Vanderlinden, Le lieutenant 37,58. 300 Meneval then arranged for the now pregnant daughter of La Valliere to receive her own AC* seigneurial grant in the Saint John River valley. While Meneval was certainly assisting La Valliere by these actions, he was also asserting royal over seigneurial authority, and sparing Morin from a worse fate. As in the Loudunais, smaller seigneurs like d'Entremont and Martin did not maintain their own courts. The bigger seigneurs of Port Royal, Minas, and Beaubassin did administer their lands directly and appear to have practiced aspects of low justice - particularly the enforcement of their seigneurial rights. Le Borgne's heavy-handed efforts to practice high justice after arriving in 1671 appear to have been swiftly curtailed by the governor, no doubt because such arbitrary decisions could have a devastating impact on colonial development. Once the rudiments of a royal court were established at Port Royal, the Acadians seemed to use it, just as they had gone to Boudrot or Bourgeois in the past. The rapid expansion of Minas soon led to the appointment of a royal judge there; significantly, he was one of the founding settlers. As the Campagna case illustrates, the superior court at Quebec was also available for more serious matters. Of course, such a small population had to live together and no doubt tried to resolve most of its disputes by community negotiations, perhaps through the priest or the delegate. After the British Conquest, seigneurial and royal justice were again combined in a single body - this time the Council at Annapolis Royal. The King of Great Britain was seigneur of Port Royal, Minas, and Cobequid, in fact as well as in theory after the death of Mathieu Martin (1724) and the purchase of Agathe La Tour's rights (1733). The King's governor was thus both royal officer and seigneurial agent. His Council took on 48 M&noire de Meneval, 10 Sep 1688; Concession to La Valliere, 23 Apr 1689 in Vanderlinden, Le lieutenant 316. 301 all matters of high, middle, and low justice — enforcing seigneurial rights, resolving disputes over land claims, and dealing with crime. In the Loudunais, when a complicated property dispute came before the royal court, experts were appointed to survey the terrain in question and recommend solutions. In British Nova Scotia, the Council relied on the Acadian delegates to perform this function — because they knew both the region and French customary law.49 There was no attempt to institute English common law in civil matters - instead the Council enforced both French customary law and seigneurial rights, for the moment. They hoped eventually to be lords of English townships when new immigrants arrived, but in the meantime settled for collecting what dues they could and keeping the peace. Significantly, it was not just the deputies who brought cases to the "royal court" but individual Acadians.50 As early as 1724, before most Acadians had even sworn fealty (the oath of allegiance), disputes already were being brought to the British. The Council got more than it bargained for, complaining that they were "daily employed and harassed with their [Acadian] affairs" and that the Acadians were "a litigious sort of people, and so ill natured to one another as daily to encroach upon their neighbour's properties." Lieutenant-Governor Armstrong appointed constables and justices of the See for example the case of Pierre Commeau versus Francis Richards, 7 Jul 1725 and that of Ren6 Blanchard versus Antoine Celestin and Claude Babin, 21 Apr 1735, in Archibald MacMechan, ed., Original Minutes of His Majesty's Council at Annapolis Royal 1720-1739 (Halifex, 1908) 104-105 and 320-323. 30 J. B. Brebner, New England's Outpost: Acadia before the Conquest of Canada. (New York, 1927) 140. 51 Macmechan, Original Minutes. 43-53. In 1724, Louis Thibault accused Joseph Broussard of assault. The affair quickly became entangled with British concerns that some Acadians were supporting the Mi'kmaq in the latest hostilities, Maurice Basque, "Conflits et solidarity familiales dans Pancienne Acadie: 1'affaire Broussard de 1724" SHA. 20,2 (1989): 60-68. 52 Thomas B. Akins, Acadia and Nova Scotia: Documents Relation to the Acadian French and the first British Colonization of the Province. 1714-1758 (Cottonport, 1972) 5 Oct and 16 Nov 1731. 302 peace to help. Ultimately, the British understood the importance of having ordinary Acadians come to the Council to resolve civil matters. It reinforced what little authority they had over rural society. Up to the 1690s, Acadia's judicial institutions and practices appeared to be developing very much like diose of the rest of New France. Seigneurial courts existed in larger seigneuries but tended to focus on matters of low justice. Property and financial disputes and almost all criminal cases were handled by royal courts established in each major centre. There were clear parallels with the experience of the Loudunais. In both places, prominent seigneurs maintained their own courts to enforce their rights, while smaller lords relied on the royal courts. Ordinary people took meir disputes and their accusations directly to royal courts, using these institutions to pursue their own interests. Peasants did not look to the seigneur to be their arbiter, but to their parish, community, and state. After the British Conquest in Acadia, even low justice powers were concentrated in the hands of the government. This was in some ways a return to the situation of the first half of the seventeenth century, when seigneurs were also governors and exercised royal and seigneurial justice powers jointly. The wider spaces of Acadia meant that a community's chosen delegates had a greater importance in civil matters. The Acadians at Beaubassin, hundreds of kilometers away from Annapolis Royal, and closer to New France, did not rely on the royal court at all after 1713. As early as the 1690s, Beaubassin had requested approval to appoint its own deputies to resolve ordinary disputes, and Minas soon followed.54 Unlike the justice 53 Tapie, "Grand PreV' 97-99; In 1729, Lieutenant-Governor Armstrong appointed two constables, a justice of die peace, and a clerk from among the Acadians, MacMechan, Original Minutes. 171. 54 Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 45. 303 system in Acadia, the royal court at Loudun was effective because it was close to the population it served. As the Acadian population grew and dispersed throughout the marshlands, the royal court at Port/Annapolis Royal was less and less able to provide local justice. Clearly the delegates had an enhanced importance as mediators and advisors in all of the Acadian communities. Perhaps the surprising thing is how many Acadians still brought their disputes to the British, underlying the enduring appeal of royal justice for ordinary peasants. In both the Loudunais and Acadia, the lords were truly secondary to this relationship. The economic importance of the seigneurs In the Loudunais, the seigneurs and their estate managers were very prominent in the rural economy. In a formal sense, all of the land ultimately belonged to one seigneur or another, and small bits of land "owned" by most peasants theoretically belonged to seigneurs, as they acknowledged by the payment of the cens. Most seigneurs however also had larger parcels of land as demesnes (domaines) which they leased out for a term of years; as they preferred not to cultivate it themselves, they needed tenants. Most peasants did not own enough land to make a decent living fromit , and the normal recourse for those who wanted to expand their arable or pasture was to take a lease on more land. There was a strong chance that the landlord who leased it to him would be a seigneur. Meanwhile, merchants, themselves often seigneurial estate managers or receivers, controlled the grain trade in the towns. In the Loudunais, this trade was connected to the Loire valley network which supplied grain to Paris, Nantes, and other major cities. Farmers needed to have connections with these merchants to sell crops at 304 good prices, and with millers to turn grain into flour and bread. The patronage of seigneurs and their agents was particularly important for wealthier ploughmen who produced a lot of grain for export.55 An analysis of the notarial record between 1737 and 1747, and 1753 and 1759, reveals that many leases in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize were granted by seigneurs and their estate managers.56 They accounted for 53 of 160 recorded leases or 33 per cent, and 40 per cent of the total value of property leased. Certainly the seigneurs were not the only people leasing out land - but most of the rest came frommerchants , officials, and wealthier widows who were often connected with the seigneurs to one degree or another. It is interesting to note that during this period many seigneurs were actively seeking to expand their holdings in order to increase their landed income. They bought back a lot of land that had previously been conceded to censitaires in their own seigneuries, thus increasing their demesnes. This land was then leased to reliable ploughmen. Three of the resident seigneurial families are cases in point. The Lomeron purchased over 863 It worth of property during the period - 623 It fromthei r seigneuries of Aulnay, Bee, and Brizay. Louis Marreau, seigneur de la Bonnetiere, and later his widow, purchased almost 500 It worth of land in their own seigneurie. The Richelots similarly purchased over 540 It of land in their seigneurie of La Roussellerie. All three of these families were prominent leasers (bailleurs). The Lomeron also leased out a large number of livestock.57 Another tactic to increase income was to use the courts to force payment of outstanding seigneurial dues, especially the cens et rentes and the lods et ventes, and in extreme cases 55 For more on the rural economy and leases, see Part III, 8. 56 AD V 2 C 1931-1943 Contrdle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour 57 AD V 2 C 1931-1937, the ploughman Louis Bourdier received several leases of livestock collectively worth several hundred It from the Lomeron family between 1737 and 1747. 305 force the seizure of the land of those who could not pay. The Lomeron went to the royal court of Loudun for over 850 It from their censitaires between 1750 and 1763 — an amount nearly equivalent to the value of land purchases they made. In this case, money gained from collecting outstanding seigneurial dues was re-invested into increasing demesnes. In general, direct seigneurial management of the land and enforcement of their rights appears to have been increasing in the mid-eighteenth century. The seigneurs and their estate managers were also important to the rural economy as lenders. In the period 1737-47 and 1753-59,28 per cent of recorded loans and 33 per cent of the amount of money loaned was provided by these men. Table 15 -Seigneurs and Estate Managers as lenders in Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaizg Name Position Number of Value of Loans Loans Lomeron Seigneurs of Aulnay, 19 2 492 It family Bee, Brizay Marreau Seigneurs of La 6 1 042 It family Bonnetiere Daniel Seigneur of La 7 600 It Richelot Roussellerie Nicolas Estate Manager of 17 1 791 It Jamin Mouslandrault Francois Estate Manager of 2 1 507 It Rolland Moncontour Jean Estate Manager of 6 694 It Regnier Sautonne and Bourg The credit provided by the seigneurs and estate managers was an important resource for ploughmen who had experienced a setback or those wishing to expand their holdings. Wealthier ploughmen, in turn, lent money to day-workers (Journaliers) and poorer artisans. The hierarchy of debt certainly reinforced the broader economic and social ADV5B3through5B6. 306 hierarchy. The money available from the seigneurs was the starting point and helped keep the rural economy going. In general, it is clear that the seigneurs of the Loudunais were very important economically to rural society. In the mid-eighteenth century they were showing greater interest in collecting dues and managing their estates. Of course, the seigneurs were most interested in maximizing their own profits, but they seemed to understand that supporting the rural economy was to their benefit as well. Successful peasants paid their dues on time, took on leases, acquired more land, and in general, contributed more to seigneurial coffers over time. The lords of New France, especially those in outlying areas, had to be careful not to alienate the few settlers willing to take on concessions. Land was cheap and needed to be cleared, and labour was expensive and hard to come by. By far the greater part of the seigneuries was conceded out in perpetuity in exchange for the usual dues. A few lords maintained small demesnes which they leased out to better established habitants. Although the situation varied across the colony, the seigneurie was generally weak in New France. However, in the course of the eighteenth century, it did become more of an economic asset to the seigneurs.59 After 1700, many lords began to more consistently collect dues, using their own or royal courts, and some began to reclaim land and build larger demesnes.60 This was particularly true in the more settled areas, such as Montreal, where denser population and competition for land gave the seigneurs more edge; in such places the seigneurie became "rigid and intrusive." Seigneurial dues were farmed out to 59 Greer, Peasant. Lord. Merchant 13; Laberge et al, Cdte du Sud. 87. 60 Coates, "Boundaries," 107; Lavallee, La Prairie. 95-100. 307 collectors, and much of the land was under leases that split the crops a moitie between leaser and lessee rather than the traditional cens et rentes?1 Once population and cultivation had reached a certain stage of development in the eighteenth century, the seigneurs of New France were able to more aggressively enforce, and even raise, their customary rights. In Acadia, the seigneurs played an important role in recruiting and supporting early colonization efforts. Aulnay at Port Royal and La Valliere at Beaubassin are known to have hired indentured servants, general labour, and experts to help get settlement going in their seigneuries. But after the initial phase of settlement, it was almost entirely up to the Acadians themselves to keep cultivation going and to expand, in part because the seigneurs died or left (Aulnay died in 1650, La Valliere left in 1687). This was not a problem for the settlers; they did not need money, and they did not lack land. As a consequence, however, seigneurial control of the rural economy was limited. The remaining recorded land sales from 1699 to 1701 regularly indicate the cens due to the seigneur, but the buyers and sellers were Acadians and officials. The seigneurs do not appear as leasers of demesnes.63 Thus, the economic importance of the seigneurs was much diminished, restricted to the collection of their traditional dues. It is possible to estimate the following potential revenue from the seigneur's annual rent, on the basis of the 1707 census data and the application of a standard rate of 2 lc64 / concession of cens et rentes. 61 Dechene, Habitants and Merchants. 142. 62 LAC (France) AD C-M Serie E, MG A2, Engagements of Jehan Cendre and Pierre Gaborit, 1 Mar 1636 and Saint-Jehan Passenger List, 1 Apr 1636; Leopold Lanctot, L'Acadie des Origines (Quebec, 1994) 48. On La Valliere's efforts and the hiring of workers, Marsaud, "L'etranger qui derange," 20,61. 63 LAC Notaires d'Acadie (Etude Loppinot). 64 Colonial livres (lc) were worth one-quarter less than standard French livres tournois (It) 308 Table 16 - Estimate of seigneuriai revenue from the cens et rentes, 1707 Community Population Households Potential Revenue Port Royal 458 102 2041c Minas 488 88 1761c Beaubassin 226 45 901c TOTAL: 4701c These were small amounts of money, insufficient to fund trading enterprises or permit investment in new settlements. To put this in perspective, the 200 lc raised at Port Royal was the equivalent of the salary of the royal clerk or half of that of the king's attorney. The wages of the small garrison of 60 men cost over 6 000 lc / year.65 Compared to the expenses of the colony, seigneuriai revenue was just a drop in the bucket, as the British would learn after they took over. With no demesnes or livestock to lease, and in debt themselves, the Acadian seigneurs paid more attention to trade than managing their estates, and were certainly happy to leave government and military matters to royal officials.66 Since fur-trading and fishing by and large did not involve the Acadians, this resulted in a separation between the rural economy and the interests of the seigneurs. This separation remained the case under the British regime, and the rapidly expanding population made it even more difficult for the now royal "seigneur" to exert any economic influence. The cens et rentes (now called quit-rents) continued to be assessed at a little under 2 lc for each concession, providing a revenue of almost 1 500 lc between 1739 and 1741. This was not enough to support a military garrison; it would Ntemoire de I'intendant de Meulles, 1686; Instructions for des Goutins, 10 Apr 1688 in Vanderlinden, Le lieutenant. 304.311. 66 John Mack Faragher, A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of die French Acadians from their American Homeland (New York, 2005) 34. 67 See Note 23. 309 not even have paid the wages of the officers. The accounts of two Annapolis Royal rent-gatherers show the mixed nature of these payments. Table 17 - Accounts of Annapolis Royal rent-collectors Duon and Robichaud, 1739 Item Duon Robichaud Total Grain 40 bx 21 bx 91 lc, 10s Capons 42 birds 30 birds 361c Money 8s 2 lc, 5s 2 lc, 13s Lods et ventes 7s 621c 62 lc, 7s VALUE: 811c, 15s 1101c, 15s 192 lc, 10s Chronically in debt, struggling to maintain their garrison, and with little authority outside Annapolis Royal itself, the British Council was in no position to dominate the rural economy. In a sense, the town became its demesnes, reserved for its use, while most of the Acadians moved further upriver.70 Like the French seigneurs before them, the British tried to use their rights to control trade and fishing in the region. Seigneurial dues provided some negligible funds, but were more important symbolically, a rare tie between the Acadians and the government. Hope for profits rested on the colony's other natural resources. The social role of the seigneurs In the idealized society of orders, the lords were at the top of the rural social hierarchy. At church and in the community, they led the way. They were the protectors LAC Colonial Office, Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island - Original Correspondence, MG NS "A" Vol 4 Ordonnance of Queen Anne, 30 Jul 1712. 69 Of course the lods et ventes were not an annual rate but collected based on property exchanges and sales, Vanderlinden, Histoire du Droit. 240. 70 Barry Moody, "Making a British Nova Scotia" in John G. Reid, et al., The 'Conquest' of Acadie. 1710: Imperial Colonial, and Aboriginal Constructions (Toronto, 2004) 127-145. 310 and arbiters of the countryside. But most of the seigneurs in the Loudunais were not resident — their place at the front was vacant. One measure of the social importance of the seigneurs was the degree to which they served as godparents for peasants. In Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize between 1737 and 1765, just 1 in 20 godparents were seigneurs or notables (including priests, doctors, and merchants). This made it all the more special when they did assume this role. Local seigneurial families seem to have made a point of occasionally serving as godparents for their censitaires?1 This helped maintain relationships and authority in a way that emphasized the symbolic and protective aspects of their power. Serving as a godparent for peasants also appealed to the men who worked for the seigneurs. Estate managers, millers, and merchants could reinforce relationships with their tenants, grain suppliers, and customers. The potential advantage for the peasant families was to have patrons who would want their godchildren to do well, and might help create opportunities for them later in life. The presence of Andre Leon Eynaud, seigneur of Sautonne, was a significant boon to the Giroire family at the baptism of their daughter Andree in 1762. Andre Marreau, an attorney at Loudun and relative of the seigneur of la Bonnetiere, was godfather to Elizabeth Rebecheau in 1739. But it would be a mistake to make too much of the very occasional presence of seigneurs and their agents as godparents or witnesses in parish registers. Since parish and community boundaries did not correspond to seigneuries, and most seigneurs were not resident on their estates, the social relationships between peasants and lords remained 71 John McManners, Church and Society in Eighteenth Century France. Vol 2: The Religion of the People and die Politics of Religion (Oxford, 1998) 5; Brigitte Maillard, Vivre en Touraine au XVIIf siecle (Rennes, 2003) 118. For more on godparents in the Loudunais, see Part II, 4. 311 limited and distant. Further, the seigneur's men (estate managers, lawyers, notaries, and receivers) often lived in towns, though they interacted regularly with the community in the course of their duties. Their education, wealth and their endogamous marriage alliances set them apart as a rural elite below the lords but distinct from the ploughmen. In Acadia, between 1712 and 1740, the whole range of notables including merchants, officials, military officers, seigneurs, and indeed, priests were also rare godparents for rural society -just eight per cent of godfathers and six per cent of godmothers. The old seigneurial families (La Tour, Le Borgne, d'Entremont) provided only a handful, and the new regime of the British Council did not participate at all. Since the seigneurial system had such limited economic importance in Acadia, the advantages of having a noble sponsor were even less evident than in the Loudunais.72 Although the French seigneurs had been resident, they were mainly interested in trade, and the dispersed nature of the Acadian communities made it difficult for them to achieve much social prominence. After the British took over, the social separation between seigneur and censitaire was even more complete, particularly outside Annapolis Royal. Now the Acadians' seigneur and his estate managers were English and Protestant, the latter a group of rather high-handed military officers. These officers were smart enough to realize that they needed agents of their own among the Acadians, and they found them among the emergent rural elite, the same centre families who had served as seigneurial agents, rent collectors, and notaries under the French and who now were the wealthiest and most distinguished Acadians. Like the seigneurial agents of the Loudunais, these 72 For more on godparents in Acadia, see Part II, 5. 312 men and women increasingly formed their own caste - characterized by endogamy, status, and relative comfort. In general, the seigneurs may have been theoretically at the top of the social hierarchy, but they were distant, often absent, and generally uninterested in the lives of their censitaires. Seigneurial agents formed their own sub-class that remained in closer contact with peasants because of the nature of their jobs, but otherwise also sought to keep themselves apart. These were well-established educated and mercantile families in the Loudunais, wealthier farmers descended from founding colonists in Acadia. In both places, the seigneurial system did not intrude on the social relationships and activities of peasants. The political importance of the seigneurs In the Loudunais, there was some overlap between seigneurs and the civil administration. Many seigneurs (or their relatives) were also state officials, often in far- off towns, even in Paris. Thus there was a contrast between the political importance of these men on the provincial or national stage and the political importance of these seigneurs for rural society. Having as seigneur the Due de Richelieu, a man who usually had direct access to the King, did not necessarily translate into state help for his censitaires when poor harvests, floods,o r epidemics struck. He usually had other things on his mind. The key to civil administration (and tax relief) at the provincial level was the intendants and their subdelegates. These men did not necessarily have any links with the seigneurs in their jurisdictions, and usually worked directly with parish delegates, tax 73 On endogamy and social hierarchy among the Acadians see Jacques Vanderlinden, Se Marier en Acadie Francaise: XVIT et XVuT siecles (Moncton, 1998) and Part II, 6. 313 collectors, and priests when gathering information and executing orders. The seigneurie, in and of itself, was not really a political institution, so the political importance of the lords was largely dependent on the involvement, connections, and capabilities of the individual in question. At the local political level, a strict separation was maintained between the parish assembly and the seigneurs, though some assembly members might have economic ties to one lord or another. Rural society drew up its own tax rolls, nominated its own representatives, and resolved its own disputes. Its delegates were empowered to negotiate with the seigneurs on matters that involved them (such as use of common land or woodcutting rights), but otherwise the lord did not participate. In Acadia, the seigneurs had far greater political importance because their civil roles directly involved their censitaires. In the early decades of colonization, they were the primary recruiters, developers, and investors, as well as royal officials.74 As such, they tended to represent entire communities. In 1650, Aulnay was seigneur and governor of the whole colony. When Robert Sedgwick captured Port Royal in 1654, the terms of surrender were negotiated by Emmanuel Le Borgne, the seigneur. Later seigneurs also filled posts in the government. D'Entremont, for example, was seigneur of Pobomcoup and king's attorney. After 1670, civil administration was placed in the hands of royal governors and officials, but the lack of qualified men still caused the government to rely on the seigneurs at times. La Valliere was first commandant (1678), and then governor (1683), of Acadia. After Port Royal was captured in 1690, Le Borgne was one of several Acadians named to a governing council that continued to function for several years until 74 In certain areas of New France, the seigneurs were also central to early development, Alain Laberge, "Mobility, Iitablissement et enracinement en milieu rural: le peuplement des seigneuries de la Grand Anse sous le regime Francais (1672-1752)" (Ph.D. thesis, York University, 1987). 314 a French governor returned in 1699. Le Borgne's death in 1693 and La Valliere's return to Quebec in 1687 left the seigneurs out of the political decisions for a time, until the British took over as both governors and seigneurs. In general, political power in Acadia was always concentrated in the hands of a small group of men - military officers, officials, and seigneurs. Often it is difficult to see where seigneurial power ends and state power begins. At the same time, it must be recognized that this inner circle was often largely powerless in the wide expanses and greater imperial struggles that defined the colony. The situation might be summarized by saying that officials and seigneurs in Acadia had wider powers and discretion than their Loudunais counterparts, but narrower control and ability to enforce their decisions. Conclusion There was a seigneurial system in Acadia and it survived right up until 1755. Allan Greer has argued in the context of New France that seigneurialism was not a "system" but a "relationship" between different groups of people that can only be understood "as an aspect of a larger configuration of society." This chapter certainly shows the seigneurie did not define all aspects of rural life — far from it. Other historians of France have also emphasized that the seigneurie was not a vehicle of domination. I agree with Greer's notion that seigneurial tenure can not be understood as a separate phenomenon with "a reality all its own." Here we have examined seigneurs as landlords, creditors, patrons, godparents, and even governors in rural communities. In short, we have examined "relationships" between seigneurs and censitaires. But the term 75 Greer, Peasant. Lord, and Merchant. 90. 76 Jean Gallet, La seigneurie Bretonne. 1450-1680: l'exemple du Vannetais (Paris, 1983) 592. 315 "system," defined as "a set of things working together as a mechanism or interconnecting network" and "an organized scheme or method" seems to me to describe seigneurialism in both Acadia and the Loudunais very well.77 It was, in Greer's own words, "an institution of prime importance, the basic framework within which seigneurs and habitants, sometimes collaborating and sometimes contending, shaped their emerging communities."78 Every land-holder in both Acadia and the Loudunais had a seigneur, and the relationship was based on established rights and dues backed by customary law. There can thus be no doubt that seigneurialism was at least "systematic." This does not mean that the seigneurial systems in Acadia and the Loudunais were identical or unchanging in their importance and application. Generally speaking, the economic role of the seigneurs in Acadia was much diminished, but they had more political significance for rural society. Perhaps the biggest difference was one of geography. The handful of very large seigneuries in Acadia could not be managed in the same way as the relatively small ones of the Loudunais. In Acadia, a vast forest had to be cleared, land was cheap, and labour was scarce. In the Loudunais there was an overabundance of labour, land was expensive, and the cereal plains were already intensively cultivated, so the seigneurs exercised greater economic control. Another key difference was the backgrounds of the seigneurs. The Acadian seigneurs after 1650 were mostly men of commercial or colonial backgrounds relying on trade and fishing for their fortunes. The British Council also focused their efforts in this direction. The seigneurs of the Loudunais were nobles and clerics, often with offices or greater lands elsewhere and primarily interested in landed revenues. The results of this comparison are 77 "System," Compact Oxford English Dictionary. 3rd Edition, 2005. 78 Greer, Peasant. Lord, and Merchant 13. 316 interesting because they indicate that nobles and clerics were more important economically while merchants and traders were more important politically for rural society. A final difference is one of development. In the eighteenth century, both the Loudunais and New France saw attempts to impose more direction and enforcement on the seigneurial system. In Acadia, by the time the rural population and their cultivation reached a sufficient level for this to occur, neither the French seigneurs nor the British Council had the funds to invest or the clout to enforce a revival of seigneurial rights. Yet there were remarkable continuities between the seigneurial system of the Loudunais and Acadia. Perhaps most obviously, the cens et rentes and the lods et ventes were paid throughout, in Acadia right up to the Deportation. The relative weight of seigneurial dues was similar in both places, certainly less than five per cent of a farmer's annual expenses. Seigneurs may have died or been absent at particular times, but their ultimate claim to the land was respected. Another important continuity was the administration of justice. Larger seigneurs established courts to enforce their rights and dues — an aspect of low justice - but otherwise relied on the royal courts established in major towns to prosecute criminals and resolve disputes. Smaller seigneurs relied on the courts for all judicial matters. Peasants, when they could not resolve disputes amongst themselves, generally took their complaints directly to these royal courts. Outside seigneurial matters, the lords had very little impact on judicial matters at all. A final continuity was the way in which the Acadian rural elite increasingly resembled the sub class of wealthier families who worked for the seigneurs in the Loudunais. Their economic and social prominence made them the notables at the community level, and the seigneurs recognized that they would need their cooperation and help. 317 In 1750, despite over one hundred years of separation for its founding families and almost forty years of British rule, Acadia remained a society with feudal characteristics including lords and censitaires. This is no doubt partly because both the colonial government and the inhabitants saw value in continuing this way. For the British Council, the political advantages outweighed the economic, as the seigneurial system - specifically local justice and property relations - formed a framework within which they could communicate with the Acadians and, to a limited extent, administer the colony. The fact that they also gained a small amount of money and provisions was a bonus. The Acadians were certainly willing to continue paying the rents. This could be seen as part of their larger strategy to swear limited oaths and maintain neutrality: acknowledging that the British were the current seigneurs and giving them their due as such did not imply that the Acadians were required to provide them with military support. An added advantage was that, should the French re-take the colony, there was not likely to be any difficulty in maintaining the system. After all, it was not uncommon in the Loudunais, or anywhere else in France, to buy or exchange seigneuries. Further, by accepting the payments, appointing Acadians to collect them, and resolving disputes in their "court," the British were in effect recognizing Acadian rights to the land. This was a critical issue for the Acadians as their communities continued to grow and expand. It seems that both the British and die Acadians used the seigneurial system to relate to each other. The importance of the seigneurial system in the Loudunais was quite different and had a clear economic focus. The seigneurs and their agents were key figuresi n the community, but almost exclusively as landlords. As these men and women benefited from dues and payments, they in turn provided loans and new leases - in a word, 318 opportunities - to wealthier ploughmen. But their social and political importance to peasants should not be exaggerated. Most peasants held land in many different seigneuries that were all relatively close together, and, besides, seigneurs were not the only people who controlled land that could be leased. As a result, strong connections with any particular lord were uncommon. Few seigneurs were resident, and while they and their estate managers were treated with respect, peasants usually took their concerns to royal courts, notaries, and officials. In the Loudunais, the seigneurial system was the framework for the rural economy, but the political relationship between state and subject was distinctly separate. 319 Picture 14 - Seigneurial estate of La Bonnetiere7 9 79 Photograph taken by the author, summer 2005. 320 PART III, CHAPTER 8 - THE RURAL ECONOMY AND DIFFERENCES IN WEALTH Introduction This chapter analyzes the rural economy and differences in wealth among peasants in Acadia and the Loudunais. I will do this through a series of budgets, an examination of indebtedness, and a consideration of material life. In general, farming in both Acadia and the Loudunais allowed people to make a living, or even better. However, there was a significant difference between the fortunes and opportunities of small and large farmers. Many people in both places did not produce enough to meet their consumption needs, selling their labour to make up the difference. Some fell into poverty. But there was much that bound the two groups together, so that it is difficult to think of them as two distinct and opposing classes of subsistence and market-oriented peasants. In reality, the activities of all workers in the rural community were closely intertwined. There was no such thing as a self-sufficient farmer; all were dependent on the market economy, as both buyers and sellers. In addition, peasants depended on each other for labour, plough-teams, exchange, and credit.1 In Acadia, peasants also had to work together to build and maintain the dykes. There was certainly an unequal relationship between these groups. Some peasants were far richer than others, and it was very difficult for smaller farmers to amass the capital needed to advance their lot. In general, despite the considerable differences in the rural economies of Acadia and the Loudunais, economic stratification among peasants in both places had comparable qualities. 1 Philip T. Hoffman emphasizes the need to get past this conventional understanding in Growth in a Traditional Society: The French Countryside. 1450-1815 (Princeton, 1996)40. 321 Rural budgets and socio-economic stratification In order to get some idea of the economy and social stratification of rural society in the Loudunais and in Acadia, and to establish a basis for comparison between the two places, I have used the method of constructing comprehensive budgets, based on primary sources. This is a technique that has been used by many historians to re-construct peasant revenues and expenses.2 I have created these budgets based on primary sources. For the Loudunais, models have been developed for an average day-worker and a wealthy ploughman, using harvest results, grain prices, and tax rates from official reports in the years 1762 through 1765. For Acadia, the budgets of a small and large farmer have been depicted, using information from the 1707 census, contemporary price data from Acadia, Louisbourg, and New France, and estimates of livestock productivity.3 Of course there is a degree of artificiality in this exercise, as neither Loudunais nor Acadian peasants actually kept accounts and set out budgets in this manner, and we have to estimate certain items not specifically quantified in the records (e.g. heating expenses). Further, official figures provide a snapshot on prices at the principal markets, but the rate at which grains, 2 These include but are not limited to Pierre Goubert, Beauvais et le Beauvaisis de 1600 a 1730: contribution a l'histoire sociale de la France du XVIP siecle (Paris, 1982 (I960)); T. J. A. Le Goff, Vannes and its Region: a Study of Town and Country in Eighteenth-Century France (Oxford. 1981); Donald Sutherland, The Chouans: The Social Origins of Popular Counter-Revolution in Upper Brittany. 1770-1796 (Oxford, 1982); Marcel Lachiver. Les ann£es de misere: la famine au temps du Grand Roi (Paris. 1991); and Hoffman, Growth in a Traditional Society. 3 Acadian census of 1707 from LAC, Census Returns on Microfilm, 1666-1901, also viewed online at www.acadian-cajun.com/1707cens.htm. On livestock, Andrew Hill Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia to 1760 (Madison, 1968); Annie Antoine, ed., "Des anhnaux et des hommes: 6conomie et societes rurales en France (XIe - XIX6 siecles)" Annates de Bretagne et des Pays de l'Ouest Anjou. Maine. Touraine 106,1 (1999) numero special; Virginia DeJohn Anderson, Creatures of Empire: How Domestic Animals Transformed Early America (Oxford. 2004); and Jean-Marc Moriceau, Histoire et gebgraphie de l'elevage francais: Du Moven Age a la Revolution (Paris. 2005). Prices in Acadia (1701), Louisbourg (1740) and during Du Vivier's campaign in Minas (1744) found in Edith Tapie, "Les structures socio-6conomiques de Grand Pr& communaute acadienne" (M.A. thesis, University de Moncton, 2000) 55,92,114. Prices at Port Royal (1699) found in John Clarence Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century (Saint John, 1934) 128. For Louisbourg prices, J. S. McLennan, Louisbourg fromit s Foundation to its Fall. 1713-1758 (Halifax, 1979) 224. Wheat and peas prices in New France fromJea n Hamelin, "Economic et society en Nouvelle-France" (Unpublished doctoral thesis, l'Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes de Paris) 59-61. 322 vegetables, meat and livestock were sold or bought undoubtedly varied throughout the year and in different locations. This is of particular concern in Acadia, where the inhabitants might be buying from or selling to each other, local officials, French or English traders, or even aboriginals. The place of exchange could vary from the main Acadian communities to more isolated settlements, fishing posts to forts, and even colonial cities like Boston or Louisbourg. In general, these budgets are approximations that permit us to consider the structures of the rural economy and to analyze the degree of separation between poorer and wealthier peasants. SECTION I - THE LOUDUNAIS The Rural Economy The rural economy of the Loudunais was centred on the grain trade, which followed two distinct circuits. For local consumption, small, itinerant merchants (bl&tiers) bought up peasant surpluses and took them to market towns like Loudun and the smaller centre of Moncontour. At least one of these small merchants lived in each of the parishes of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize.4 Some wealthier peasants and estate managers (fermiers) no doubt sold their grain directly to town merchants.5 For the larger export market, a network of large and small merchants reached back from the major port of Saumur on the Loire (north of Loudun) into the countryside to draw in surpluses from 4 For example, Charles Savary and Pierre Baudu (Martaize), Charles Pic and Pierre Rousseau (La Chaussee) and Jean Melais (Aulnay) were identified as blatters in the parish registers. This arrangement was not unlike the grain trade of the Vannetais, T. J. A. Le Goff, "An eighteenth-century grain merchant: Ignace Adrisse Desruisseaux" in J. F. Bosher, ed., French Government and Society. 1500-1850 (London. 1973) 98. 5 This is suggested strongly in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize by the connections between local estate managers like Nicolas Jamin and Alexandre Goujon with merchants in Moncontour. As noted in previous chapters, the term "fermier" in the Loudunais referred to an estate manager, whereas in other parts of France, it might describe a big tenant farmer. 323 peasants. Grain would often pass through the hands of several merchants before making its way to the city,6 When competition was fierce, some merchants dispatched their own commission agents directly to rural areas, buying grain from peasants at high prices in order to secure larger shares of the crop. Saumur connected the Loudunais with the largest and most complex grain trading zone of France, the Loire valley. Wholesale merchants there supplied major cities up and down the Loire including Paris, Orleans, Tours, and Nantes, and also shipped grain through Nantes to England, Spain, and Portugal. In the mid-eighteenth century, the province of Touraine alone (including the Loudunais) exported around 640 000 setters of wheat to England annually, reaching a peak of 1.2 million setters in 1764.9 At the local level, peasants produced grain on land that they either owned or leased. In a formal sense, all land belonged ultimately to the seigneurs, but those who held concessions in return for small annual and perpetual rents effectively owned their property.10 These peasant owners were not necessarily wealthy, however. In the Loudunais, land owned by peasants tended to be divided into tiny plots and belonged to 6 Judith Miller, Mastering the Market: The State and the Grain Trade toNorther n France. 1700-1860 (Cambridge, 1998) 5-32. 7 Abbott Payson Usher, The History of the Grain Trade in France. 1400-1710 (New York, 1973) 25. 8 AN G7 531 Tours, 11 Feb 1720. Intendant Chauvelin wrote that Saumur was the largest commercial centre in his generality, and trade would be assisted by establishing a bank for foreign merchants and currency exchange. On the grain trade in Paris, see Steven L. Kaplan, Provisioning Paris: Merchants and Millers in the Grain and Flour trade during the Eighteenth Century (Ithaca, 1984). 9 C. Chevalier. Tableau de la Province de Touraine. 1762-1766: administration, agriculture, todustrie. commerce, impdts (Tours, 1863) 122. The Loire valley used Parisian weights and measures. A Paris setter was the equivalent of 159 litres, thus Touraine was usually exporting 1 017 600 hi and in 1764 exported 1908 000 hi. 10 Henri S6e, Economic and Social Conditions in France during the Eighteenth Century, trans. Edwin Zeydel (New York, 1968 (1927)) 4; Gerard Beaur, Histoire Agraire de la France au XVHF siecle: inerties et changements dans les campagnes francaises entre 1715 et 1815 (Paris. 2000) 17-18. 324 people like day-workers and artisans, the poorest elements of rural society.11 Larger farms (metairies) were granted to ploughmen on leases (baux) for terms of fivet o nine years. The terms of the lease were either in kind (a moitie), a sharecropping arrangement in which the tenant paid half of the net produce, or in money (aferme), in which the tenant paid a set amount of cash each year. A mid-eighteenth century survey of notarial records for Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize reveals that ploughmen took on nearly two-thirds of all new leases, comprising almost 90 per cent of the value of property leased during that period. Day-workers and artisans accounted for most of the remainder. The predominance of the ploughmen in this regard is not surprising, as the landlords would only rent to those they trusted could consistently meet the tenancy requirements.12 The vast majority of leases to ploughmen (86 per cent) were in money, with an average payment of 104 It.13 For example, the widow of the seigneur of Aulnay let out a farm to the ploughman Jean Rebechau of La Chauss6e in 1737 for 112 It / year, and another to Jean Barreau in 1739 for 212 It / year. Henry Bigot, notary at Moncontour, leased a small farm to Jean Bourdier of Martaize for an annual payment of 75 It in 1741. The few leases in kind were for smaller farms with projected net products of, oh average, 87 It. This meant that the average annual payment was about 43 It of produce. For example, Daniel 11 Similar results were found in Goubert, Beauvais et le Beauvaisis, 175; Jean Gallet, La seigneurie Bretonne. 1450-1680: l'exemple du Vannetais (Paris, 1983) 569; Annie Antoine, Fiefe et Villages dn Bas- Maine au XVHT siecle (Mayenne, 1994) 55; Zoe A. Schneider, "The Village and the State: Justice and the Local Courts in Normandy, 1670-1740" (Ph.D. thesis, Georgetown University, 1997) 49; B£aur, Histoire Agraire. 28. 12 AD Vienne 2C 1931-1943 Contrdle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour, 1737-1747 and 1753-1759. Hoffman, Growth in a Traditional Society. 50. 13 In Bas-Maine, most leases were in kind rather than in money, Antoine, Fiefs et Villages du Bas-Maine. 352. Mitairies in western France tended to be relatively unified but modest holdings, Annie Antoine, "Systemes Agraires de la France de 1'Ouest: Une rationality meconnue?" HES 1999,1 (18e annee): 115. This was particularly the case in toe Loudunais and Touraine, Brigitte Maillard, Les campaanes de Touraine au XVIIF siecle: structures agraires et gconomie rurale (Rennes, 1998) 125. 325 Richelot, seigneur of La Roussellerie, leased in kind a farm with a net income of 90 It to Charles Giroire of Martaize in 1755. There were two other forms of property lease in the Loudunais. The terms of a lease of livestock (a croit) were similar to those of a lease in kind - the tenant managed the animals and paid half of the net produce. For livestock this could consist of offspring, meat, wool, eggs, and other products. Once again, ploughmen were the predominant tenants, taking on responsibility for the animals of seigneurs, merchants, and officials. These livestock leases were a very old practice almost universally followed across France. But in the Loudunais, though not uncommon, they were relatively few and hardly a great source of wealth, usually involving a single cow or some goats. There were a few exceptions. Pierre Bertrand, merchant of Moncontour, leased 2 027 It worth of livestock to a ploughman of La Chaussee in 1746, while the estate manager Jean Regnier leased livestock valued at 815 It to a ploughman of Saint-Clair in 1742. The last type of lease was a kind of long-term loan (a rente). This involved the provision of a small piece of land, house, or a sum of money in return for a fixed annual payment calculated at one-twentieth (five per cent) of the item's value.15 For example, a lease for a sum of 300 It required a payment of 15 It a year. When this kind of lease was used for land, the tenant also took on responsibility for seigneurial dues. In some ways, this operated much like a modern bank loan with annual interest payments, except that these leases were usually intended to last indefinitely, their principal was not progressively paid back, and they could involve relatively small amounts of money. In order to redeem 14 Moriceau, Histoire et geographie de l'elevage francais. 55-69. 15 Richard C. Hoffmann found this kind of credit was a common stopgap in Land. Liberties, and Lordship in a Late Medieval Countryside - Agrarian Structures and Change in the Duchv of Wroclaw Philadelphia, 1989) 248. 326 them, the tenant paid back the total of the principal (or gave back the property). For example, in 1740 Jacques Brossau of La Chauss6e paid 60 It to a merchant of Dercay to redeem a lease with an annual payment of 3 It. The following year, Jean Renault, also of La Chaussee, paid 180 It to a merchant of Sauves to redeem a lease with an annual payment of 9 It. During the period surveyed, the average value of these leases was only about 120 It, with an annual payment of just 6 It. Land was central to the rural economy of the Loudunais, and a peasant's status was in large part defined by how much land he possessed.16 Most of the land was controlled by elites, who leased parcels of it to ploughmen. The ploughmen in turn sublet land to other ploughmen and/or day-workers. Leases of money, livestock, and houses could also be had under various terms. In general, this created complicated social and agrarian structures which caught up peasants and landlords and made it difficult for farms to be consolidated or expanded.17 But the system worked because the grain trade was profitable in most years; the soil was well suited to produce such crops and the region was connected to the largest market network in France. Most peasants, even poorer day- workers, grew fine wheat to sell and then bought bread made from cheaper grains to eat. The money could also be used to cover expenses that had to be paid in cash like taxes. The most successful farmers tended to be those with enough land to grow large crops of fine wheat for market as well as less valuable grains for their own subsistence. Henri S6e, Les classes rurales en Bretaene du XVI6 siecle a ia Revolution (Paris, 1906) 74. 17 T. J. A. Le Goff, "The Rural Property of the Hospices of Dijon during the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries," proceedings of the conference Production et productivite agricoles dans le monde occidental (XlV-XX1 siecles) Institut National de Recherches Agronomiques / fLeole des Hautes Etudes en SciencesSociales, Paris, 18-20 December 2003. (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, forthcoming, 2008). 327 Socio-economic Hierarchy Historians often have difficulty distinguishing the contours of rural economic hierarchy. Social categories are often ambiguous and arbitrary, and rarely consistent in the documents. This creates problems for those using this "impossible yet necessary" method for understanding rural society.18 For example, the term "ploughman" (laboureur) is misleading because it does not refer necessarily to a wealthy or comfortable peasant, but strictly to those who owned a plough team, and not always even that19 Historians have applied a number of labels to differentiate ploughmen; most agree that there was a wide range of wealth among them.20 The term day-worker (journalier) is also confusing because many day-workers owned and/or leased at least some land. Many studies have emphasized the importance of a middle group between wealthy ploughmen and poor day-workers.21 Although the taille assessments suggest that there was a middle group of peasants in the Loudunais, this in fact consisted of less wealthy ploughmen who were still distinctly better off than the region's day-workers, 18 G6rard B6aur, "Les categories sociales a la campagne: repenser un instrument d'analyse" Annates de Bretagne et des Pays de POuest: Aniou. Maine. Touraine 106,1 (1999): 161. 19 Antoine, "Systemes agraires," 108. 20 Jean Gallet, Seigneurs et pavsans en France. 16004793 (Rennes, 1993) 58. For Poitou, Paul Raveau uses the terms laboureurs a bras (workers), laboureurs a 6a»M/"(plougbmen), and laboweurs-marchand (merchants) to distinguish among those claiming ploughman status in L'agriculture et les classes pavsannes: la transformation de la propriety dans le Haut-Poitou au XVT siecle (Paris. 1926)217-235. Similar categories are developed in Goubert, Beauvais et le Beauvaisis. 170-175. Jean-Marc Moriceau describes how the wealthiest ploughmen took advantage of a weak seigneurial regime to become a veritable rural elite, Les fermiers de l'fle-de-France. X^-XVIIf siecle: Pascension d'un patronat agricole (Paris, 1994). 21 Le Goff divided rural society into thirds, with one-third secure, one-third somewhat secure, and one-third living in poverty, Vannes and its Region. 202. Gallet argues that this middle group was characterized by a combination of farming and seasonal work in La seigneurie Bretonne. 570. Antoine called this middle group closiers - farmers who owned/leased some land and were generally dependent on the larger ploughmen, Fiefs et Villages du Bas-Maine. 73. 328 owing to their plough teams and the amount of land they held. This dichotomy is consistent with what historians have found in other areas of Haut-Poitou. In fact, the gap between ploughmen and day-workers appeared to be increasing in the second half of the eighteenth century. Peasants in the Loudunais seem to have applied the terms "ploughman" and "day-worker" to a particular socio-economic status rather than a specific agricultural function. In a 1727 notarial document detailing contributions to the parish vestry, the peasants of Martaize' were listed as either ploughmen or day-workers, even though there were several artisans and millers among them. While the ploughmen paid according to their relative wealth, the day-workers were assessed a flat, reduced rate.24 Artisans were not very prominent in the Loudunais but certainly essential to the local economy. In the parishes of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, many trades, including those of shoemaker and weaver, were pursued by day-worker households.25 A few professions, including those of miller, baker, and especially blacksmith (marechal), carried higher status and were carried on by peasants from wealthy ploughman families. Blacksmiths appear disproportionately among parish delegates (syndics) and as witnesses to official documents, indicating significant social status.26 The parishes were also served by a carpenter, several masons, a coppersmith and a few tailors. The appearance at 22 M&ika Louet estimates that as many as two-thirds of ploughmen fit into this middle group in "Le pays loudunais et mirebelais au XVHf siecle (d'apres les rdles de taille)" (D. E. A. m&noire, University de Poitiers, 2000) 123. 23 Angeline Rousseau, "Les 'coqs de villages' du pays Loudunais dans la dieuxieme moiti6 du XVIIIe siecle" (m&noire de maitrise, Universit6 de Poitiers, 2002) 33; Jack Pichon, "La taille tariff dans quatre paroisses du Haut-Poitou: approche statistique d'un essai de repartition equitable de l'impdt au XVTIf siecle," Revue Historique du Centre-Quest III (2004): 129-174. 24 AD V 4E 110 15 1727-1729 Martaiz6 22 Apr 1727 25 Christelle Montalescot, "Les artisans de Loudun et du Loudunais a la find u XVTHe siecle" (m&noire de maitrise, University de Poitiers, 2000) 174. 26 For example, in 1741, the blacksmith Urbain Courtilly was named delegate of Martaize\ AD V 2 C 1933 Contrdle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour. 329 Martaize of a hatter from Loudun suggests that more specialized urban artisans occasionally toured the countryside.27 Of course, peasants would also have gone to town themselves to shop. Figure 39 - Artisans in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaizg, 1737-1765 •Weaving E Shoemakers S Construction • Miller •Baker/Butcher Q Blacksmith O Other Almost half of the artisans in these three parishes were weavers. There were also a number of masons and shoe-makers. Some masons benefited from lucrative contracts to work for the local elite. Weavers and shoe-makers appear to have produced cloth and shoes for local use.29 There were a large number of millers, bakers, and butchers, who were obviously central to the rural economy and particularly the food consumption of households. As a rule, artisans can be grouped with the day-worker or ploughman households with which their trades were associated. The most significant division in the socio-economic hierarchy of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize^ lay between ploughmen and day-workers, though there could be 27 AD V, Baptismal Register Martaize, 8 Aug 1760, Pierre Rateau of Loudun is a godparent for Jean Chottier. 28 For example, Claude and Pierre Bruneau completed work for an estate manager at Moncontour and the seigneur of La Roussellerie in 1757; the two projects earned them 143 It. AD V Contrdle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour, 2 C 1943. 29 While there was a weak textile industry concentrated in Tours, in the Loudunais what little industry was present was entirely designed for local consumption. Maillard, Les campagnes de Touraine. 260-262. 330 considerable variety in the fortunes within each group. By examining parish registers and notarial records the economic standing of 308 of the about 325 households in these three parishes can be identified.30 Artisan households have been assigned to one or the other group based on their trade. Figure 40 - Socio-economic hierarchy in Aulnay, La Chaussee and Martaiz6,1737-1765 • Ploughmen El Day-workers fl Merchants • Other There were 124 ploughman and 147 day-worker households, close to an even split. There were more ploughmen in Aulnay (25 of 50 households) and more day-workers in the larger community of Martaize (92 of 170 households). This balance differed significantly from other rural areas in France, reflecting the nature of the rural economy of the Loudunais and particular local definitions of the terms "day-worker" and "ploughman."31 Agriculture was a financially successful activity for those with sufficient land and equipment to pursue it. On the other hand, this system depended on a large supply of cheap, accessible labour that came from peasants with 30 Where the terms are inconsistent for a particular individual, I have chosen the one appearing most often. 3i Antoine found that day-workers composed just ten per cent of the population in Bas-Maine, while only an additional four per cent could be classed as artisans, Fiefs et Villages du Bas-Maine. 57. Gallet similarly found that in western France there were fewer day-workers, Seigneurs et Pavsans. 232. But in the Beauvaisis, the day-workers (manoeuvriers) were an even stronger majority, Goubert, Beauvais et le Beauvaisis. 180. 331 insufficient land to provide for their families or keep themselves fully employed. By examining the model budgets for an average day-worker and a successful ploughman, we can get a closer idea of the gaps in wealth and income between these groups. Budget Methodology Day-workers' Income Day-workers in the Loudunais got by on a combination of wage work and small farming. Many held small plots of land that they essentially owned, simply paying the cens et rentes. Some leased land from ploughmen. The day-worker in this budget owned a single plot of 1 boisselee (b) or 3.2 ha. I have assumed use of a standard three-field system and allowed for some unusable land, leaving the day-worker with three fields of 1 ha each, one of which would have been left in fallow. The average gross product from the land was 9.63 hi or 88.28 bx / ha. Day-workers owned a few livestock and planted gardens to supplement their diets. They might work up to 250 days a year at a wage of as much as 15 s a day, depending on whether they received meals as part of their pay. Day-workers' Expenses The day-worker had to set aside the cens et rentes for the seigneur, and the tithe (dime) for the church. He would also pay taxes including the taille, the gabelle, and extraordinary taxes such as the vingtieme. Most peasants lived in the village; in only a few large metairies were their houses situated near the land they worked. Houses were 32 Hoffinan, Growth in a Traditional Society. 38. 33 Paul Raveau, L'agriculture et les classes pavsannes. 235; P. Boissonnade, Histoire de Poitou (Paris, 1977 (1926)) 235. 332 expensive and often belonged to a seigneurie, so most day-workers rented only part of one, depending on the size of their family. They had to purchase wood for heating their rooms and oil for lighting their lamps or candles.34 Lacking a plough-team of his own, the day-worker needed to borrow one from a local ploughman, and this had to be paid for, or recompensed in kind, or with labour. Then there was the cost of seed. Seeding ratios varied depending on the quality of the land, but generally secondary grains like oats produced more from seed (1:8) than wheat (1:6).35 The day-worker relied on vegetation from the uncultivated parts of his land to feed his livestock, and bought some hay for the winter. Finally, the day-worker had to pay a small commission to the local, itinerant merchants (blatters) who typically bought up his crops. The day-worker's first concern was to feed his household. We can estimate that his family consisted of two adults and four children, who consumed 7.5 pounds of bread a day or over 2 700 pounds a year.36 The day-worker grew and sold his wheat and purchased cheap rye bread. Most day-workers could only afford small quantities of dairy products and vegetables in addition to what they themselves produced, and ate meat perhaps once a week. This was clearly an unbalanced diet, deficient in fats, proteins, and vitamins. 34 For examples of peasants renting houses see AD V 4E 53/509 Saint-Cassien 4 Jul 1695,4E 110/26 Saint- Clair 26 Nov 1757 and 4E 109/66 MartaizS 17 May 1762. Estimates on heating and lighting costs from Francois Lebrun, La vie conjugate sous 1'Ancien Regime (Paris, 1975) 68. 35 Sutherland, The Chouans. 84; Lachiver, Les annees de misere, 36. 36 Lachiver estimates a working man consumed an average of 2.5 pounds a day, while a woman and older children consumed 1.5 pounds a day. The bread was typically eaten with or in simple soups and stews, Les annees de misere. 39. For more on demographic practices in the Loudunais, see Part II, Chapter 4. Lebrun, La vie conjugate. 68. 333 Ploughmen's Income Most ploughmen farmed several plots of land and, as the name suggests, owned at least one plough-team. The ploughman depicted in these budgets held a total of 10 b of land - five leased from a landlord under a bail aferme and five which he owned. Like the day-worker, the ploughman used a three-field system. On the land he owned he planted fine wheat (froment) and mixed wheat (meteil), while on the leased land he cultivated fine wheat and barley (orge), leaving a third of the total arable land fallow in a given year. A certain portion of his property was wasteland (landes), good only for feeding livestock. His animals consisted only of the draught oxen, perhaps a dozen sheep, a dairy cow, and a few pigs.38 He might also rent out his plough-team for a small profit. Ploughmen's Expenses The ploughman paid the tithe and the cens et rentes on all of his land (his lease made him responsible for these dues). He also laid out a set amount in money for his lease. This amount would be re-negotiated at the end of the lease's term, usually every five to nine years. Many large leases included a house in the village with a garden, though the ploughman would still have had to bear the cost of heating, lighting, and maintaining it. The ploughman's taxes were higher than the day-worker's - the vingtieme in particular took a significant slice of his income. The costs of running his farm were also considerable. For example, the ploughman required seed for his wheat, mixed wheat, and barley crops and hired day- 38 Marina Dinet, "Culture materielle et vie quotidienne a Loudun et ses campagnes (1642-1691)" (memoire de maitrise, University de Poitiers, 1998) 83. 334 workers either seasonally or as year-round servants (domestiques) to help him with his cultivation. The ploughman produced wheat and barley for the market, and mixed wheat for his own and his family's consumption. He usually produced enough, 20 hi, to provide the necessary bread for the year - about eight pounds a day.39 This mixed wheat was subject to banal dues at the mills and ovens, which were assessed at one-fourteenth of the grain processed. Ploughmen had similar-sized families to those of day-workers, but typically consumed more meat, dairy products, and vegetables, both from the products of their own livestock and that which they purchased. Finally, the ploughman might sell his produce to a local grain merchant (bldtier), a larger merchant based in a town, or arrange to transport and sell it himself at market. Whatever choice he made, we can estimate storage, transport, and/or commission fees at 10 per cent of the grain. Budget Results - Day-workers and Ploughmen in the Loudunais (1760s) The gap between day-workers and ploughmen Table 18 - Total revenue, expenses, and net income of day-worker and ploughman Revenue Expenses Net Income Day-worker 349.8 it 337.64 It 12.16 It Ploughman 1872.47 It 1456.92 It 415.55 It These results demonstrate that the definitions of day-worker and ploughman mattered. The gap in net income was particularly significant. The ploughman had a 10 to 1 advantage in land held, only a 5.4 to 1 advantage in revenue, yet enjoyed a potential 39 Brigitte Maillard discusses the type of bread eaten in the Loudunais in Les campagnes de Touraine, 181. Pierre Goubert estimated that 19.5 hi of grain were required to produce 2920 lbs of bread, or the equivalent of 8 lbs of bread a day, Beauvais et le Beauvaisis. 165. 335 net income over 30 times higher than that of the day-worker. The ploughman could potentially save money to invest in more land, livestock, or equipment. The day-worker, on the other hand, could only hope to make a small profit in an average year. He would have great difficulty saving enough to improve his lot* and in difficult years would fall into debt. The number of day-workers selling land at this time (nearly 10 000 It worth of land in the periods 1737-47 and 1753-59 alone) suggests that ploughmen and others were prepared to take advantage of their neighbour's distress in order to satisfy their hunger for land.4 0 Standard Annual Expenses Figure 41 - Day-Worker Annual Expenses •Consumption 10 Living/Upkeep B Seed and Plough B Taxes •Tithe S Merchant • Seigneurial Ones Item Per cent Remarks consumption 63.4 includes livestock feed seeding & ploughing 13.4 living/upkeep 8.9 house, heating, lighting taxes 5.7 taille, gabette, vingtieme tithe 4.0 V\2m of produce merchant fees 3.7 seigneurial dues 0.9 cens et rentes 40 AD V 2 C 1931-1943 Contrdle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour. Day-workers were half of all sellers in land sales between 1737 and 1747, and 1753 and 1759 in Aulnay, La Chauss6e, and Martaize\ They sold nearly 10 000 It worth of land during this period alone. Each piece of land was worth on average about 30 It. Ploughmen were the majority of the buyers. 336 About two-thirds of a day-worker's annual expenses went to feeding himself, his family, and his livestock. Next to this, his other costs appear minor. Taxes represented less than six per cent of annual expenses, while the dues to priest and seigneur together were about five per cent. With little net income, day-workers were vulnerable to any increase in their expenses, including taxes. They sold the wheat they produced, and used their wages to buy the poorer grains they consumed. If grain prices rose or their wheat crop failed, consumption costs could quickly become unmanageable. Day-workers were also dependent on finding employment, so in years when ploughmen had poor harvests they might be faced with less employment or reduced wages. Figure 42 - Ploughman Annual Expenses •Lease dSeigneurial Dues B Consumption •Seed •Wages 0 Tithe B Living/Upkeep •Taxes 0 Merchant Item Per cent Remarks seed 21.0 consumption 18.9 includes livestock lease 13.7 bailaferme wages 12.9 tithe 10.4 l/12th of gross product living/upkeep 8.2 heating, lighting, effects, upkeep merchant 7.1 taxes 5.8 taille, gabelle, vingtieme seigneurie 2.0 cetis et rentes, banalite The initial impression from reviewing this chart is that the ploughman's budget was well-balanced. He spent most on his actual farming operation - seed, the lease, and 337 wages accounted for almost half of his total expenses. Consumption costs were a far lighter burden on the ploughman, though the tithe was more considerable. Although the ploughman paid far more tax than the day-worker, the rate of taxation was about the same. The seigneur enjoyed a small but consistent income fromth e ploughman's dues and use of the banal mill and oven. This ploughman could hope for a substantial profit of over 400 It, or the equivalent of what he would have paid to buy himself a complete plough-team. Of course, bad harvests and/or low grain prices would cut significantly into his revenues. In years with poor crop yields, he might cut labour costs or reduce household expenses. The lease from his landlord, a set amount over several years, would be a greater or lesser burden depending on his actual revenue. Some scholars have suggested that many landlords were actually extremely flexible in demanding payment, particularly during times of crisis, because it was difficult for them to find and keep good tenants.41 There is no evidence for this one way or another in the Loudunais. Other costs, such as merchant fees and the tithe, rose or fell with the harvest results. In general, this ploughman certainly appears to have achieved a degree of financialsecurit y and had the potential to expand in the future. The nuances of economic groups Naturally, most families fit somewhere above, below, or in between these models. Most agrarian societies were characterized by a great variety in peasant holdings and 41 Le Goff, "The Rural Property of the Hospices of Dijon." 338 wealth. In the Loudunais, some day-worker families managed to assemble several plots of land. For example, Louis Buzet of Martaize owned seventeen different parcels of land in four different seigneuries, collectively worth 763 It. Meanwhile, some ploughman families owned little more than their plough-team. For example, Rene Negrault of La Chaussee formed a marriage community of just 270 It with Louise Giroire, only 12 It more than that of the average day-worker.44 Positions in the community socio-economic order were not static, nor were day-worker and ploughman closed groups. Some peasants moved up to become ploughmen or sank to the status of day-workers over the course of their lifetimes. Sons of ploughmen might work as agricultural labourers in order to earn money to marry and set up their own households. But for the majority of rural families, the gap in property, revenue, and especially net income set a barrier between economic groups that was not easily crossed. Opportunities and potential were simply not the same for everyone. Rural Society in the Loudunais at the end of the Seven Years' War (1762-65) For the years 1762 through 1765, the primary sources allow us to see how these budgets translated into year-to-year reality for day-workers and ploughmen.45 The results are shown in the following graphs (Figures 5-10), which depict what happened to the revenue, expenses, and net income of the model day-worker and ploughman over these 42 Richard C. Hoffmann, Land. Liberties, and Lordship, 240. 43 AD V 2 C 1931-1943 Contr61e des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour. It is likely that Buzet held still more land rather than selling it all off. 44 AD V 2 C 1936, the marriage contract of Negrault and Giroire was signed 19 Jan 1746. For more on marriage contracts see below under Material life. 45 AD I-L C83 1720-1765,11 Aug 1761,1 Aug 1762, Jul 1763, Jul 1764,28 Jul 1765; C. Chevalier, Tableau de la Province de Touraine. 1762-1766: administration, agriculture, industrie. commerce, impots (Tours, 1863) 115-118. 339 years. It is interesting to note the degree to which the results are linked. When the ploughman lost, so did the day-worker. When he had high profits, the day-worker too was in the black. The following sections examine the economic conditions of each year and the consequences for day-workers and ploughmen. They show in particular how the burden of particular expenses like consumption, taxes, or seigneurial dues changed from year to year. They also show that the gap between day-workers and ploughmen remained wide throughout. Figure 43 - Revenue and Expenses in the Loudunais, 1762-65 - Day-Worker Revenue - Day-Worker Expenses - Ploughman Revenue -Ploughman Expenses 1762 1763 1764 1765 Figure 44 • Net Income in the Loudunais, 1762-65 i • Day-worker ill B Ploughman 1763 1764 340 1762 With the Seven Years' War in its final stages, taxes were high; war taxes nearly doubled the taille, and the state levied three vingtiemes. To make matters worse, by August, it was clear that the harvest would be a major disappointment. The subdelegate reported that wheat yields would be one-half, mixed wheat one-third, rye one-quarter, and oats and barley two-thirds of normal results. Figure 45 - Day-Worker and Ploughman Expenses, 1762 Day-worker Per cent •Consumption consumption 61.4 B Living/Upkeep B Seed and Plough seed and plough 14.2 •Taxes living/upkeep 11.1 •Tithe taxes 8.9 B Merchant tithe 2.0 • Seigneurial Dues merchant fees 1.4 seigneurial dues 1.0 Ploughman Per cent DLease seed 25.2 0 Seigneurial Dues • Consumption consumption 23.2 • Seed lease 22.5 •Wages taxes 13.4 •Tithe living/upkeep 7.4 0 Living/Upkeep tithe 5.5 BTaxes seigneurial dues 1.6 • Merchant merchant 1.3 wages 0 With significantly reduced revenue from his small farm and fewer work opportunities, the day-worker faced a deficit of over 50 It. Since he had less grain to sell, merchant fees decreased and taxes increased in relation to other costs. The day-worker likely trimmed his family's consumption of meat, dairy, and vegetables, but otherwise 341 had few options. To meet his obligations and feed his family, he would have to sell assets, acquire a loan or rely on informal credit. His course of action probably depended on his existing indebtedness, and the results from preceding years. If 1762 was just the latest of a series of bad years, additional credit may have been difficult to find. The year 1762 was disastrous for the wealthier ploughman as well. Low prices and very low harvest yields created a deficit of about 207 It, even if he reduced many living expenses, and dispensed with seasonal help. As the mixed wheat crop failed almost entirely, he had to look at other options to feed his family. One possibility was to eat his fine wheat crop. But finewhea t prices were about 25 per cent higher than those for mixed wheat, so he probably sold it and then used the money to buy bread on the market. This was certainly more expensive than making his own bread; bis consumption costs rose to 23 per cent of his annual expenses. Meanwhile, the proportion of his expenses dedicated to lease payments rose by more than half (from 13.7 to 22.5 per cent), while wartime measures more than doubled the relative burden of taxes (from 5.8 to 13.4 per cent). Like the day-worker, the ploughman may have reduced his consumption and living expenses, but still faced a large deficit that could only be met by selling property or acquiring loans, unless his landlord permitted him to defer his lease payment. Not surprisingly, the lower nutritional levels that probably resulted from this difficult year can be linked to higher mortality in these communities.46 For more on mortality and nutrition see Part II, 4. 342 1763 Fortunately for all, the harvest of 1763 was much better. The subdelegate reported normal returns on mixed wheat, rye, and barley, and above average yields for fine wheat (+25 per cent) and oats (+33 per cent). Grain prices remained stable, up just 1.7 per cent from1762 . Figure 46 - Day-worker and Ploughman Expenses, 1763 Day-worker per cent • Consumption E3 Living/Upkeep consumption 58.3 B Seed and Plough seed and plough 13.5 •Taxes living/upkeep 10.5 •Tithe taxes 8.4 S Merchant tithe 4.3 • Seigneurial Dues merchant fees 4.3 seigneurial dues 1.0 Ploughman per cent 0 Lease seed 17.8 E3 Seigneurial Dues consumption 16.5 •Consumption lease 15.6 •Seed wages 14.6 •Wages tithe 10.0 0 Tithe taxes 9.3 H Living/Upkeep aTaxes living/upkeep 7.7 Q Merchant merchant 6.8 seigneurial dues 1.9 The day-worker's revenue was up, helped by better results on his small farm and plenty of work available at good wages. Low prices helped him manage his consumption costs. He could hope for a much larger than average profit of about 48 It. Merchant fees had a somewhat higher importance as the day-worker had more grain to sell, and taxes 343 remained high. Perhaps most importantly, the profit enjoyed in this good year would cover most of the deficit endured in the previous bad one. The ploughman also benefited from the better harvest. His revenue more than doubled and he could expect a profit of around 284 It - covering the previous year's deficit with room to spare. If his landlord had permitted the ploughman to defer his lease payment, he could catch up now. Taxes remained higher than normal at almost 10 per cent of expenses. The ploughman did well against his lease in this year, though proportional obligations like the tithe and merchant's fees took their share of the increased yield. These results show how important grain prices were to ploughman budgets. The standard model at the beginning of this chapter projected a profit of over 400 It with only average crop yields but high prices (i.e. those of 1765). In 1763, crop yields were well above average, but prices were 20 per cent lower - the resulting profit was much more modest, 1764 The harvest of 1764 was mixed, while prices rose slightly (about 5 per cent). The wheat crop was average, and mixed wheat and rye can be estimated at 10 per cent above average. Oats and barley, however, were down to just one-quarter of their normal yield, greatly reducing the revenue of secondary crops for both the ploughman and day-worker. On the positive side, taxes were reduced after the end of the war. Direct war taxes like the ustencile disappeared entirely, and the number ofvingtihmes was reduced from three to two. 344 Figure 47 - Day-worker and Ploughman Expenses, 1764 Day-worker per •Consumption cent EH Living/Upkeep consumption 61.5 B Seed and Plough seed and plough 14.0 BTaxes living/upkeep 10.7 •Tithe B Merchant taxes 7.1 •Seigneurial Dues tithe 3.0 merchant fees 2.6 seigneurial dues 1.0 Ploughman per cent DLease seed 19.7 0 Seigneurial Dues •Consumption consumption 17.9 •Seed lease 16.4 •Wages wages 15.3 Q Tithe tithe 9.0 B Living/Upkeep living/upkeep 8.1 •Taxes taxes 6.1 • Merchant merchant 5.3 seigneurial dues 2.0 In general, both day-worker and ploughman benefited less than they had fromth e bountiful harvest of the previous year. The former could hope for a small profit (less than 10 It), while the latter, getting what he could from the strong mixed wheat results, would bring in a more robust 140 It Taxes fell in value and as a proportion of expenses for both the day-worker and the ploughman, but more for the latter since war taxes and vingtiemes had taken far more from him. The relative burden of consumption costs rose slightly for both owing to their reduced revenues fromsecondar y crops. 1765 After two good years, the wheat and mixed wheat crops fell drastically to one-half of their average yield. Rye was similarly reduced, but the other secondary crops (oats, 345 barley) can be estimated at about 10 per cent above average. Grain prices rose by about 20 per cent, putting great pressure on the day-workers who had to buy their bread from the market at the same time as they had far less wheat to sell. Figure 48 - Day-worker and Ploughman Expenses, 1765 Day-worker per cent a Consumption consumption 65.1 EH Living/Upkeep seed and plough 13.7 •Seed and Plough •Taxes living/upkeep 9.2 •Tithe taxes 6.1 Q Merchant tithe 2.8 DSeigneurial Dues merchant fees 2.2 seigneurial dues 1.0 Ploughman per QLease cent CO Seigneurial Dues seed 28.9 • Consumption consumption 23.1 lease 18.9 •Wages tithe 7.7 BTithe taxes 7.0 S Living/Upkeep living/upkeep 4.9 •Taxes wages 4.3 • Merchant merchant 3.3 seigneurial dues 1.9 With less income and higher bread prices, the day-worker faced a deficit of 51 It For the ploughman, the high grain prices helped avoid a repeat of the big losses of 1762. Though his major crops produced half of a normal year's output, the high return on what he could sell and some strategic reductions of labour and other costs would have helped him preserve a small profit of about 39 It. Consumption costs were also a heavier burden for the ploughman in 1765, as he had to buy some of his bread. Most striking is the increase in the weight of his seeding expenses frompreviou s years. This certainly would 346 have been a time of discomfort, as the day-worker searched for credit or considered selling assets, while the ploughman stringently cut costs and hoped to break even. Summary At the end of the Seven Years' War, life for day-workers in the Loudunais was difficult While there was great variety in their condition from year to year, they generally tended to lose, and by the end of the four years examined on the assumptions of this model budget, the average day-worker would have been 58 It in the red. Well- established ploughmen also had a seesaw time at the end of the Seven Years' War, but emerged with gains of around 250 It A combination of low prices and low wheat yields (1762) was bad for everyone but worst for ploughmen. High prices and low wheat yields (1765) were also an adverse combination, particularly for day-workers. The day-worker did best when crops were above average but prices remained low, as in 1763. The ploughman, on the other hand, needed both prices and yields to be high in order to maximize his profits. Since most leases required fixed payments over terms of several years, increased revenue would also equal a net gain for the ploughman over what he paid his landlord. Of course, nothing stopped a landlord fromrenewin g a lease at higher terms when it expired. Taxes could be a significant burden for everyone. While they were never among the top expenditures, taxes certainly cut into profits and increased deficits. At the end of the war, in 1762-63, taxes reached almost thirteen per cent of the ploughman's annual expenses - the King's fiscal policy of tapping the resources of his wealthier subjects appears to have had some success. The effect of higher taxes on day-workers 347 should not be minimized either, as even small increases could endanger those who relied on such small margins of profit to get by. Perhaps the gap between day-workers and ploughmen is best seen by the fact that day-workers spent the greater part of their income on simply feeding themselves, while ploughmen spent most on their farming. Nobody was starving, but the small deficits faced by day-workers were enough to increase their dependency on ploughmen (and others) not only for work, but also for credit. This worked to the advantage of the ploughmen, who needed cheap, reliable labour to manage their cultivation. It may be true that an inclusive social order existed in rural communities, but the economic potential and opportunities for these groups were radically different. Ploughmen and day-workers were tied together, but it was certainly an unequal relationship. Loans and Indebtedness in the Loudunais Credit was an integral part of the rural economy in the Loudunais. Peasants took on debts by purchasing goods and merchandise on credit, leasing money, livestock or property (as described above) and securing loans.47 They borrowed money for a variety of reasons, such as to invest in land, livestock or equipment, to meet a sudden need for food, seed, or fodder, to purchase items for their household, or to settle family matters like dowries and succession claims. The information in the available records does not always enable us to be certain what their motives were, but differentiating between patterns of borrowing based on social groups, and examining who was providing loans to whom, allows us to formulate an understanding of the structures and importance of credit 47 Serge Chassagne, "Faillis en Anjou au XVIIf siecle: contribution a 1'histoire economique d'une province" Annates: Economic. societes, civilisations XXV (1970): 491. 348 and indebtedness in these parishes. A survey of the notarial records from 1737 to 1747 and 1753 to 1759 for Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, reveals that credit relationships reflected and reinforced economic hierarchy.48 Seigneurs, merchants, and officials issued loans to ploughmen. Ploughmen, in turn, issued loans to day-workers and to each other. It is quite clear that credit was a method that many ploughmen employed to support and expand their operations. They borrowed more money and for longer periods than day- workers. Day-workers were more likely to need short-term credit to get through bad years, and borrowed smaller amounts. A few day-workers became so indebted that they simply gave up, ceding their property {cession) to relatives or creditors because they could no longer even pay the seigneurial dues.49 In general, it seems that there was growing indebtedness, especially among ploughmen, as peasants in the Loudunais were borrowing more money than they were paying back. Loans and Quittances The loans and quittances analyzed here are those formally recorded with the notaries and registered in the Controle des Actes at Moncontour. The results underestimate the total number of loans and repayments in these parishes for several reasons. First, it is likely that additional loans were registered with notaries outside the jurisdiction of the office at Moncontour, in places such as Loudun, which many inhabitants regularly visited. Second, it is difficult to assess the importance of informal 48 AD V 2 C 1931-1943 Controle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour. 49 AD V 2 C 1931-1943 Controle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour. There were thirteen examples of cessions in this survey; nine were from the later period (1753-1759). The majority of those ceding property were day-workers, though there were 2 examples involving ploughmen. There were also a few examples of leases being turned over because the peasant involved could no longer pay. 349 debt, which seldom leaves traces in the documents. Finally, these records do not include the leases which, as discussed above, functioned like a long-term loan (a rente). Figure 49 - Number of loans in the Loudunais, 1738-1746 and 1754-58 1738 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1746 1746 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 In the three parishes of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize\ with a population of about 1 300 people in 325 households, there were on average a little more than thirteen loans a year. In other words, an average of four per cent of households in these parishes secured a loan in any given year. True, loans were hardly universal - even in the busiest years less than ten per cent of households acquired one. But they were common enough occurrences, although their frequency varied, with as few as four loans in 1757 and as many as 31 in 1739. Most of the variation in the number of loans came fromth e ploughmen, as day-workers consistently took out roughly the same number each year. The number of loans also varied over time; it seems clear there was a greater need for credit throughout rural society in 1738-39, probably because of poor harvests in those T. J. A. Le Goffhas shown that in the eighteenth century there were only between 120 and 160 It a person of actual coins in France. Alternatives for informal credit included bills of exchange, talley-sticks, and even verbal acknowledgements, as well as a variety of exchanges and transactions in kind. See "Monetary Unification under the French Monarchy" in Patrick M. Crowley, ed., Before and Bevond EMU: Historical Lessons and future prospects (London, 2002) 58. 51 Hoffman, Growth in a Traditional Society, 71. 350 years.52 Later peaks in the number of loans taken by ploughmen could relate to difficulty, but conversely could show good years in which successful ploughmen sought to invest and expand. The notaries also recorded quittances, or formal acknowledgements by someone of money paid to them to fulfill an obligation. While most of these transactions were to repay loans, it is impossible to systematically match up individual loans and quittances, while some payments may also have been for other commercial transactions. However, by comparing the total number and value of loans and quittances, we can gain some indication of how often peasants in the Loudunais repaid their debts. In general, there were fewer quittances than loans recorded with the notaries; more money was being borrowed than repaid. This was particularly true of ploughmen, who acquired 100 loans and paid back only 36 quittances (a ratio of 3:1). Day-workers acquired 58 loans and reimbursed 27 quittances (a ratio of 2:1). Figure 50 - Number of quittances in the Loudunais, 1738-46 and 1754-58 20i 15 *# of Quittances 10 -Day-workers -Ploughmen S 0 <^' 4? «* ** *+ ** ** «* ** «* ** The overall average was almost nine quittances a year in the three parishes - about four less than the average number of loans. Interestingly, the highest peak of quittances 52 Pierre Leveel, Histoire de Touraine (Chambray, 1988) 552. Also see Part II, 4. Chassagne found that there was a connection between the number of millers, bakers, and rural merchants declaring bankruptcies in Anjou and harvest results in that region, especially between 1758 and 1787 in "Faillis en Anjou au XVnTsiecle,"488. 351 (1743) corresponds with the firstdro p in the number of new loans. This certainly suggests a connection - improving rural fortunes made it possible to pay off at least part of what was borrowed in the previous, difficult years. In this period, a total of 20 013 It was borrowed - an average of 1 430 It each year, or roughly the equivalent of 1 It for each inhabitant of the three parishes (4.4 It / household). During the same period, less than half was repaid (9 462 It). Figure 51 - Value of loans and quittances in the Loudunais, 1738-46,1754-58 -4— Value of Loans -*—Value of Quittances i "* i "i 4? ** ** ** «* «* Although the number of loans appears to fall in the second part of the period, the amount of money borrowed (the value of these loans) was more consistent. This is also true of quittances - there were fewer of them but just as much was repaid. Not surprisingly, the most money was borrowed and the least repaid during the crisis years of 1738 through 1742.53 The balance between loans and quittances reveals that in the majority of the years studied, the total outstanding debt of the inhabitants in these parishes was 1 000 It or more. 53 See Part 1,1 for more information on this crisis, and Part II, 4 for its impact on local demography. 352 Figure 52 - Overall indebtedness in the Loudunais, 1738-46,1754-58 2000 1500 1000 500 -500 -1000 -1500 V$> A> *& J> *& *%• > *& ^ J> x*> A J§> It appears that the first fiveyear s were particularly difficult. Between 1738 and 1742 the balance represented a debt of 7 373 It or about 5.7 It for each inhabitant. In 1743,1755, and 1758 more money was actually repaid than borrowed, significantly so in the first two cases. In 1744 and 1746, the inhabitants were only slightly in the red. On the one hand, the financial situation appears to have been improving over the course of the period. Between 1743 and 1748, and again between 1754 and 1758, the balance of debt was just 3 178 It or about 2.4 It for each inhabitant. But on the other hand, although the rate of indebtedness had slowed, the total amount of debt continued to accumulate. Breaking down these figures into the sums owed by each of the two groups, day- workers and ploughmen, draws attention to the growing indebtedness of ploughmen in particular. As a group, they paid off just one-third of the amount they borrowed. Day- workers, however, paid off more than two-thirds of what they borrowed, indicating that they used loans differently - seeking smaller amounts of money for shorter terms and trying to pay it back as quickly as possible. 353 Figure S3 - Indebtedness by group in the Loudunais, 1738-46,1754-58 16000-1 14000 12000 10000 Q Borrowed 8000 6000 ©Reimbursed 4000 2000 I f:.::-4«MMi l:;:::famw 0 i|im • HiiHi • Ploughmen certainly borrowed more, and borrowed more often than day-workers. They acquired half of the loans and 69 per cent of the money loaned during the period, while day-workers acquired one-third of the loans and just 17 per cent of the money. Both of these figures can be increased somewhat, since presumably most of the widows and, as discussed above, the artisans, could be considered part of the ploughman or day-worker groups in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize. Figure 54 - Loaners by group and number of loans in the Loudunais, 1737-47,1753-59 QLaboureurs EUoumaliers BArtisans •Widows •Other 354 Figure 55 - Loaners by group and value of loans in the Loudunais, 1737-47,1753-59 QLaboureurs HJournaliers 0 Artisans •Widows •Other Day-workers borrowed an average of 67 It, while ploughmen borrowed over twice as much, an average of 141 It. Significantly, the difference in the value of quittances was much smaller between the groups. The average repayment by ploughmen was 119.4 It; for day-workers it was 80.8 It. Since the average quittance of day-workers was higher than their average loan, it seems reasonable to conclude that some day-workers still had ongoing debts that they carried from year to year. The figures for day-workers (loans of almost 70 It and repayments of over 80 It) should be considered with the understanding that many day-workers both acquired loans and repaid money in conjunction with several other people, including relatives. This may have been to rent out land together, or to buy out fellow heirs to a parent's property. In December, 1738, Louis Fillatreau headed up a group of several day-workers who repaid 220 It to Henry Bigot, the notary of Moncontour. This group activity was less common among ploughmen, but not unheard of. The seasonal pattern of borrowing certainly reflects that of agricultural activity. The most money was paid back after the harvest (October through December) while the 355 most money was borrowed at the beginning of winter (December), and especially in the spring (March through May). This suggests that many loans were an investment in seed, young livestock, equipment, or even more land for farming, rather than a reaction to poor harvest results. Comparatively little was borrowed from June through September, indicating that farmers planned well to ensure they had enough money to get through the growing season. The least money was repaid from March through August, the months before agricultural products came in. Figure 56 - Number of loans and quittances by month in the Loudunais, 1737-4% 1753-59 35 n 30 25 20 d# of Loans 15 i13 # of Quittances 10 6 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure 57 - Value of loans and quittances by month in the Loudunais, 1737-47,1753-59 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 Q Value of Loans 1500 IC3 Value of Quittances 1000 500 0 •i *jnf«w.i| nfcuiBaowi Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec An analysis of seasonal patterns further suggests the differences m the reasons that day-workers and ploughmen borrowed money. Ploughmen were far more likely to 356 secure loans in the spring, no doubt to invest in their fanning. Day-workers, however, borrowed more from October through January. This suggests that many day-workers had employment seasonally rather than all year round. The months after the harvest presented the fewest opportunities for work, and were also furthest away from the possibility of new wages the next summer. It is interesting that so many day-workers acquired loans in October (the lowest month for ploughmen). Clearly the fruits of the harvest were shared among these groups unequally. Figure 58 - Number of loans by month and class in the Loudunais, 1737-47,1753-59 •Ploughmen Q Day-workers Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec In general, the economic hierarchy of rural society was reflected in the sources of credit. Loans flowed down from the top - from seigneurs, estate managers, priests, officials, and merchants through ploughmen to day-workers and artisans. Repayments sent money back up. It was also possible for credit to be given within an economic group. 357 Figure 59 - Creditors in the Loudunais by the number of loans supplied, 1737-47,1753-59 • Seigneurs or Managers EH Merchants B Priests • Officials • Ploughmen 0 Artisans B Domestics • Day-workers •Widows Q Militia Figure 60 - Creditors in the Loudunais by the amount of money supplied, 1737-47,1753-59 a Seigneurs or Managers & Merchants • Priests •Officials • Ploughmen E3 Artisans Q Domestics • Day-workers •Widows • Militia Not surprisingly, seigneurs and estate managers were the most prominent creditors. They supplied 28 per cent of the loans and one-third of the money borrowed.54 Merchants, priests, and officials were also important creditors. Together, these social and economic elites provided more than half of the loans and two-thirds of the money. Many ploughmen also loaned money to other peasants. For example, Jean Savary lent 240 It to Jean Rebechau, both ploughmen of Martaizd, in June 1745. Some wealthy ploughmen, like the Messiers of Saint-Aubin and the Giroires of Martaizg, were veritable creditors for the whole of rural society. While the Messiers supplied five large loans to other ploughmen (a total of 995 It), the Giroires provided 24 smaller loans to 21 different 54 See Part III, 7 on the economic importance of the seigneurs, including as creditors. 358 people, mostly day-workers (a total of 1 342 It). In fact, more than simply acting as creditors, these ploughmen were links to the whole credit system. As they loaned money to other ploughmen, artisans, and day-workers, they borrowed money from seigneurs, estate managers, merchants, and their widows. Ploughmen provided about one-quarter of the loans and one-fifth of the money borrowed. As we saw above, ploughmen also acquired one-half of the loans and over two-thirds of the money borrowed. They were at the centre of the credit system, just as they were at the centre of the rural economy. An example of the diverse financial connections of peasants is provided by the inventory of Jean Giroire, a ploughman who died in 1727.53 His property was valued at 1 120 It but he had debts of 920 It He owed money to his estate manager for both a loan and a large lease of land. He also owed quite a lot of money to a merchant (over 400 It), and small amounts to an attorney at Loudun, the parish salt-tax collector, a neighbour, a local butcher, and the parish priest. Giroire also had outstanding wages to pay to his two valets and a domestic servant. Another example of the network of financial relationships is offered by Louis Moreau, a ploughman of Martaize. When he died, his appointed trustee, Anthoine Giroire, ordered an inventory of his personal property (less real estate), which was valued at 1 066 It, 13 s. Within a month, Giroire had sold it off in two roughly equal blocks on behalf of Moreau's children. A mixed lot of people put in claims on Moreau's estate and opposed these sales: men from Moncontour, Ouzilly, Chasseignes, and more distant towns west of Loudun like Saint-Jouin, Oiron and Airault (in the pays of Thouars, Poitou), and from a variety of professions, including merchants, ploughmen, a blacksmith, a priest, a baker, a surgeon, and a wheelwright. It seems that debt among ss AD V 4E 110/15 Lanlaud, Saint-Clair, 4 Apr 1727 inventory of Jean Giroire. 359 ploughmen was something accumulated and managed over a lifetime - and passed to successive generations. Peasants who could not acquire new credit or improve their economic fortunes soon found accumulated debt led to larger problems, especially if they could not pay their seigneurial dues or state taxes. Some lords frequently used seigneurial or royal courts to force their censitaires to come up with unpaid dues such as the cens et rentes and lods et ventes. Non-payment could ultimately lead to the lord's reclaiming the concession.56 Estate managers, merchants, and even other peasants took ploughmen and day-workers to en court for outstanding loans, wages, or unpaid transactions. The state also used the justice system to enforce taxation. In 1763, a bailiff (huissier) from the royal court (bailliage) of Loudun visited the parish of Martaiz^ in order to collect payment of the vingtiemes from ploughmen Martin Jubinet, Jacques Brissault, and Jean Yron. They owed 22 It, 3s from that year and an additional 31s (1 It, 1 Is) from 1759. It appears that the bailiff left frustrated because another was sent in 1769 to collect the original outstanding amounts plus an additional 6 It, 8s.58 These were paltry amounts, but, left long enough, obviously had to receive the state's attention. When a parish fell seriously behind on its taxes, the subdelegate could order the rural mounted police (marechaussee) to imprison the parish tax collectors.59 This analysis of credit and indebtedness has many nuances because many families in the Loudunais fit somewhere in between the models presented of an average day- 56 See Part III, 7 for more on the enforcement of seigneurial rights. 57 AD V 5 B 3 through 5 B 6 Bailliage du Loudun, phunitifs d'audience, 1750-1765. 58 AD V G9 61 cure of Martaiz£, undated (assumed 1769). 59 AD V B supplement 272, registres d'ecrous, prison royale de Loudun. See for example the imprisonment of the collectors of the taille fromth e parishes of Ouzilly-Vignolles, Mouterre, Monts-sur- Guesnes, St Laon, Rossay, and others across the Loudunais in the years 1757-1759. 360 worker and a wealthy ploughman. But in general, the results underline the distinctions in wealth and expectations of these groups found in the budgets. Ploughman borrowed more and for longer periods of time, and tended to borrow in the spring so that they could invest in their farms. Day-workers sought short-term credit throughout the year, especially in the fall and early winter months when employment opportunities were farthest off. They were most likely to repay quickly. Peasants borrowed more than they paid back, and the burden of debt was increasing over the course of the period. Credit was particularly necessary in difficult years, such as 1738-1742. This should not be overstated, however. An average debt of about 32 It a household over a period of 16 years of analysis is not a huge sum, even if informal credit or other loans registered elsewhere may have increased the figuresomewhat . It appears that many peasants got by with just occasional loans, if they needed them at all. For those wealthy ploughmen at the top of rural society, credit was a fact of life. As creditors and debtors, they were inextricably linked to the lords and notables above them, and the rank and file of ploughmen and day-workers below them. Material life A final method of evaluating rural wealth and standard of living among day- workers and ploughmen is to consider household fortune and possessions. Marriage contracts provide one way to measure wealth, since they indicate the value of the personal property (less real estate) of the new marriage community (communaute de mariage), based on the dowry and dower given by the families of the bride and groom. Men might bring farm equipment such as seed, ploughs or tools, while women typically 361 brought money, household goods, and livestock. The marriage community was a legally protected construction; wives could take their husbands to court if they squandered its assets. It lasted as long as the marriage. When one spouse died, the property of the marriage community was divided into equal parts - half for the surviving spouse and half for any heirs (which was in turn divided equally among them).61 In Aulnay, La ChaussSe, and Martaize, ploughmen communities (558.8 It) were worth on average well over double those of day-workers (237.3 It).62 Interestingly, on second marriages day-worker communities were worth less (200 It) while those of ploughmen were worth more (669 It). At this later stage of household and economic development, the distinction between day-workers and ploughmen was much wider, with ploughmen communities having 3.35 times more value. Though significant, the gap was nevertheless not as wide as that suggested by the day-worker and ploughman budgets modeled above - again emphasizing that most families fell in between these standards. Sometimes the marriage contracts list the personal property involved. A comparison of two such contracts in 1695 again illustrates the difference between ploughman and day-worker households. Rene Brissault and Marie Giroire, children of ploughmen from Martaiz6 who married in 1695, received a fully fitted up bed, trunk, kitchen pots and pans, 12 goats, a team of oxen, 4 setters of seed and a small house. Rene Queniot and Marie Rutiault, children of day-workers of Martaize^ who also married 60 James B. Collins, "The Economic Role of Women in Seventeenth-Century France" French Historical Stadj§sl6,2(1989):452. 61 Pierre Le Proust, Commentaires sur les coustumes du pays de Loudunois (Saumur, 1612) 488-496. 62 Jacques Peret studied inventories after death and found that the average day-worker community was worth 279 It throughout Haut and Moyen-Poitou in "Le mobilier rural dans les pays pohevin et charentais au XVIIP siecle: approche a partir des inventaires apres deces" Revue Historique du Centre-Quest II (2003): 171-183. That the figurei s somewhat higher is not surprising given that the marriage contracts show the value of the community at its formation, and Peret's sources show the value at their dissolution. 362 in 1695, received 5 setiers of seed, 9 goats, a bed with quilt and pillow, and a used trunk and cauldron. The marks of a wealthy ploughman family - a plough-team, a house, plenty of household goods, were the starting foundation for Brissault and Giroire. The team of oxen alone (up to 300 It64) was worth more than all of Queniot and Rutiault's personal possessions combined. The latter only received some essentials, and would need to either live with their parents or lease their own accommodations. Occasionally, complete inventories of personal property also appear in the notarial record, usually when a parent died while his or her children were still minors. The inventory of Jean Giroire, a ploughman who died in 1727, has already been mentioned. In 1761, the widow Jeanne Montilly drew up a list of household goods for her son.65 Giroire's inventory did not include his clothes, which must have already been sold or given to his heirs. Still, the three beds, cabinet, table, trunks, sheets and towels of his bedroom were worth as much as Moreau's entire inventory (about 95 It). Yet the gap between the total value of Moreau's and Giroire's household goods was not huge; the latter's were only worth about half again as much. For example, Giroire's kitchen had more pots and pans, plates, and serving utensils, but collectively these items were worth just 25 It. The most significant differences were in livestock, stores, and farm equipment. Over half of the value of Giroire's possessions came from his livestock, particularly his 110 goats, several horses, and pigs. This was somewhat unusual for a ploughman of the Loudunais; he must have had land set aside on which to keep the animals. Giroire also 63 AD V 4E 53/509 Voyer, Saint-Cassien 13 Nov 1695 marriage contract of Ren6 Brissault and Marie Giroire and 13 Jul 1695 marriage contract of Ren6 Queniot and Marie Rutiault 64 Maillard, Structures agraires. 227. 65 AD V 4E 109/66 1761 Rivereau, Martaiz6 23 Aug 1761 inventory of household goods by Jeanne Montilly, widow of Francois Moreau; 4E 110/15 1727-1729, Lanlaud, Saint-Clair 4 Apr 1727 inventory of Jean Giroire. 363 had two complete plough-teams (though his widow sold one pair of oxen after his death), one hundred feet of wood planks and a stock of firewood, 6 setters of seed (wheat and oats), hay, and sixty pounds of cloth. In comparison, Moreau had some firewood, five goats, and one cow and her calf. These results emphasize that while the value of the ploughman's household goods was much higher, most of the difference related to his farm (livestock, equipment). The difference in how the ploughman and day-worker lived in their homes was less marked. Certain items set the ploughman apart, such as his recently purchased lockable cabinet with frontwindows , but generally his family made do with only a little more furniture and effects than that of the day-worker. Many of these items, especially beds, bed coverings, trunks, and clothes, were handed down to subsequent generations - a stock or "capital" of personal effects that remained much the same overtime, with individual items replaced as needed.66 Summary - Peasant Groups in the Loudunais There was a considerable gap between day-workers and ploughmen in the Loudunais. These groups were separated by their revenue, expenses, and net incomes, their land holdings, their credit relationships, and the value of their households. Ploughmen were large farmers who invested their profits and secured loans to expand their operations. Day-workers ran their own smallholdings, but relied mostly on wage- work with the ploughmen to get by. Their perspective was more short-term, particularly with regard to the credit they sought. The material life of peasants did not differ Peret, "Le mobilier rural," 174. 364 enormously, but ploughmen certainly had more household goods and a few newer items to enjoy. The principal difference between the groups was the opportunities ploughmen enjoyed because they owned all the equipment and stores they needed to get started; indeed this was ensured when they got married and began a new household. A day- worker simply could not save enough money or secure enough credit to buy (or lease) the land and the plough-team, seed, and other equipment needed to become a large fanner. While there was some mobility between these groups, in general this economic hierarchy remained distinguishable because the investment required to move very far up the ladder was too great. SECTION II-ACADIA Rural Economy Acadian fanners produced both grain and livestock for local consumption and export, while colonial officials, seigneurs, and trading companies pursued fishing, fur- trading, and other mercantile enterprises. A few peasants took part in these latter activities, especially in the seventeenth century, but in general the Acadians concentrated on agriculture. The rural economy was based on the family farm, constructed from cleared and dyked marshland, and it proved remarkably productive. Unlike peasants in the Loudunais, the Acadians generally enjoyed contiguous land holdings, especially in 67 For example, Pierre Landry ran a small fishing enterprise that employed nine Acadians in 1701 that appears to have failed because of the resumption of war. Louis Allain constructed a timber company with saw mills in the Port Royal area in the 1680s. Abraham Boudrot was an Acadian fur trader who traveled to New England. In 1693 his cargo was seized and he wrote directly to the governor, Sir William Phips, for its release. Boudrot is also known to have provided intelligence to the French colonial government. Emerson W. Baker and John G. Reid, The New England Knight: Sir William Phips. 1651-1695 (Toronto, 1998) 228-229. Pierre Arsenault was a prominent trader in the Gaspe" region, NAC PRO CO 217 Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island - Original Correspondence, 16 Sep 1714. 365 the early decades of settlement when there was plenty of room for expansion. While all land was subject to seigneurial dues, most Acadians held their concessions in perpetuity and so were essentially owners rather than tenants. Leases were rare.68 It might appear that these conditions laid the foundation for an egalitarian society with great homogeneity. Arguing along these lines, some have maintained that dyke- building developed an advanced sense of community and cooperation that was exceptional to Acadia.69 But others have stated that the Acadian experience or technique was not unique. Further, while it is true that the dykes had to be checked and repaired regularly, "inspectors" and specific tradesmen usually took on these responsibilities. Bleakney points out that dyke-building, once learned, was "a relatively easy undertaking." Six men with an oxen team could raise 16 linear feet of dyke in a day and 320 in a month, even when taking into account the time lost due to periodic flooding by the tides.72 The team methodically cut sods, dug trenches, drove in posts, built and compacted the walls, their routine broken only by the occasional insertion of a sluice box, A few leases involving the seigneurial families also occuired. For example, the widow of the seigneur of Port Royal leased a habitation (house and arable land) to Alexandre Girouard with an annual charge of 10 bx wheat, 8 lc, and responsibilityfo r 2 cows. CEA, Notaires d'Acadie (fetude Loppinot) 1687-1710,31 Jan 1705. 69 Yves Cormier, Les Aboiteaux en Acadie: Hier et aujourd'hui (Moncton, 1990) 65-73; N. E. S. Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian: A North American Border People. 1604r1755 (Montreal & Kingston, 2005) 48. Contemporary observers also made this argument - Sieur de Diereville, Relation of the Voyage to Port Royal in Acadia or New France trans.. Alice Lusk Webster, (Toronto, 1933 (1708)) 95. 70 For example, Matthew G. Hatvany discusses dyke-building in the marshlands of Poitou and also English and Dutch dyke-building in the New World in Marshlands: Four Centuries of Environmental Change on the Shores of the St Lawrence (Laval, 2003) 38-44. He notes that what made Acadia unique was the degree to which the peasants relied almost solely on these techniques for agriculture. The term "aboiteau" is a variant of "abotais" or "aboteau" used in the marshlands of Poitou to describe an obstacle to the passage of water and especially mechanisms used to prevent flooding. See Pierre Gachignard, Dictionnaire du patois du marais poitevin (Marseilles, 1983) and Marcel Lachiver, Dictionnaire du Monde rural: les mots du pass6 (Paris, 1997)27. Cormier, Les Aboiteaux. 76; Myriam Marsaud, "L'&ranger qui d&ange: le proces de sorcellerie de Jean Campagna, miroir d'une communautg acadienne, Beaubassin, 1685" (M.A. thesis, University de Moncton, 1993) 80; Tapie, "Grand Pre," 48. 72 J. Sherman Bleakney, The Acadians at Grand Pre" and their Dvkeland Legacy (Montreal & Kingston, 2004)45-61. 366 clappet, and valve chamber (aboiteau). Bleakney argues that these "sod masons" preferred working in small groups, "drinking lots of cider while dyking, and singing ribald songs to combat the boredom of it all." Larger numbers of people would simply have gotten in each other's way. The dispersed pattern of settlement and expansion supports the notion that dyke- building and farming were pursued by particular families working together, and not by entire communities working collectively. After all, there was no solid mass of community to draw labour from. The 1701 census shows, for example, that the Acadian population in the Minas Basin at that time was composed of 75 households divided along eight different rivers. A map of the Port Royal area in 1709 similarly shows a variety of scattered small dyke projects outside two larger enclosed areas near the fort.74 The documentary record does not give us enough to say definitively how dyking was achieved, but it is clear that it was not the outcome of a united, communal effort maintained over generations. A few neighbours working together could soon clear and dyke enough land to be productive, and several peasants appear to have become specialists and hired on an individual basis. Although most of these peasants' main occupation was agriculture, trade was a critical activity in Acadia, providing the metal, manufactured, and luxury goods that would otherwise not have been available in the colony. In the seventeenth century, trade was supposedly under the control of the various French trading companies established in New France. They charged high prices, were unable to consistently meet Acadian needs, Bleakney, Dykeland Legacy. 59. 74 Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia. 136. 367 and had little interest in Acadian produce. An average of only eight ships a year came from France to visit Quebec between 1670 and 1730, and ships that came to Acadia in the 1680s, such as the Saint-Louis, were mainly ferrying indentured servants (engages). Fortunately, New England traders like John Nelson provided an alternate supply of goods. Boston was in constant need of food, so there was a ready market for Acadian agricultural surpluses.77 A few Acadians traded directly in Boston, at least until war and privateering made the seas too dangerous. Generally, however, New England traders took their wares straight to the Acadian communities.78 After the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) ceded Acadia to Great Britain, British governors sought to control trade through Annapolis Royal, building warehouses and issuing permits.79 They were not however able to prevent New Englanders from trading directly with the Acadians, nor Acadians from trading with the new French settlement at Louisbourg. Meanwhile, the needs of the British garrison were supplied by a small group of prominent Acadians, including the Robichauds.80 Governor Philipps confided to his superiors in London that "the people of Minas & Chignecto [Beaubassin] know very well 75 Governor Meneval wrote that the colony was short 12 000 livres (5 874 kg) of supplies and that, as a result, English trade was constant in "Mtooire sur l'Acadie, 1687" Collection de manuscrits. 411. 76 NAC, France: Archives D6partementales de la Charente-Maritime (La Rochelle) MG A2 SSrie E, Equipage de Saint-Louis, 170-200. The Saint-Louis made at least 3 voyages to Acadia from La Rochelle in the late 1680s carrying at least 16 indentured servants. Few of the ships bound for Quebec stopped in Acadia. See James Stewart Pritchard, "Ships, Men, and Commerce: A Study of Maritime Activity in New France" (Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, 1971); Dale Miquelon, New France. 1701-1744: A Supplement to Europe (Toronto. 1987) 128. 77 G. B. Warden, Boston. 1689-1776 (Boston, 1970) 17-19; Richard R. Johnson, John Nelson. Merchant Adventurer: A Life Between Empires (Oxford. 1991)26. 78 Tibierge, an agent of the Compagnie de lapeche sedentaire de l'Acadie, noted disapprovingly that the king's attorney of Port Royal, Pierre Du Breuil, led several expeditions to trade grain in Boston between 1695 and 1697. He reported that the Acadians "do almost no trade with the French" for fear of English reprisals. See Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 142,148. 79 On the warehouse, see LAC, Nouvelle-France: Correspondance officielle 3e serie (1621-1731) MG 8 Al, proclamation de General Phillipps, 28 Aout 1720,677-78. On permits, see Adam Shortt, V. K. Johnston, and Gustave Lanctdt, Currency. Exchange, and Finance in Nova Scotia. 1675-1758 (Ottawa, 1933) 13. 80 Maurice Basque, Pes hommes de pouvoin histoire d'Otfao Robichaud et de sa famille. notable acadiens de Port Royal et de Neguac (Neguac, 1996) 71. 368 that they are out of my power" and would continue to trade with French-controlled lie Royale. Lieutenant-Governor Armstrong estimated that three to four hundred cattle, plus many sheep and other provisions were traded to Louisbourg each year. He also blamed New England traders for encouraging the Acadians to ignore his regulations and orders. In fact, better prices were available at Louisbourg, and the British were unable to create a market at Annapolis Royal that could compete. English ships came no more frequently than their French counterparts had, once the colony was under British rule. From the little documentation that has survived, we can see that the Acadians developed a rural economy, concentrated in the marshlands around the Bay of Fundy, which produced surplus grain and livestock for both local consumption and export. As in the Loudunais, land was a critical resource, both for cultivation and for pasture. It was generally available, though a resource much scarcer in Acadia, labour, was required to clear and dyke it. By the eighteenth century, this economy had developed considerably and had two potential export markets - Boston and Louisbourg. Inevitably, Acadian trade was entangled with the imperial struggle between Britain and France. While both sides wanted to control Acadian produce, neither state was able to provide a secure and consistently profitable trading network like that of the Loire valley for the Loudunais. Most Acadians seem to have adopted the perspective expressed by the deputies of Beaubassin to an English official in 1727; "they thought themselves at liberty to dispose Phillipps to Secretaiy Craggs, My 1720, in Thomas B. Akins, ed., Acadia and Nova Scotia: Documents relating toth e Acadian French and the first British Colonization of the Province. 1714-1758 (Cottonport, 1972) 37. 82 Armstrong to Lords of Trade, 5 Oct 1731, and Armstrong to Secretary of State, 30 Apr 1727, in Akins, Acadia and Nova Scotia. 27. 369 of their goods to the first that would pay them for them whether French or English.' It is likely that the inconsistency of markets functioned as a brake on the development of large farms and commercial agriculture. There was no point in expanding surpluses if buyers and good prices were not available. Socio-economic Hierarchy It is difficult to discern a socio-economic hierarchy in Acadia because of the lack of notarial records and the limitations of the parish registers. Terminology is no help either: the term "day-worker" (journalier) was rarely used in Acadia, though some of the older settlers were designated "ploughmen" (laboureurs). Acadians were almost universally described as "habitants," like their counterparts in New France. This did not mean they stopped being peasants. The word "habitant" was also used in the Loudunais; it seems to simply denote those who were members of the community.84 Some historians have concluded that there was a general parity among Acadian farms and fortunes and thus no distinct economically-based social structure and hierarchy. Yet, a review of the census data suggests that they have missed a gap between rich and poor peasants not unlike that between the day-workers and ploughmen of the Loudunais. 83 LAC PRO CO 217 Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island - Official Correspondence, Phillipps to Armstrong, 29 Mar 1727, 105-108. 84 Louise Dechene, Habitants and Merchants in Seventeenth-Century Montreal, trans. Liana Vardi (Montreal & Kingston, 1992). Allan Greer discusses the issue of habitants versus peasants in Peasant. Lord, and Merchant: Rural Society in Three Quebec Parishes. 1740-1840 (Toronto. 1985) 10. The word "habitant" was most oflen used in the Loudunais in documents involving the parish assembly. 85 Naomi Griffiths wrote that Acadia was "not a rank-ordered society," more a "collectivity" than a community, in The Contexts of Acadian History. 1686-1784 (Montreal & Kingston, 1992) 21-22. Gisa I. Hynes argued that there were no class distinctions seen in marriage alliances in "Some Aspects of the Demography of Port Royal, 1650-1755" Acadiensis Vol HI, 1 (1973): 9. This has been solidly refuted by Jacques Vanderlinden in Se Marier en Acadie Franeaise: XVH6 et XVHF siecles (Moncton, 1998). On Acadian marriage alliances also see Part II, 2 and 3. James Pritchard referred to Acadia as a "republic of subsistence farmers," In Search of Empire: The French in the Americas. 1670-1730 (Cambridge, 2004) 71. 370 The 1707 census presents the following distribution of 209 households in Port Royal, Minas, and Beaubassin based on the value of their land and livestock.86 Figure 61 - Land and livestock value by household in Acadia, 1707 (in 1c) D 700 or less 13701to 1399 H1400+ Eighty-three households (40 per cent) had so few resources that they must have had other sources of income to get by, such as wage work or artisanal production. A similarly- sized group of 84 households could be characterized as subsistence fanners - a middle group not unlike those found in other rural societies of France.87 Only one-fifth of Acadian households in 1707 had a large margin of surplus and potential profit. This wealthy group included prominent tradesmen such as millers and blacksmiths. There was considerable variation in economic structure among the communities. Port Royal had more surplus producers, but also the most dependent workers. In Minas, there was an even split between subsistence and dependent workers, while in Beaubassin, there were few dependent workers and many surplus producers. It is interesting to note that the largest community had the highest proportion of dependent workers, just as the largest community studied in the Loudunais, Martaize, had the most day-workers. 861 have calculated these values by applying contemporary price date to the lists of cultivable land and livestock given in the census. A similar method was used by Clark, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 87 See note 21. 371 Writing of New France, Hamelin noted that few habitants consistently produced large grain surpluses and suggested a tripartite division of society which corresponds well with the Acadian situation of 1707:1'habitant consommateur, Vhabitant producteur- consommateur, and I'habitant surproducteur.™ The middle term is useful because it emphasizes that those households characterized as "subsistence" nevertheless depended on trade, needing to exchange surpluses in one area to make up for shortfalls in another. A pure subsistence model was rare indeed; over half of the Acadian population in 1707 did not produce enough grain to feed themselves -just like the day-workers of the Loudunais. The budgets in the next section provide a way to further explore the differences between small and large farmers in Acadia. Sources and Methods - Small and Large Farmers in Acadia (1707) I have estimated budgets for two real farmers based on the cultivated land and livestock listed in the 1707 census - Francois Boudrot, a large peasant proprietor who lived in Port Royal, and Germain Landry, a smaller rural landholder from Minas. There are no surviving Acadian harvest reports, though we do know that there was a famine in 1699, and that otherwise crops did very well. An average wheat harvest of 12 hi / ha has been estimated for Acadia based on yields from similar marshlands in Poitou.89 We also know that extreme hardship resulted when the dykes were broken by flooding or raiders, which occurred on several occasions. Between 1690 and 1710 there were several raids and invasions which likely had a significant impact on the census results recorded during Hamelin, "ficonomie et soci&6 en Nouvelle-France," 58-67. Jean Paul Billaud, Marais Poitevin: Rencontres de la terre et de 1'eau (Paris, 1984) 55. 372 that period. Livestock prices can be approximated using official reports from Acadia, but the only grain prices available for 1707 are from Quebec; these are somewhat higher than those recorded at Port Royal in 1699. The productivity and attrition of livestock are estimated from historical studies of both the New and Old World. Unfortunately, no equivalent of the subdelegates' annual reports exists for Acadia, so we are unable to track changes in harvest results and prices from year to year. As a result, we can only examine a single snapshot of the rural economy. To ensure the most reasonable comparison, Acadians who had lived their whole lives in the colony and had families at similar stages of development have been chosen. Germain Landry (aged 33) married in 1694 and by 1707 had six children, including two sons aged 12 and 10 who might have helped around the farm. Francois Boudrot (aged 41) wed in 1692 and in 1707 had five children, including two sons aged 13 and 10. Revenue Marshland farms in Acadia used a two-field system and did not leave part of the land in fallow. The unit of land measurement was the arpent (ar), which was equivalent to 0.3419 ha ~ The census indicates only the amount of land under cultivation, so it is assumed that the habitant had additional land that he used for pasture, and woods from which he drew his firewood and construction materials. The primary grain crop, taking up two-thirds or more of the total cultivated area, was wheat. Peas were the most 90 See Part 1,1 and 2 for natural and human threats to the dykes and Acadian agriculture. 91 See note 3. 92 In New France, Parisian weights and measures were used, Colin Coates, "The Boundaries of Rural Society in Early Quebec: Batiscan and Sainte-Anne de la Perade to 1825" 0?h.D. thesis, York University, 1992) 5. An arpent of Loudun was equivalent to 1.2 arpents of Paris (.41 ha). See AD V 8 C 110, Recueil de tables pour faciliter la comparaison des poids et mesures du nouveau svsteme avec les poids et mesures ci-devant en usage a Paris (Poitiers. 1807). 373 common secondary crop, and had an average yield of 8 hi / ha. Gardens and orchards provided additional food. The revenue from livestock is divided into primary products (offspring) and secondary products (meat, butter, wool, eggs). Both farmers are assumed not to have earned extra income as wage-workers. Expenses There were no taxes in Acadia, but the Church's tithe was consistently collected at a rate of one-sixteenth of produce.93 It is unknown whether the tithe also extended to livestock and garden vegetables, though at least one document suggests that the Acadians contributed a regular supply of meat to their priests.94 For our purposes, we can assume that the tithe did apply to livestock products like meat, eggs, and butter, but not offspring or garden crops. Seigneurial dues existed, including the certs et rentes, as indicated by the few remaining notarial records and the continuing collection of "quit-rents" under the British regime. The Acadians appear to have built their own mills and individual bake ovens.95 There still would have been a cost for using the mill, which has been estimated as five per cent of the grain. The Acadians built their own houses and had access to plenty of firewood.96 Seed ratios were 1:6 for wheat and 1:8 for peas. Wages in Acadia were somewhat higher than in the Loudunais, estimated at 20 s or 11c / day. Labour was required to keep up and repair the dykes - we can estimate a requirement of 30 days. In Acadia, produce was traded either directly to traveling New England merchants, or 93 Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian. 184. 94 Villebon to Pontchartrain, 1693, in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 50. 95 Marc C. Lavoie, "Belleisle Nova Scotia, 1680-1755: Acadian Material Life and Economy" (M. A. thesis, McMaster University, 1987) 336. Also see Part III, 7. 96 These houses would have slowly amortized over time, but the amounts involved are too negligible to include here. 374 transported to Port/Annapolis Royal or Louisbourg. In any of these cases, a merchant's commission of 10 per cent has been assumed. The requirements for livestock feed have been estimated based on a combination of oats, turnips and free grazing. Finally, bread was more expensive in Acadia at 2s a pound (livre). Both small and large farmers appear to have supplied themselves with all the meat, dairy, and vegetables they needed from their own resources. Their families were bigger than those of their French counterparts and therefore needed more bread; probably nine or ten pounds each day. Results - Small and Large Farmers in Acadia (1707) The gap between poor and wealthy In 1707, Boudrot enjoyed more than twice the revenue of Landry. This was partly because they had holdings of different sizes; Boudrot had 4.8 ha cultivated to Landry's 1.37 ha, and 72 head of livestock to Landry's 41. There was more to this, however, as Landry barely broke even, while Boudrot enjoyed a large potential profit, nearly thirteen times larger. Table 19 - Total revenue, expenses, and net income of Landry and Boudrot Revenue Expenses Net Income Germain Landry 776.33 lc 762.85 lc 13.48 lc Francois Boudrot 1647.07 lc 1447.12 lc 199.95 lc The main difference between them was consumption costs. Boudrot produced enough grain to feed himself and his family, and sold his surplus on the market, while Landry had to purchase more than half of his bread. Landry sold no wheat; the only products he sold were meat and eggs. Since there were no taxes or tenancy obligations, most of what was produced over and above consumption needs would go directly to profit. So long as the 375 market sustained it, there was a clear benefit in cultivating larger crops and livestock herds for trade. Landry had not yet reached this level. Figure 62 - Germain Landry's Revenue, 1707 • Wheat SI Peas a Cattle • Sheep • Pigs 0 Chickens Figure 63 - Francois Boudrot's Revenue, 1707 •Wheat EOPeas H Cattle •Sheep •Pigs Q Chickens Germain Landry received less than 20 per cent of his revenue from crops. Not unlike the Loudunais day-worker, he relied on a different source of income - livestock instead of wages - which he sold at high value in exchange for bread. Pigs, both meat and young, supplied half of his revenue. At the same time, Francois Boudrot drew only 31 per cent of his revenue from crops, also depending largely on livestock for his income. Cattle were his most important asset, but he also had herds of pigs and sheep. 376 Figure 64 - Expenses of Germain Landry, 1707 Item per •Consumption cent U Livestock Attrition consumption 57.7 E Living/Upkeep livestock attrition 24.9 • Labour living/upkeep 4.8 •Tithe labour 3.9 BSeed tithe 3.4 •Seigneurial Dues 3.2 Q Merchant seed seigneurial dues 1.4 merchant fees 0.7 Germain Landry's greatest expense was meeting the nutritional needs of his family and their animals. The second highest was the yearly attrition of livestock. All of the other costs had a relative weight of less than fivepe r cent each. His seigneurial dues and tithe together comprised just 4.8 per cent. For the time being, he was little better off than the Loudunais day-worker, and like his counterparts there, he spent most of his income on feeding his family. Figure 65 - Expenses of Francois Boudrot, 1707 Item per cent consumption 29.0 • Consumption labour 27.3 El Labour livestock attrition 23.5 B Livestock Attrition tithe 7.4 •Tithe seed 5.5 •Seed 0 Living/Upkeep living/upkeep 3.2 •Merchant merchant fees 2.2 Q Seigneurial Dues seigneurial dues 1.9 With a projected profit of about 200 lc, the extra labour costs on his large farm appear to have been well worth Francois Boudrot's money. Although they were still his largest expense, consumption costs, even with larger herds to feed, were only half as great a 377 burden as those of Germain Landry. Seigneurial dues and particularly the tithe were higher because his farm was larger and produced more grain and livestock products. Boudrot's expenses were balanced in a manner very similar to that of the ploughman in the Loudunais. With effective husbandry and expanding lands, Boudrot could hope for even greater profits in the future. The Limits of Acadian Farming In Acadia, the land was more productive than in the Loudunais, but reliance on the dyke system also made crops vulnerable to unexpected disaster, even total loss. After marshland was flooded, it needed at least two years before it would be cultivable.97 Fortunately, such failures do not seem to have been a regular occurrence, especially after the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) brought peace, for a time, to the region. In part because of these risks, Acadian farmers both small and large relied on livestock for much of their revenue.98 Livestock had the additional benefit of being easier to transport for trade. Perhaps the most significant advantage that Acadian farmers had over their Loudunais counterparts was the ability to expand their holdings or migrate somewhere else. Without the taxes and rents found in the Loudunais, once they covered their consumption and upkeep costs, any surplus would be profit. Not surprisingly, the distribution of cultivated land reflected the dominance of the centre group of Acadian families discussed in Part II. In general, the centre families controlled the best marshland near Port Royal and in the Minas Basin. In Port Royal, the 97 Clark notes that hay could be grown while waiting for desalination in The Geography of Early Nova Scotia 241; Hatvany argues that it took up to fiveyear s for complete desalination in Marshlands. 46. 98 Antoine found that peasants in Bas-Maine also invested in livestock as a form of security against difficult times, Fiefs et villages du Bas-Maine. 315,456. 378 average area of cultivated land of non-centre families was just 3.5 ar (1.2 ha), while that of centre families was half again as large at 4.78 ar (1.6 ha). Similarly, in Minas, centre families cultivated an average of 4.51 ar compared to non-centre families who farmed 3.12 ar. Looking at the Minas censuses from 1686 to 1707, Edith Tapie also found distinctly unequal land distribution, with only a few families contributing to the large exports of grain commented on by the colonial governors." Significantly, in the less populated and larger marshland area of Beaubassin, which was settled by a different group of Acadians, farms tended to have more land under the plough. Figure 66 - Land cultivated in Acadia by each household, 1707 a 4 ar or less 0 5 to 9 ar B10+ar Port Royal Minas Beaubassin But in general, a majority of Acadian farms in Port Royal, Minas, and Beaubassin (57 per cent) were the same size as Germain Landry's or smaller (1.4 ha or less), while only a handful were larger than the 14-ar farm (4.8 ha) of Francois Boudrot. Only three farms were listed as having a surface greater than 20 ar (6.8 ha). In comparison, ploughmen in the Loudunais cultivated much more land (up to 20 ha), and even the arable farmed by day-workers each year (2 ha) would have been bigger than that of most Acadians. Why were Acadian farms so small? There are two possible explanations that need to be considered initially. First, it took time to establish a family farm, and it would be 99 Tapie, "Grand Pre," 50-55. 379 reasonable to assume that newer arrivals would have disproportionately fallen into the less wealthy group until their families had got themselves established, years later. However, most of the Acadian settlers arrived between 1650 and 1690. By 1707, Port Royal had been in existence for well over sixty years, and Minas and Beaubassin around thirty; even the latest newcomers would have had seventeen years to get established. Undoubtedly, there were a few newer migrants who were just getting started, but this would not have had a major impact on our results. Secondly, mature families may have been favoured by a "demographic differential": they could have used their more numerous older children as labour to cultivate larger areas and manage larger livestock herds.100 This would certainly have been an advantage in a colony with a dispersed population and where, as in New France, labour was expensive and in short supply.101 Yet the vast majority of the farms listed in the 1707 census were well within the ability of a new peasant couple to manage on their own. One historian estimates that one male adult could farm up to 14 ha.102 Even if we reduce this figure substantially to account for time spent maintaining dykes, clearing additional land, and taking care of livestock, it is clear that family size does not explain why Acadian farms generally remained relatively small. A more likely factor was the insufficiency of trade opportunities for agricultural produce. Without a regular market, there was little incentive to grow larger surpluses that 100 A. V. Chayanov, The Theory of Peasant Economy. Thorner, et al., eds., (Homewood, 1966) 68.. 101 Diereville, Relation. 93. Christopher Hodson, talks about the Acadians in relation to the Atlantic World and its "series of politicized markets for labour" in "Refugees: Acadians and the Social History of Empire, 1755-85" (Ph.D. thesis, Northwestern University, 2004) 3. Shortages and high costs of labour were an ongoing concern in New France as well. In Montreal, soldiers and poor fromth e city could be hired, but the standard wages were double that of day-workers in the Loudunais - slightly less if considering the exchange rate with colonial currency. See Dechene, Habitants and Merchants. 196 and 213. 102 Hoffman, Growth in a Traditional Society. 38. 380 might not find a buyer. A 1699 report indicated that Minas "will become important as soon as these people find a market for their produce." But in the meantime, the only consistent demand was from other Acadians - the smaller farmers who still needed to buy some of their bread. This was not a unique situation in New France; on the lie Jesus, the majority of peasant debts were related to sales of grain and hay from large farmers to smaller ones. Some historians emphasize that the rural economy in France, often described generally as stagnant, also grew only so far as market opportunities would support.104 The peasants of the Loudunais certainly adapted their agricultural practices to the demand for wheat in the Loire trading network. Later in the eighteenth century, some Acadians decided to focus almost entirely on livestock production in order to profit from the demand for meat at Louisbourg. Every year, they brought their herds to the Baie Verte, north of Beaubassin, where the animals could be ferried over to the fortress. The uncertain political situation in Acadia between 1690 and 1710, discussed in Part I, must also have applied a brake to rural development. Some of the earlier censuses of the 1680s and 1693 suggest that the average farm then was somewhat larger than in 1707, though the difference is probably explained by the census-takers' counting non- cleared marshland and forested areas as well as pasture and arable. Although comprehensive data on the period after 1707 is not available, estimates of the amount of land dyked in 1750 broadly suggest that Acadian farms had not greatly increased in size (about five arpents or 1.7 ha for each household), despite an extended period of peace and 103 Villebon, "Memoir on the Settlements and Harbors from Minas to Cape Breton" 27 Oct 1699, in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century, 133. Clark also discusses the lack of markets in The Geography of Early Nova Scotia. 54. 104 Sylvie Depatie, devolution d'une society rurale: lile Jesus au XVIIf siecle" (Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, 1988) 357; Hoffinan, Growth in a Traditional Society. 205; T. J. A. Le Gotland D. M. G. Sutherland, "What Can We Learn From Leases? A Preliminary View" Histoire & M<5sure XV (2000): 314. 381 relative security. Unfortunately, there is no way to break down this figure by family in order to determine the size of the gap between centre and non-centre families in each community.105 The lack of records also prevents us frombein g specific as to why there was this apparent lack of growth. Likely factors include an increased demand for land as the population grew, the division of family farms among multiple heirs, a continued emphasis on livestock, and the ongoing lack of trading opportunities. A third likely explanation for the limited size of Acadian cultivations was the local climate also discussed in Part I. With a growing season of only four to five months, considerable rates of precipitation, frequent storms and extreme tidal variations, crops were vulnerable to early or late frosts or flooding. If salt water broke through the dyke, the fields would be useless for at least two additional growing seasons. As a result, most Acadians logically invested in livestock against these possibilities. The animals were a source of revenue but also a kind of insurance policy. Andrew Clark suggests that farming families in Acadia could be divided into those who had surplus livestock that could be sold commercially and those who did not. He found that in 1707, 57 per cent of families had at least a few animals to sell (77 per cent in Beaubassin, just 44 per cent in Minas), while a small number of Acadians had many. These results also underline the gap between rich and poor. The census results also highlight the relative wealth of the centre group of families. Their advantage was considerable in Minas, where they owned on average about twenty-five per cent more 105 Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia. 236. 106 Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia, 170-175. Clark estimated that a family needed one unit of livestock (1 head of cattle, 5 pigs, or 5 sheep) per capita for its own subsistence. Two or more units a person suggested the potential for commercial activity. Moriceau also noted that subsistence and commercial husbandry often existed side by side in France, Histoire et g&)graphie de l'elevage, 386. 382 animals than non-centre families. In Port Royal the gap was wider: non-centre families owned an average of 8 cows, 11 sheep, and 7 pigs, while the centre group owned an average of 12 cows, 16 sheep, and 11 pigs - about fiftype r cent more. The Acadians continued to invest in livestock throughout the eighteenth century, though there are no comparable figuresb y which we can break down the figuresb y peasant groups. In general, these results show that Acadia was far from being a community of independent, subsistence farmers. Many Acadians, like Germain Landry, had to sell some of their animals in order to acquire the grain and other foodstuffs they needed. Where was this grain to come from? New England merchants came to Acadia to buy grain for Boston, not to sell it. There was little or no trade with Quebec or France. Even the Mi'kmaq looked to the Acadians for provisions. The only source for this grain was the few Acadians with large surpluses. Thus it is not surprising that Francois Boudrot had a large herd of livestock. The number of animals was likely increased as much by trade with smaller Acadian farmers as by his own husbandry. Farmers without surplus livestock to sell probably only had their own labour to offer in exchange for die grain and/or vegetables they needed to survive. Forage and hunting likely also played a role in meeting the gap. The Acadians' relatively small cultivated areas also reflect the lack of market opportunities and the tumultuous political situation limited the cultivation of even the richest Acadians. Yet even during the period of relative peace between 1712 and 1740, it does not appear that Acadian farms expanded greatly; the overall amount of land cultivated grew with the population, but the size of each family farm remained consistent. This suggests that an important factor determining the size of farms and livestock herds 107 Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia. 236. 383 was the degree to which communities were defined by economic stratification. A centre group of richer Acadians, who controlled more land and resources, emerged over several generations to dominate the countryside. This process was well underway by 1707, and continued over the course of the eighteenth century. Even the centre groups, however, did not develop farms as large as those cultivated by the wealthier ploughmen of the Loudunais. The notion that Acadia was a colony of abundance needs to be tempered by an understanding of the factors that limited the size of Acadian farms and contributed to the uneven distribution of wealth. Material life Though lacking the continuous notarial record of the Loudunais, enough clues about Acadian material life have survived to make it possible to sketch the contours of rural society and estimate differences in material conditions between the principal groups of peasants. Ten marriage contracts remain fromth e years 1700-1709, nine of which involved Acadian peasants.108 As in the Loudunais, these contracts recorded the value of the marriage community to be formed. This ranged from 50 to 180 lc, and averaged 119 lc. This was quite low, about half the average value of day-worker marriage communities in the Loudunais (237 It) and even less if taking the exchange rate for colonial currency into account. For example, the widower Charles Robichaud and the widow Marie Bourg had very few possessions when they married in 1703. They owned just two cows, four sheep, and a few household goods (a bed and quilt, two pots, two plates, a few pieces of cloth, and a basin). The groom also brought some money, while the bride owned half of 108 LAC Notaires d'Acadie (Etude Loppinot) 1687-1710. 384 a house. These were not rich farmers, to say the least Furniture, effects, and other material goods were particularly sparse. Yet there was still a discernable gap between smaller farmers who formed marriage communities worth 50 lc and larger fanners who formed ones of 150 lc or more. Like the ploughmen and day-workers of the Loudunais, the difference in wealth was less in household goods and more in the value of livestock and equipment. Even the supposed elite possessed modest fortunes and opportunities. In 1703, Jacques David, a military doctor fromQuebe c posted to Port Royal, brought 500 lc to his marriage with Jeanne La Tour. La Tour was one of seven heirs to the seigneurie of Port Royal and Minas after the death of Alexandre Le Borgne in 1693. Ten years later, all she brought to her marriage were her seigneurial rights, the cens et rentes and lods et ventes, which provided her with a modest revenue. This wedding was nevertheless a big event in the colony, witnessed by the governor, the lieutenant-general, and several military officers. Significantly, when David died nine years later, La Tour apparently gave up her rights in Acadia and returned with her two children to France by way of Rochefort.109 In 1734, another former heir of this seigneurie, (a different Alexandre Le Borgne) could be found penniless at Annapolis Royal, petitioning the British government for help. He was given permission to cut hay on part of the king's land near the fort and presumably spent his last days in that pursuit.110 The resources of the colony and lordly status clearly did not guarantee wealth and comfort in Acadia. Stephen A. White, Dictionnaire genealogique des families acadiennes Vol 1 (Moncton, 1999) 473 "David dit Pontif. 110 Charles Bruce Ferguson, ed., Minutes of his Majesty's Council at Annapolis Royal 1736-1749. (Halifax, 1967)49. 385 Archaeological work on several Acadian houses has provided more information on how Acadian farmers lived. Unfortunately, we do not have comparable data with which to compare Acadian houses to those of the Loudunais, though in the larger area of Poitou we know that peasant houses tended to have one or two large rooms and a cellar, and they were often shared by one or more extended families.Ul In Acadia, the size and type of house were significant indicators of wealth. The foundations of nine houses, eight in Annapolis Royal and Minas, present an average area of 59 m2. There is a significant gap between the smallest houses (areas of 45 and 48 m2) and the two largest (86 and 100 m2).112 House size, of course, also had something to do with the size of the household. But most of the houses were 60 m2 or less, with only a couple of them much larger. Many homes were en colombage, which meant they had a wooden frame with the hollow spaces filled by stone, rubble, and/or mortar and then covered with a clay whitewash. The floor was packed soil or boards. The poorest houses consisted simply of posts planted in the ground with a cheap fill of stone, mud, and clay.113 As time went on, some families built new houses en charpente, which included a stone foundation and squared timber laid horizontally between the posts of the frame,an d a wooden floor. At the home of Charles Melanson and Marie Dugas near Port Royal, the original house of simple posts burned down and was replaced by one en colombage. As the family became more established, they rebuilt the house twice en charpente, adding two stone chimneys, a bake-oven, and a proper cellar. They may also have built a small windmill and a 111 Peret, "Le mobilier rurale," 174. 112 Marcel Lavoie, "Les Acadiens et les 'Planters' des Maritimes: une etude de deux ethnies de 1680 a 1820" (Ph.D. thesis, University de Laval, 2002) 337. 113 Peter N. Moogk, Building a House in New France: An Account of the Perplexities of Client and Craftsmen in Early Canada fToronto. 1977) 10,32; Marc Lavoie, "Vie quotidienne en Acadie" Cap-aux- Diamants No 57 (1999): 22-27. 386 dovecote (colombier),nA The Blanchet house at Belleisle was en charpente and included a rock hearth, a bake oven, a clay chimney, a thatched roof, and a loft. The sleeping areas and some of the storage spaces (under the floor) were situated around the hearth to benefit from the heat.115 Poorer houses in Minas had timber walls but no stone foundation, no chimney, and no bake oven. Certainly an indication of success in Acadia was the ability to improve one's living conditions. Ceramics and other artefacts also hold clues to differences in rural wealth. Most of the dishes found in Acadian houses were of durable, utilitarian make. A few houses had small amounts of expensive porcelain. In Annapolis Royal and Minas, the majority of ceramics was of English origin, or Rhenish items commonly traded by Englishmen. In Beaubassin, most were of French make, and the results matched closely those found in archaeological excavations in Louisbourg.117 This is an important clue as to whom each Acadian community was trading with. It shows that most Acadians chose their ceramics because they were affordable and available, not because they came from a particular country. True, a few homes had more expensive items. Charles Melanson was a prominent man of wealth in Port Royal, the patriarch of one of the most important centre families. His home had two kinds of decorative porcelain, some shell-edged pearlware, glassware and more expensive English stoneware for the table. Melanson also had leaded glass windows at a time when most habitants in Acadia and New France relied on oiled 114 Andr6e Crepeau and Brenda Dunn, "L'&ablissement Melanson: un site agricole acadien (vets 1664- 1755)" Pares Canada. Bulletin de Recherches, 1986: 8. U5 Lavoie, "Vie quotidienne," 24. 116 E. Frank Korvemaker, "Report on the 1972 Excavation of Two Acadian Houses at Grand Pre" National Historic Park, Nova Scotia" Parks Canada Report #27; Lavoie, "Belleisle Nova Scotia," 246-261. 117 Marcel Moussette, "Analyse du materiel ceramique du site Acadien de Beaubassin" Parks Canada No. 35 (1970): 199-200; Marc Lavoie, "The Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Beaubassin Region in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, 1986" Reports in Archaeology No 7 Council of Maritime Premiers, 1990: 15. 387 paper if they had windows at all. Other notable artefacts found at the site include mirror glass, brass buttons, iron scissors, glass pearls, amphorae, shingles, a sword point, an iron hatchet, and sewing needles. The hundreds of animal bones and mussel/clam shells indicate that there was plenty of meat in their diet.118 The less wealthy but still prominent Blanchet family at Belleisle owned mixing bowls, a colander, several mugs and tankards, glass bottles and storage jars, a pitcher, seven eating plates, five bowls, four cups and at least one stemmed wine glass. They also had window glass and a couple of precious heirlooms including a brass cross, an icon representing the Holy Spirit, and a dove of white opal glass. Blanchet was a gunsmith, so it is no surprise that many musket parts were also discovered. Poorer homes excavated at Minas and Beaubassin had far fewer artefacts, though fire and pillage may have claimed some items. Fragments of glass and porcelain were occasionally found, but the majority of artefacts were common 120 stoneware. The clues remaining to us about Acadian material life indicate that some Acadians were far wealthier and more comfortable than others. There were large differences in the size and type of houses, their sturdiness and warmth. It seems that over the course of the eighteenth century, the gap between small and large farmers widened. Wealthier families built larger and better-constructed houses, and regularly traded produce in exchange for both practical and decorative manufactured goods. A similar increasing distinction was seen in New France, where richer farmers eventually built large houses completely of stone with shingled roofs. Most Acadians made do with wooden houses and a small 118 Moogk, Building a House. 37; Cr^peau and Dunn, "L'etablissement Melanson" 10. 119 Lavoie, "Vie quotidienne," 26. 120 Lavoie, "Belleisle Nova Scotia," 175,209, 214. 388 collection of household goods, while the poorest families settled for a few essentials, a » 111 single room, and a floor of damp soil. Summary - Economic Groups in Acadia By the early eighteenth century, socio-economic groups differentiated on the basis of wealth had developed in Acadia. Many Acadians cultivated small farms but also relied on a combination of livestock, artisanal work, and/or wage-work to get by. They needed to purchase much of their bread on the market, and in fact devoted most of their revenue to feeding their families, just like the day-workers of the Loudunais. A few had large farms and regularly sold surpluses from both crops and livestock on the market, and to each other. Historians have found similar indications of socio-economic hierarchy in the rural communities of eighteenth-century New France.122 Of course, some Acadians had economic functions and levels of wealth that put them in between these standards. Conclusion Perhaps the most significant finding of this chapter has been that the Acadians cultivated relatively small farms in comparison with the peasants of the Loudunais, despite the apparent abundance and expanse of the marshland. Historians who emphasize population growth seem to have missed the point that there were considerable limits on agriculture imposed by the lack of market opportunities and incentives for peasants, the 121 Moogk, Building a House. 61. Dechene notes that even in 1731,90 per cent of the rural houses in the Montreal area were still simple one-room wooden houses, Habitants and Merchants. 182. 122 Sylvie D6patie found that one-third of peasants were significantly poorer, with fortunes of under 500 lc, while about eight per cent were truly comfortable, with fortunes of over 2 000 lc. The rest fell in between, "Involution d'une soctete rurale," 360. 389 ongoing political insecurity that came from living in a march between competing imperial powers, and the emerging economic stratification of the Acadians themselves. These factors help explain why many Acadian farmers invested so much in livestock, which was easier to transport, protect, and nourish. In the Loudunais, there was little pasture to support large herds, but peasants benefited from having access to a large, established trading network that took their wheat through much of northern France and even to other parts of Western Europe. As a result, almost everyone cultivated fine wheat to sell. Day-workers combined small farms with wage labour, using the money they earned from wheat and work to purchase the subsistence needs of their families. In most years they could hope to break even, but in difficult times such as the years from 1738 to 1742 or at the end of the Seven Years' War, they tended to fall into debt. The ploughman owned and leased much larger plots of land, on which he grew both finewhea t for market and mixed wheat for his own consumption. He could hope for considerable profits in good years but faced deficits when the wheat crop was poor, especially when prices remained low. When the ploughman struggled, one of his few options was to reduce the cost of hired labour, which hurt day-workers as well. In general, the fortunes of landlords, ploughmen, and day-workers were closely tied together. Each needed the other to be financially successful. Further, it was difficult to find reliable tenants and workers, so agrarian structures developed and were maintained over time.124 This analysis of rural budgets has also demonstrated that while taxes took their share of peasant income, their relative weight on the finances of peasants — and thus the advantage the Acadians supposedly derived from not paying them - should not be 123 Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian, 285. 124 Hoffman, Growth in a Traditional Society. 45-50. 390 exaggerated. As for seigneurial dues, they proved to be a negligible burden in both places. Despite the differences in the rural economy, there was a similar degree of socio economic stratification among peasants in Acadia and the Loudunais that separated groups of small and large farmers. This hierarchy can clearly be seen through an examination of rural budgets, through credit relationships (in the Loudunais), through house construction (in Acadia), and through material life. Achieving true wealth, comfort, and independence, was simply beyond the means of the vast majority of peasants in both locations, and would have remained so for many generations to come; even if the expulsion and the French Revolution had not intervened. In the Loudunais, only wealthy ploughmen possessed the equipment, livestock, and credit necessary to take on larger and more lucrative leases. Similarly, there was not a universally-enjoyed state of plenty in Acadia; the centre group that dominated demographic relationships there also controlled more land and livestock, and lived in more comfortable and better furnished homes. These structures emerged over time, but once formed, proved difficult to change. 391 PART III, CHAPTER 9 COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS: VESTRY AND ASSEMBLY Introduction In early modern France, there were two important local institutions through which the rural community managed its own affairs. These were the parish vestry (fabrique) and the assembly (communaute d 'habitants). The inhabitants chose churchwardens (fabriquers or marguilliers) and delegates (syndics) to lead these institutions. Both institutions existed in the Loudunais and Acadia, though under different conditions. There were two general assumptions on which both operated. One was that peasants assumed direct responsibility for managing their communal responsibilities, such as church repair and political representation. Another was that in both locations the activities of these institutions were encouraged and supported by the state. The socio-economic hierarchy counted in the operation of these institutions; those who were wealthiest were also most likely to serve as leaders. True, there has been a historical literature about the Acadian elected deputies and their pursuit of neutrality, and one of its themes, echoing contemporary official complaints, is that this was an egalitarian, even a republican political system that was revolutionary for its time.1 In fact, the Acadian political system was consistent with that of its Loudunais counterpart, though certainly adapted to the particular circumstances in the colony. That system was 1 See for example: J. B. Brebner, New England's Outpost: Acadia before the Conquest of Canada (New York, 1927) 47; Henri-Dominique Paratte, Peoples of the Maritimes: Acadians (Halifax, 1998) 37; Clive Doucet, Lost and Found in Acadie (Halifex, 2004) 42,84. 392 far from a primitive democracy; as one historian put it, the Acadian deputies "represented the dominant, if not the majority opinion."2 SECTION I - THE LOUDUNAIS The Parish Priest and the Community The importance of the Church for daily life in the community is difficult to overstate. It is clear that the maintenance of order was closely related to its schedule and regulations. Further, religion shaped social interactions. Peasants attended Mass on Sundays and special services on religious holidays. They participated in fairs and festivals associated with feast-days.3 As the church was the central location for community life, the parish priest was "the essential link between man and the supernatural, man and his salvation."4 There was a significant clerical presence in the parishes of the Loudunais. La Chaussee and Martaize each had a priest (cure) and a vicar (vicaire), that is, an assistant priest, while the smaller parish of Aulnay had a single member of a religious order (prieur) fulfilling the functions of a priest. This gave a ratio of 1 cleric to 300 people (about 75 households), that comfortably ensured that there was no interruption in the provision of the sacraments or the holding of services. It was, in fact, slightly higher than the average ratio in the parishes of the Loudunais (1 cleric: 320 people) and considerably higher than that of many rural parishes across France. In 2 N. E. S. Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian: A North American Border People. 1604-1755 (Montreal & Kingston, 2005) 384. 3 Donald Sutherland goes so far as to say that "the church allowed the community to express itself as a community," The Chouans: The Social Origins of Popular Counter-Revolution in Upper Brittany. 1770- 1796 (Oxford, 1982) 217; Alain Collomp, La Maison du Pere: Famille et village en Haute-Provence aux XVTT et XVIIf siecles (Paris, 1983) 333; John McManners, Church and Society in Eighteenth Century France. Volume 2: the Religion of the People and the Politics of Religion (Oxford. 1998) 101. 4 Timothy Tackett, Priest and Parish in Eighteenth-Century France: A Social and Political Study of the Cures in a Diocese of Dauphine\ 1750-1791 (Princeton. 1977) 152. 393 neighbouring Poitou, only one in three or four rural parishes had both a priest and a vicar, while in the Vannetais, the ratio of clerics to people was considerably lower, only 1: 370.5 Priests tended to come from elite backgrounds, served for a long time, and usually held rights to the tithe. Vicars, on the other hand, were more often of humbler origin, paid a small stipend, and were frequently moved fromon e parish to the next.6 For example, Henry Guillaume de la Brosse served as priest of La Chaussee from 1735 to 1768. During that time, no fewer than seven different vicars assisted him. Similarly, Jean Marreau de Boisguerin served as priest of Martaize from 1718 through 1759 and was aided by at least six different vicars.7 Clergy could also be important economic figures. In Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Renove (a smaller village in the parish of La Chaussee) certain estates (prieures) were owned by clerics in religious orders who collected dues fromtenant s like any other seigneur. The latter two belonged to the powerful Abbey of Fontevrault, north of Loudun.8 The Abbey of Saint-Jouin (west of Moncontour), was the seigneur of another piece of land in the parish of La Chaussee. These clerics were distant landlords for the most part, relying on local agents to actually collect the dues, but in Aulnay theprieur was also the resident parish priest. Parish clergy were generally quite active in the rural 5 Timothy Tackett and Claude Langlois, "Ecclesiastical Structures and Clerical Geography on the Eve of the French Revolution" FHS 11,3 (1980): 361,366; T. J. A. Le Goff, Vannes and its Region: A Study of Town and Country in Eighteenth-Century France (Oxford, 1981) 245; Jacques Marcade, "Le clerge du Loudunais pendant la Revolution" Bulletin de la Soci&e des Antiquaires de 1'Ouest et des Musees de Poitiers 5e s6rie - tome VI (1992): 60. 6 Jean Qu&iiart, Les hommes. 1'eglise et Dieu dans la France du XVuT sidcle (Paris, 1978) 80; Timothy Tackett, Religion. Revolution, and Regional Culture in Eighteenth-Century France: The Ecclesiastical Oath of 1791 (Princeton. 1986) 82. 7 AD V Serie 9E 82/2 (La Chaussee), 9E 178/2 (Martaize^, and 9E 17/1 (Aulnay), the Marreau family were seigneurs of La Bonnetiere in La Chaussee. 8 AD V 4E 53/475 Audemont Martaize~ 23 Nov 1653, mis document gives a description of some of the holdings of the Abbey of Fontevrault in the area, including several tenants from Aulnay, Martaiz6, and the nearby parish of Angliers. 394 economy. Many bought land in lay seigneuries and subsequently leased it out to peasants. For example, Claude Babaud, prieur of Aulnay, purchased twelve small plots of land collectively worth 240 It, mostly in the seigneury of Aulnay. In 1727, he leased a farm with an annual revenue of 90 It to Rene Brissault for seven years at a high cost of 5 It, 20 bx of wheat, 30 bx of rye and 20 days of work each year. Jean Marreau, cure of Martaize purchased nine pieces of land valued at 319 It in the seigneuries of Saint-Jouin, La Bonnetiere, and Aulnay.9 The priests were also creditors of their parishioners, providing several large loans to ploughmen. For example, Rene Baudu borrowed 205 It from Babaud between 1738 and 1742, in three different installments. De la Brosse, cure of La Chaussee, loaned 230 It in 1739 to Joseph Messier. In the period 1737-47 and 1753-59, the average loan from a priest was worth 138 It. In contrast, the vicars appear rarely in transactions recorded by notarial documents relating to property, credit, and trade. Of course, priests also drew income from their position. They collected tithes (often leased out in return for annual payments in cash) and were permitted to charge surplice fees for baptisms, marriages, and burials. The rates for the latter were set by the bishop, and might be lowered or waived for poorer members of the parish. Parishes in a region were grouped into ecclesiastical cantons overseen by an archpriest (the equivalent of a rural dean) who was appointed by the bishop of the 9 AD V 4E 110/15 Lanlaud Saint-Clair 30 Jan 1727, Lease from Babaud to Brissault; AD V G9 29 La Chauss6e and G961 Martaize. For example, 29 Mar 1741 Jacques Brosseau leased 4 b of land and 18 Jun 1760 Gabriel Proust leased 26 b of land fromth e priest. Additional examples in 2 C 1931-1942 Contr61e des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour. Many of these leases were in exchange for small rents in kind rather than in money or for a share of the produce. 10 On surplice fees, which were typically less than 1 It / event, see Tackett, Priest and Parish. 130. The tithe was routinely leased out to wealthy inhabitants. In 1699, the tithe of Martaize was leased for five years to a group of bakers and butchers fromLoudun . The latter agreed to pay 400 It / year in two payments. In 1707, the same tithe was leased for three years to a pair of senior ploughmen fromth e parish, Marc Brissault and Jean Buard. The ploughmen agreed to pay 325 It / year, AD V G9 61 Cure" of Martaize, 21 Jan 1699 and 20 Sep 1707. 395 diocese. Some responsibilities could not be delegated; for example, the bishop and his vicars-general had the authority to grant dispensations (usually for marriages on short notice or for consanguinity) and adjudicated cases involving canon law. The church bureaucracy could move quickly when required. In one case in Martaize, the priest learned after the fact that he had married two cousins with fourth-degree consanguinity. He dispatched an emergency request for a dispensation and received it five days later.12 Bishops were also required to visit each parish every two years in order to ensure that religious services were appropriately administered. This was not possible in a diocese the size of Poitiers, which had seven hundred parishes and was among the largest in France, but visits from at least a vicar-general occurred with some regularity. In general, clergy were prominent members of the community. They had their own hierarchy: priests tended to be wealthy tithe-holders who accumulated property and resided for long periods of time, while vicars were relatively poor and transient. Peasants might also owe dues to large abbeys that held seigneurial rights to property in the area. Together, these clergy were responsible for the spiritual affairs of the parish and also could be figures of influence in the rural economy. Priests might also perform important social roles in the community, such as mediating personal disputes or helping to organize collective events like festivals, though this varied greatly from place to place and the importance of their role is difficult to evaluate from the available records. 11 In the diocese of Gap, each canton had an average often parishes, Tackett, Priest and Parish. 35. 12 AD V Parish Register Martaizd, 3 Feb 1750 marriage of Maurice Jubinet and Madelaine Briant. 13 The visiting cleric used a standard list of 126 questions to be answered in each parish, J. Marcade, "Les visites pastorales dans le diocese de Poitiers au XVIIP siecle" Bulletin de la Soci&e" des Antiquaires de POuest et des Musees de Poitiers 5e serie - tome XII (1998): 201. 396 The Vestry The vestry (fabrique) managed all of the temporal matters relating to the church. These included keeping up the church and its grounds, as well as maintaining the vestments, ornaments and sacred vessels required for religious services.14 These items were normally stored in the sacristy (or annex). An edict of 1695 clarified that the priest holding the tithe (normally the cure) was responsible for die expenses of die choir, bell- tower and altar. All omer costs fell on the community.15 Between paying tithes and fees for the priests and maintaining the vestry, peasants paid a lot for the services provided by the church. To meet these responsibilities, the community made contributions and/or dedicated certain revenues to the vestry. The assembly annually elected a churchwarden to manage the accounts, which were reviewed and approved annually. Churchwardens usually had discretion to make small purchases or order minor repairs, but had to get authorization from the assembly for bigger projects. Larger parishes, especially in towns, might select a group of churchwardens. These were very time-consuming positions normally held by wealthier parishioners. In Loudun, the churchwardens actively went after those who did not pay their annual contributions.16 The churchwardens in turn appointed a sacristan, who was responsible for the items in the sacristy and maintaining the church grounds. The sacristan might also do duty as a clerk, schoolmaster, or 14 Jacques Marcade\ "Fabriques et fabriciens dans le diocese de Poitiers" Bulletin de la Soci&e" des Antiquaires de l'Ouest et des Musses de Poitiers 4e serie - tome XIII (1975): 189. 15 Tackett, Priest and Parish. 181. The edict is found in F. A. Isambert, Recueil g&i6ral des anciennes lois francaises. Vol 20, Article 22,249. 16 AD V 5 B 3 Bailliage du Loudun. For example, 15 May 1752 the churchwarden of Saint-Pierre du Martray gained a ruling in the royal court against two people who had not paid. The amounts due were 4 It and 14 bx wheat respectively. John McManners, French Ecclesiastical Society Under the Ancien Regime: A Study of Angers in the Eighteenth Century (Manchester. 1960) 151-152. 397 gravedigger, but he was not responsible for maintaining the priest's living quarters or other belongings. Priests normally hired domestic servants to meet these personal needs. Vestries were not always very important in rural parishes. In the diocese of Gap, in Dauphine, there were no churchwardens at all and management of the church's temporal affairs fell on the priest.18 In the diocese of Poitiers, few rural parishes had vestries and the church's property could become confused with that of the priest. In the Loudunais, just six of thirty-seven parishes were specifically mentioned as having a functioning vestry. But even when the priest performed the vestry's duties himself, the assembly had to approve the accounts since it was the parishioners who paid.19 The arrangement in Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize' (and surrounding parishes) was to combine the position of churchwarden and sacristan, appointing individuals to serve for long periods of time, even for life.20 Sacristans such as Charles Senegon in Martaize, Gabriel Proust in Aulnay, and Francois Massereau in La Chaussee were chosen by the community and acted as managers, groundskeepers, and clerks for their parish. These functions took up a considerable amount of time. For example, sacristans witnessed all baptisms, marriages, and burials and maintained the accounts. Yet the position did not preclude the pursuit of fanning. Proust, for example, held over 300 It worth of land in the seigneury of Aulnay alone, though he may have sublet much of it. In fact, the position of 17 For example, the domestic servant of the priest of Martaize" was Vincent Plume\ Pierre Dubois served the priest of La Chaussee, AD V Parish Registers; McManners, French Ecclesiastical Society. 148. lt Tackett, Priest and Parish. 184. 19 J. Marcad6, "Fabriques et febriciens," 189; J. Marcad6, "La culture paysanne (1750-1830): colloque du Centre d'Histoire culturelle et religieuses" Universite de Rennes 2, Annates de Bretagne et des pays de FOuest 100,4 (1993): 459,491. 20 For example, AD Vienne G9 29 La Chauss6e 24 May 1712 document refers to Pierre Pernault, sacristan and churchwarden of the neighbouring parish of Saint-Aubin. 398 sacristan seems to have stayed in certain prominent ploughman families. In Aulnay, Gabriel Proust took over when Claude Proust died in 1740. Similarly, Francois Massereau took over from Antoine Massereau in 1720. It is not clear what compensation the sacristans received, whether as salary or exemption from certain taxes and the tithe, but it must have been considerable. How much did peasants contribute to the vestry? In Martaize, the largest of the three parishes studied, the arrival of a new vicar in 1727 prompted an assembly to renegotiate each peasant's contributions (which covered the vestry's expenses and also the vicar's salary and accommodation). A total of 224 bx of fine and mixed wheat (froment and meteit) was agreed upon, as well as several poultry. The assembly assigned each ploughman a particular contribution, from half a boisseau for a few widows, to eight for the wealthiest. Most paid two to three bx. Day-workers were assigned the amount of 1 lA bx (worth a little over 1 It). In addition to the grain, ploughmen paid 2s, 2d and day- workers provided Is, 9d in money.21 In total, this was a contribution of about 270 It each year - a significant but hardly crippling expense equivalent to about one-quarter of the parish taille assessment.22 In 1740, the contributions were again updated - this time to 18 setters (216 bx) of fine wheat.23 Using these documents from Martaiz6 as a standard, we can estimate the vestry contributions for Aulnay and La Chaussee based on the size of their population. Aulnay's fifty households may have paid 85 It each year, while the peasants of La Chaussee probably provided about 180 It. 21 AD V 4E 110 15 1727-1729 Rene Lanlaud, Saint-Clair, 22 Apr 1727 assembly at Martaize. 22 AD V C849 Tableau de l'&ection de Loudun, 1789. 23 AD V 2 C 1932 Contr61e des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour, 20 Sep 1740, assembly at Martaize". 399 A few clues in the documentary record indicate that the vestries in these parishes also had at least some endowed revenue. In 1666, the habitants of Martaize agreed to provide a family burial plot in their cemetery to the seigneur of Chateau-Gannes in exchange for donating 4 b of land to the vestry.24 The habitants of La Chaussee agreed to display a banner of the seigneur of Verrue in their church in return for an annual payment of2bxofrye.25 The vestry might also benefit from one-time donations of funds. For example, the 1617 testament of an estate manager provided 150 It for the most urgent repairs needed to the church of La Chaussee.26 It is likely that smaller donations were routinely made by faithful peasants before they died. A1691 document fromth e nearby parish of Saint-Clair gives an indication of the actual expenses incurred by the vestry in a typical Loudunais rural parish. In that year, an assembly met to validate the accounts of the previous twenty years. The vestry* s annual revenue was only about 42 It, and the parish had accumulated a debt of over 500 It during the period. Fortunately, the parish priest agreed to help cover the debt The accounts were extremely detailed, not neglecting even those items that cost 1 It or less. Figure 67 - Vestry expenses in Saint-Clair, 1672-169127 •Ornaments Item Estimated Annual Cost fH Consumables consumables 21 It •Repairs and ornamentation 13 It Improvements repairs and 36 It ffl Dues and Fees improvements dues and fees 7 It 24 AD V G9 61 Curd of Martaize, 1666. 25 AD V 2 C 1932 Contrdle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour, 15 Jun 1741. 26 AD V G9 29 Curd of La Chaussee, 1617, testament of Rend Guinoa, Sieur du Bourg 27 AD V 4E 53/503 St Cassien 1676-1691 Saint-Clair 20 May 1691. 400 About twenty-seven per cent of the vestry's expenses were consumable items used for services and administration, such as bread for the Eucharist, oil for church lighting, incense, and paper for the parish register. Expenditures on ornamentation such as cloths, vases, and bottles for the altar, paintings and banners, and restoring the cross accounted for another seventeen per cent of expenses. Fees to the arch-priest and the vicar were nine per cent of costs. The greatest burden (47 per cent) was repair and improvements to the church building and its furniture, especially upkeep of pews and walls. This also included stonework on the altar, church entrance, and fountain, carpentry on the confessional, and repair to the roof. It seems that church maintenance created work for a variety of artisans.29 The vestry had limited revenue, but was nevertheless a crucial institution in the small parishes of Aulnay, La Chauss^e, and Martaize. Peasants were directly involved and responsible for the running and appearance of their church. A representative (sacristan) was chosen to manage these affairs, but the assembly remained ultimately in charge, reviewing the accounts on an annual basis. The parishioners as a group decided on the contributions to be paid and on any endowments of land and revenue. These were updated periodically. Of course the senior heads of household predominated in these discussions, and the sacristan was chosen from among them; often the position remained with a particular family for a long time. 28 This appears to refer to the contributions for the vicar's living expenses, which were the responsibility of the vestry. I found no other reference to fees for the rural deaneries and can only speculate that the arch- priests were authorized to collect small amounts of money from each parish that they supervised. McManners also discussed skilled craftsmen like silversmiths, bell-founders, and book-binders in French Ecclesiastical Society. 106. 401 The Assembly and the Community Parish assemblies had existed in some form for centuries. They expressed the autonomy of communities, their ability to administer and regulate themselves. The state was a "distant arbiter" that preferred not to interfere as long as order was maintained and taxes collected. In many areas of southern and eastern France, assemblies elected a variety of representatives and officials, managed communal lands, and worked directly with political and legal organizations at the provincial level. In western France, however, their function and organization was much simpler. There was little communal land, and the population was dispersed in smaller villages. In the Loudunais, the assembly's main responsibilities were tax collection, political representation, and oversight of the vestry. Every year, a delegate and tax collectors were chosen. There were no regular meetings; the assembly gathered to approve the tax roles and the vestry accounts, and to select its officials. Other meetings might be called in response to particular concerns, disputes, or events. For example, in 1614, rural parishes held assemblies to select special delegates to bring their grievances to Loudun and to choose the deputies of the Third Estate for the Estates-General. In 1789, meetings were similarly held in each parish to draw up the cahiers de doleances. Significantly, eighteen per cent of the deputies eventually chosen for the Third Estate in 1789 were themselves serving parish delegates. The majority of T. J. A. Le Gotland D. M. G. Sutherland, "The Revolution and the Rural Community in Eighteenth- Century Brittany" Past and Present 12 (1974): 105-107; Robert Muchambled, Society cultures et mentalites dans la France moderne. XVI" - XVIIF siecles (Paris, 2001 (1990)) 76. 31 Maurice Bordes, L'administration provinciate et municipale en France au XVIIIe siecle (Paris, 1972) 176; Jean Gallet, Seigneurs et pavsans en France. 1600-1793 (Rennes, 1999) 53,66-68. 32 Annie Antoine found similar results in Fiefs et Villages du Bas-Maine au XVRT siecle (Mayenne, 1994) 41; Melika Louet, "Le pays loudunais et mirebelais au XVIIF siecle (d'apres les roles de taille)" (D. E, A. memoire, University de Poitiers, 2000) 228. 402 the others came from the senior ploughmen and millers fromwho m delegates were normally chosen.33 All heads of household in a community were potentially members of the assembly. In the plain of the Loudunais, the villages were small but centralized, unlike the more dispersed communities of the bocage, characteristic of so much of western France; this made wide participation potentially easier. Yet the assembly was also a forum within which socio-economic hierarchy was expressed; often poorer peasants did not attend at all. Official records of meetings usually listed those in attendance as "la plus grande & saine partye d'habitans [sic]." Sometimes it was written that those in attendance represented themselves and also the other habitants. Wealthier ploughmen and artisans exerted more influence, but were also more interested in the proceedings and potentially affected by the matters discussed.34 This suited the state very well. These men had property, ambitions, and had a stake in maintaining order. They were not likely to cause trouble if it put their possessions and position at risk. The Assembly's Tax Collectors By far the most important and time-consuming duty of the assembly was to ensure the prompt collection and submission of ordinary taxes such as the taille and the salt-tax (gabelle). Collectors were nominated by the delegate and selected by the assembly in September; their names had to be registered with the clerk of the election by the end of 33 Dumoustier de la Fond, Essais sur Phistoire de la ville de Loudun (Poitiers, 1778) 101; Louis Trincant, was one of the deputies eventually chosen for the Loudunais in 1614, he wrote Abreffi des antiquitfe de Loudun et pais Loudunais (Loudun, 1994 (1894)) 8; J. Michael Hayden, France and the Estates-General of 1614 (Cambridge, 1974) 74; Jacques Peret, Histoire de la Revolution francaisee n Poitou-Charentes. 1789- 99 (Poitiers, 1988)31-53. ^Louet, "Le pays loudunais" 225-228; AD V 4E 53/509 Pierre Voyer, Saint-Cassien, 18 Sep 1695 assembly at Aulnay and 5 Apr 1696 assembly at Martaize. 403 the month or the community could be fined. Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize appear to have followed this direction for the most part, though by the mid-eighteenth century the collectors were often not chosen until November or December. The delegate was 1*7 required to provide a list of all taxable households. Each parish was assigned a particular amount of tax; it was up to the collectors to divide it among the habitants and the assembly to approve the list. Because many peasants held property in more than one parish, there were sometimes disputes as to who was eligible to be taxed and where. Such matters could be decided by the assembly, though subject to appeal before the officials of the election.5* For example, in 1727 die collectors of Aulnay and Martaiz6 both included the peasants working on the large farm (metairie) of Brizay on their tax rolls. The confusion had come about because Brizay belonged to the seigneur of Aulnay, but was physically located in the parish of Martaize. The assembly of Aulnay eventually agreed to remove them from their list. In anouier case, in 1757, the assembly of Martaize confirmed that Rolland, the estate manager of the seigneur of Sautonne, was a non-noble who should be included in the tax assessment despite his claims to the contrary.39 More details on royal taxation can be found in Part 1,3; the requirements for registration were directed by the intendant in AN G7 450 Poitiers 28 Aug 1685; the Controller-General advised the Intendant of Tours in 1687 that he must fine those habitants who did not register their collectors on time, A. M. de Boislisle, Correspondance des Contrdleurs-Gfrieraux des Finances ayec les intendants des provinces (Paris. 1874) 113; On the salt-tax and registration see J. Pasquier, L'impot des eabelles en France aux XVIIe et XVIIF siecles (Geneve, 1978) 7-17. 36 AD V 4E 53/509 Pierre Voyer, Saint-Cassien, 18 Sep 1695,23 Sep 1696,29 Sep 1697 assemblies at Aulnay, 5 Apr 1696,9 Sep 1696, 15 Sep 1697,28 Sep 1698 assemblies at Martaize\ and 28 Sep 1698 assembly at La Chausse^; AD V 2 C 1940 and 1941 Contrdle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour, 2 Dec 1753,16 Nov 1754,4 Jan 1756 (Aulnay), 4 Dec 1754 (La Chauss4e), 15 Dec 1757 (Martaiz^). 37 AN G7 519 Tours 2 Jun 1684 Declaration of Intendant de Nointel. 38 Intendant de Nointel emphasized that delegates were to ensure disputes were resolved and that the assembly's ruling would be decisive, AN G7 519 Tours, 2 Jun 1684; Michael Kwass, Privilege and me Politics of Taxation in Eighteenth Century France: liberty. 6galite. fiscalit e (Cambridge, 2000) 50. 39 AD V 9 Mar 1727 4E 110/15 Ren<5 Lanlaud Saint-Clair 9 Mar 1727 (Aulnay) and 416110/26 Saint Clair llDecl757(Martaiz6). 404 The collectors came from a wide cross-section of local society. Usually at least one wealthy individual was chosen, but many of the collectors were day-workers, artisans, or more modest ploughmen. For example, between 1695 and 1698, collectors selected at Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize included eighteen ploughmen, seventeen day-workers, four weavers, three millers, and a coppersmith.40 One study found that three-quarters of the collectors in the Loudunais could not sign their names. The subdelegates could reject any collector deemed to be too poor to be reliable, but it does not appear that this power was often used.41 No doubt officials were reluctant to confront an assembly on their choice, particularly as long as taxes were received on time. The number of collectors was based on the size of the population. In the 1690s, Aulnay chose two collectors for the taille and two more for the salt-tax, La Chaussee chose three each, and Martaizd chose four. Even with a team of collectors, preparing the accounts and receiving payments created a great deal of work. The reward was exemption fromth e taxes concerned. For an average day-worker, this was the equivalent of 15-20 It, while a ploughman could save as much as 50 It.42 Collectors also received fees from the amount collected. In the case of the taille, this was 6d / It of the principal amount (2.5 per cent), and an additional 4d / It of accessory taxes (1.6 per cent).43 This worked out to roughly 20 It in Aulnay and 45 It in Martaiz£, or 10 It for each collector. The fees and the exemption together did not translate into a vast sum of money, and considering the year-long work involved and the potential for animosity, it was not the 40 See note 36. 41 Louet, "Le pays loudunais," 86,100. 42 These figures include both the taille and the salt-tax; usually there were separate collectors for each. See Part III, 8 for the weight of taxes on rural budgets. 43 Louet, "Le pays loudunais," 109. 405 easiest way to increase one's fortune. This is probably why the wealthiest families left collection duties to more modest ploughmen, artisans, and day-workers; individuals who stood to benefit more fromth e tax break and small salary. In general, the collecting of state taxes through the community assemblies worked well.44 There were difficulties, however. Sometimes the state's officials rejected the accounts and ordered new collectors to be chosen or different formats to be used. In 1687, the intendant reported mat parishes in the flection of Loudun were nominating too many collectors, resulting in conflicting assessments and slow results.45 In 1742, the intendant complained that the collectors were not providing enough information on the tax rolls. Rural communities were never over-zealous in this regard since they knew that subsequent tax assessments could go up if the intendant believed they had sufficient property to bear it. On the other hand, tax reductions could also be awarded by the intendant, so it was in the community's interests to cooperate.46 In cases of outright non payment, the state might take direct action against the collectors. In 1680, for example, several dozen collectors were imprisoned from across the generality of Tours. Between 1757 and 1759, the subdelegate at Loudun dispatched the troopers of the marechaussee to arrest collectors in several of the surrounding rural parishes. One poor fellow, Louis Jourdin of Saint-Martin d'Ouzilly (just north of Martaize), was arrested in both 1757 and 1759; the second time he had to be dragged out of a biding place in his bedroom.47 44 Annette Smedlev-Weill Les intendants de Louis XW (Paris. 1995) 160. 45 AN G7 519 Tours, 22 Jul 1687 Intendant to C-G. 46 AN C3 1706-1789 Edits, declarations et arrest du conseil d'etat concernant les tailles, le capitation et l'exemption de ces impositions, 14 Oct 1710,1741,15 May 1742. 47 AD V B supplement 272 registres d'ecrous prison royal de Loudun, 1757-1759, Louis Jourdin's arrests were 5 Apr 1757 and 3 Aug 1759; also see AN G7 518 Tours 23 Jul 1680 Intendant to C-G. 406 Usually, the state was less heavy-handed, and aimed to reward those communities that regularly paid their taxes and obeyed the regulations.48 Lacking local tax officials of their own, the intendants needed the cooperation of the rural communities in order for the fiscal system to work. This suited the assembly; its members preferred to keep me agents of the state out of their business. In effect, the collectors were simultaneously assembly and state officials. They did not simply take care of the practical matters of assessment, receipt, and delivery of payments; the collectors also gave the state and its tax demands legitimacy, and the appearance of fairness. At the same time, the choice of collectors and the yearly accounts were expressions of local interests and social relations. The work provided the community (and especially the principal heads of household) a clear and constantly updated picture of the economic hierarchy within the parish. The Assembly's Delegate Towns and villages, monasteries and guilds - all of these organizations in the Loudunais regularly appointed delegates {syndics) to act for them. For rural communities, the delegate was someone who represented the parish and defended its interests with the state, in the courts, and also with the seigneurs.49 He was selected, almost always fromon e of the principal heads of household, for a one-year period. The delegate presided over the assembly, nominated collectors and other local officials, and could help resolve disputes. In theory, the delegate simply represented the consensus reached at the assembly, and brought back to them any matters requiring a decision. For the state, the delegate was a convenient local official through whom information could be 48 Smedley-Weill, The intendants of Louis XIV. 180. 49 Bordes, T-'fld^jnfcfration provinciate. 176; Louet, "Le pays Loudunais," 223. 407 drawn and to whom direction could be given. He was also a prominent peasant who could be held accountable if the community failed to deliver on a task or report.50 In Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize, the delegates came from prominent ploughman families such as the Baussay, Turquois, and Senegon. They might receive a small salary of a few It, and exemption from taxes, but their obligations were numerous and so they needed to be men of some substance. They could be held personally responsible both by the assembly and by the state for negligence, or for the failures of others in the parish. Indeed, their own fortunes were potentially at risk if the parish did not meet its tax bills. Their reward was a position of political and social prominence that reinforced their standing in the community. Apparently this was not always enough; in 1696, the community of Martaize was having difficulty getting anyone to step up as a candidate. Since the position was to be held only for one year, it is likely that many if not most of the principal heads of household took turns serving as the delegate, acclaimed in office by their peers, no doubt thankful that someone else was shouldering the burden that year. This gave the position a certain corporate character; there was no reason for the delegate to stray far fromth e viewpoint and interests of the group of prominent peasants who supported him and to which he would soon return. In addition to acting as the community's political representative and head of the assembly, the delegate also became a sort of village captain responsible for supervising a variety of military and other state-run activities at the local level under the direction of 50 For example, the delegates submitted reports on vital statistics for their parishes to the intendant until 1778, when mis duty was taken over by parish priests, AD V C62 Resultats des Etats de Population de la G6n6ralit6 de Poitiers; the attendants increasingly gave orders directly to the delegates through the subdelegates, rather than the local office-holders, Maillard, Les campagnes de Touraine, 24-25. 51 AD V 4E 53/50? Pierre Voyer, Saint-Cassien, 15 Apr 1696, Martaize. The delegate eventually chosen, Vincent Baussay, was given a near exemption fromtaxes ; he still had to pay 40 sous (2 It). The village of Angliers gave their delegate a salary of 10 It, AD V 4E109/66 Pierre Rivereau, Martaize\ 15 Jul 1764. 408 the intendant. These included providing winter quarters for regular soldiers, enlistments in the militia, and unusual matters such as help in organizing wolf hunts. In 1748, wolf attacks in the province of Touraine had increased to the point where the intendant ordered the delegates of several parishes to gather the best shooters from their communities to help hunt down the beasts. As for winter quarters, every year the intendant instructed the delegates of the affected parishes on the number of billets, the supplies required (for example, dragoons needed stables and fodder for horses), and the rates of reimbursement. Originally, peasants applied directly to recover these expenses, but the intendant found that working through the delegates reduced fraudan d helped ensure that the soldiers got everything they needed.53 After a new militia system was instituted in 1688, delegates were expected to ensure compliance with its regulations. The militia functioned on the principle that each parish should provide a single, well-equipped soldier, and would be responsible for maintaining and replacing him as required. The unfortunate nominee was chosen by a lottery of all unmarried men in the community. The delegates' responsibilities included supervising the lottery, raising money and purchasing equipment such as a coat, boots, and a gun in accordance with the list provided, and ensuring the chosen soldier attended training and showed up when called out. While a deserter from the militia faced imprisonment, the delegate of a perpetrator's parish could be hit with a 500 It finea s well.54 The delegate could be called upon to look after a variety of local concerns. For example, in the parish of Arcay (northeast of Martaiz£), the assembly hired a man from 52 AD I-L C412 Extrait registred u Conseil d'Etat 24 Dec 1748. See Part 1,1. 53 AN G7 522 Tours 25 Oct 1695, G7 449 Poitiers April 1678. 54 AD I-L C20 Intendance: Affeires Militaires, 1703-1789,20 Oct 1734; C48 Milice, 1737 Militia regulations; for more on the militia and winter quarters, see Part 1,3. 409 the nearby parish of Saint-Martin d'Ouzilly to serve as a guard for the community's livestock, crops and vines. The delegate was responsible for supervising the guard and collecting contributions from every household to pay his salary. Ploughmen provided 1 bx of wheat, while day-workers were assigned 1 bx of barley and grape producers paid 1 s / b of land.55 There was also a guard (Pierre Pinsard) in Martaize, presumably with similar duties. In Moncontour, the delegate supervised the assembly's choice of experts to estimate the repairs required to the parish church. The delegate of Angliers (north of Martaize) represented his community at the royal court of Loudun in a dispute with their seigneur, Charles Fran?ois Henry de Reval, a member of the Parlement de Paris. The community had been using a piece of marshland as pasturage for their livestock for some time. The seigneur now claimed the marshland belonged to him, and wanted to clear part of it for his own profit. The court ordered a survey completed and nominated experts to assess the value of the land in question. The matter appears to have dragged on; eighteen months later the court directed the delegate to hold an assembly and present the results of the experts' assessment. Since there are no further records at the royal court, it appears that the assembly and the seigneur came to some sort of agreement. This suggests that the court wanted the delegate to try to resolve the matter locally rather than pronounce a judgment itself. In all of these matters, the delegate worked for the assembly, not the other way around. 55 AD V 4E 109/66 Pierre Rivereau, Martaize, 10 Apr 1763, Arcay hired Gabriel Assailly; on guards and field watchmen throughout France see Olwen H. Hufton, "Le paysan et la loi en France au XVIIf siecle' Annales: Economies. Soci&fe. Civiliyarioris 38,3 (1983): 685. 56 AD V 2 C 1940 Contrdle des Actes, Bureau de Moncontour, 8 Sep 1754. 57 AD V 5 B 3,27 Jan 1751,5 Aug 1752, Reval versus delegate and habitants of Angliers. 410 The delegate was a key figure in the community, its political representative and the main official of its assembly. He served on an annual basis and was selected from among the principal heads of household in the assembly. The delegate was also a conduit for the state to issue orders and regulations and to receive information and tax revenues. He also helped the state manage military affairs at the local level. In general, the delegate was more official than leader; his discretion was limited to enforcing the decisions of the assembly. His symbolic importance, however, was considerable. Presiding over assemblies, supervising other local officials, and representing the community in courts and government offices, the delegate was the manifestation of community will and social order. There is also no doubt that the delegates were prominent individuals who would not have been chosen for the position if they did not already wield considerable influence in the community. The Assembly's Importance Historians have described the rural community and its assembly in western France as weak, lacking much communal property or other revenue, its own officials, or even a clerk and a register. Further, meetings were irregular and often poorly attended. This explains why little documentation of assembly meetings has survived. If we are to go by the surviving written records, it would appear that few peasants were actively interested or involved in their assembly. Certainly many day-workers and other poorer peasants would have had little time to give to local affairs.58 Antoine, Fiefs et Villages du Bas-Maine. 41; Gallet, Seigneurs et pavsans. 68; Louet, "Le pays loudunais" 228-232. 411 In the Loudunais, it was certainly true that the assemblies had little economic importance. Peasants did not work collectively and so there was no need for supervision of communal rights and practices. The assembly was simply not involved in the myriad individual disputes over credit, property and seigneurial rightstha t characterized the rural economy. The assemblies also met infrequently, and rarely left a formal record. Yet the social and political importance of the assemblies should not be underestimated. They negotiated and executed the demands of the state in the community - especially taxes and military affairs like the militia and winter quarters. The assembly decided who would pay what, who would be assigned soldier billets, and ensured that the chosen soldier reported for duty on time and properly equipped. The timing of these annual events (for example, the fall selection of tax collectors, the quarterly review of the tax roles, or the annual militia training muster) helped set the seasonal rhythm of community life as much as the items on the religious and agricultural calendars. The state's tactic of using local assemblies to carry out these unpopular demands gave them legitimacy, as peasants did not have to suffer the interference of state officials, and decided themselves how the burden should be shared. The assembly further oversaw the vestry, approving its accounts on an annual basis, as well as any major projects for the parish church. Such decisions shaped the environment within which peasants regularly gathered for worship and social events. In routine years, the assembly might only need to meet a few times a year, simply approving the work done by its selected officials. Yet if required, the assembly and its delegate were also there to deal with any unforeseen dispute, demand, or danger for the community. The assembly was important to the community as a political structure and 412 also in the way that it reinforced socio-economic hierarchy. It shaped and defined community relations and spaces in ways that maintained the existing order. Perhaps the best indication of the assembly's importance was the way that peasants reacted when the Revolution attempted to diminish its role.59 SECTION II - ACADIA The Parish Priest and the Community The Church was just as important in the New World as the Old for rural communities. It reinforced "the most basic concepts of the era, loyalty to the king, respect for order, acceptance of a hierarchical social structure, and feelings of a sense of community."60 By 1750 mere were seven parishes in Acadia - Annapolis Royal, Grand Pre (Minas), Riviere des Canards, Beaubassin, Pisiquid, and Cobequid.61 There were also missionaries serving alternately at Pobomcoup, Chedabucto, Shubenacadie, and elsewhere. Significantly, the events around the 1755 Deportation at Minas centred on the church. Colonel Winslow's soldiers used it for accommodation, including troop billets, the commander's quarters and a guardhouse, building a palisade around its yard. It was to the church that 418 Acadian men were summoned. There, Winslow read the deportation order and subsequently imprisoned them. He was polite enough to permit "the Elders to remove Sacred things so as not to be defiled by heretics" a few days 59 Le Goff and Sutherland, "The Revolution and the Rural Community," 109-114; Peret, Histoire de la Revolution. 16. 60 A. J. B. Johnston, Religion in Life at Louisbourg. 1713-1758 (Kingston & Montreal, 1984) 13; Louise DechSne writes that religion "permeated everyday life" in Habitants and Merchants in Seventeenth-Century Montreal trans., Liana Vardi (Montreal & Kingston, 1992) 278. 61 Andrew Hill Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia to 1760 (Madison, 1968) 217. 413 before. Given the prominence of the French missionaries with the first colonization expeditions to Acadia in the early seventeenth century, it might be fair to say that the colony began and ended with the Church.63 Acadia was part of the diocese of Quebec, but the bishops seldom exercised direct supervision over the colony. Bishop Saint-Vallier took a momentary interest in Acadia in the 1680s, appointing a vicar-general and even visiting himself in 1686 - the only bishop to do so.64 In contrast, the bishop or his vicar-general visited the parish of La Prairie in New France fourteen times between 1698 and 1749.65 French officials in Acadia complained that the missionaries paid no attention at all to the regulations of the Bishop of Quebec. After the Treaty of Utrecht (1713), the Bishop did appoint vicars-general from among the clergy in Acadia. In addition, the abbe de l'lsle Dieu was the bishop's vicar-general in Paris and his responsibilities included dispatching priests for service in Acadian parishes and as missionaries to the Mi'kmaq.67 Significantly, there are no dispensations in the Acadian parish registers between 1712 and 1740, despite the increasing frequencyo f consanguineous marriages among the inhabitants. The number of priests in Acadia was never large, and few stayed for long. There were no churchmen at all during the English administration of 1654-1670. During his visit in 1686, Saint-Vallier noted that serving in Acadia was a lonely affair; the sole priest Winslow's Journal, 19 Aug, 24 Aug, 5 Sep 1755, consulted at Archives of Fort Beausejour. 63 On the early missionaries, see for example the letters of the Jesuit P. Biard in Reuben Gold Thwaites, ed., The Jesuit Relations and allied documents: travels and explorations of the Jesuit missionaries in New France. 1610-1791 Vol 1 (Cleveland, 1896). 64 Jean-Baptiste de Saint-Vallier, Estat present de 1'Eglise et de la Colonie Francoise dans la Nouvelle France (Paris. 1688). 65 Louis Lavallee, La Prairie en Nouvelle-France. 1647-1760 (Montreal & Kingston, 1992) 130. 66 Villebon to Pontchartrain, 1693, in John Clarence Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century (Saint John, 1934)49. 67 Micheline Dumont-Johnson, Apdtres ou Agitateurs: La France missionaire en Acadie (Trois-Rivieres, 1970) 136. 414 at Port Royal asked for a companion as well as additional clergy to serve the newer settlements at Minas and Beaubassin. Saint-Vallier appears to have come through because by 1693, there were four priests serving in Acadia - improving the ratio of priests to people to about 1:250, though this does not take missionary duties to the Mi'kmaq into account. This was probably the height of clerical support to the Acadians; after the Treaty of Utrecht, only a handful of priests were permitted in British Nova Scotia, even as the Acadian population grew to over ten thousand. In addition, the large spaces of Acadia meant that priests in different communities would have few opportunities to meet or support each other. They were also divided by professional rivalries, especially between Sulpicians, Recollets, PrStres des Missions Etrangeres (P.M.E.) and secular priests.69 All of this meant that few churchmen developed strong ties to Acadian rural society. One exception was Charles de la Goudalie, a Sulpician who served at Minas for the better part of 20 years between 1729 and 1749 and was also vicar- general of Acadia. He supported the Acadians during their negotiations with Governor Philipps over the conditions of the oath of allegiance, and in general preached neutrality and moderation. New France, it should be emphasized, also had a shortage of priests. As late as 1730, only one in five parishes had a permanent priest in residence. The total number of clergy there fell from over 300 in 1698 to only 200 in 1759, while the population grew to nearly 60 000. Again, some priests were absorbed in missionary duties while, as in France, many clergy lived entirely in the principal towns. As a result, the eighteenth- 68 Saint-Vallier, Estat present de 1'Eglise. 307; Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 50. 69 Dumont-Johnson, Apdtres on Aeitateurs. 143. 70 Micheline Dumont-Johnson, "Charles de la Goudalie" DCB. I. 415 century ratio of priests to people in the rural parishes of New France was as low as 1:500.71 The Treaty of Utrecht (1713) had protected the Acadians' right to practice the Catholic religion "so far as the Laws of Great Britain permit the same." This was an important qualification, given the limited extent to which Catholic practice was tolerated in the metropolis. The British wanted French priests to take oaths of allegiance to the British crown for the period they were in Acadia. In France, only bishops had to take oaths to the king, and obviously, swearing fidelity to a Protestant monarch was not an easy matter. The relationship between French priests and Acadian communities was inevitably affected by the political situation. The British suspected all of the Catholic clergy of fomenting rebellion. The French government certainly tried to use these potential agents, sending instructions to Gaulin in 1711 to incite the Mi'kmaq to attack Port Royal, and to Durand and Pain in 1718 to convince the Acadians to emigrate to fie Royale. These efforts had very limited success, showing that the Acadians did not blindly follow their priests. The British became particularly worried that priests might excommunicate Acadians favourable to their regime. In 1736 and 1740 the Council condemned any use of this power. British Governor Mascarene noted that the victims of the excommunication were people in public (i.e. British) employ. Most infamously, some French missionaries such as Maillard and Le Loutre saw the interests of the church and the French state as the same and promoted them with zealotry and violence. Le 71W. J. Eccles, "The Role of the Church in New France" in W. J. Eccles, Essays on New France (Toronto, 1987) 30; Dechene, Habitants and Merchants. 262. 72 Mascarene to French Deputies, 22 Nov 1736 in Thomas B. Akins, Acadia and Nova Scotia: Documents Relation to the Acadian French and the first British Colonization of the Province. 1714-1758 (Cottonport, 1972); report of Mascarene, 1 Jul 1740 in Charles Bruce Ferguson, ed., Minutes of His Majesty's Council at Annapolis Royal 1736-1749. (Halifax, 1967) 29. 416 Loutre led an attack that burned the Acadian community of Beaubassin in 1751 when the peasants refused to move to French territory.73 The Acadians felt that they lacked enough clergy to administer the sacraments, particularly timely baptism for their infants.74 They understood the Treaty of Utrecht as guaranteeing their right to have a priest, and wrote to the King of France when this requirement was not met.75 In Annapolis Royal, an ongoing feud in the 1720s between the priest Breslay and Lieutenant-Governor Armstrong culminated in the British attempting to arrest the priest, and the latter's escape and eventual retirement back to France.76 Unable to find a long-term replacement, 107 heads of household from Annapolis Royal signed a petition to the Council requesting a priest in 1736. Beaubassin's priest, de Poncy, was banished by the British in the 1730s. The community's delegates asked the Council to let him return since there was nobody else to administer the sacraments. After finding in 1740 that de Poncy had returned on his own, the Council ordered the Acadians to send him back to Louisbourg, but agreed to allow another priest if he first came to Annapolis Royal to ask permission and to swear the oath.77 Apparently it was up to the Acadians to find a volunteer. Under the best of circumstances, it would have been difficult for a single priest to administer the large and growing parishes of Acadia. The political situation and conflict with the British government simply made it worse. 73 Dumont- Johnson, Apotres ou Agitateurs. 90,111; Ronnie-Gilles Leblanc, "Du 'derangement des guerres' au Grand Derangement: la longue evolution d'un concept" in Ronnie-Gilles Leblanc, ed., Du Grand Derangement a la Deportation; nouvelles perspectives historiques (Moncton, 2005) 11 -20. 74 See Part II, 5 for more on Acadian baptism. 75 The Acadians complain of their "sad situation" in a letter to me king in 1736, LAC Serie CI ID Correspondance Generate, ff75. 76 Breslay left in 1730, E. A. Chard, "Rene-Charles de Breslay" DCB. I. 77 10 Nov 1736,18 Sep 1740,11 Apr 1741 in Ferguson, Minutes of his Majesty's Council 10,33,36. 417 The Vestry The Acadians paid the tithe and also made contributions to their parish vestry. A •TO churchwarden was selected to maintain the accounts and keep up the church. It is unlikely that there was much property assigned to the vestry. In New France, most of the vestry's revenue came from donations and pew rentals.79 There are no references in the records to a sacristan, suggesting that the churchwarden may also have been responsible for looking after the vestments, sacred vessels, and other items for the church. As in the Loudunais, a single individual appears to have been responsible for all temporal church matters, and may have served for long periods of time. However, in Acadia the building and outfitting of new churches would have been a significant community undertaking involving most of the inhabitants. It was certainly a major investment; a wooden church could be built for around 200 lc, but was unlikely to last long, while a stone church could cost several thousand lc.80 The early churches in Acadia were humble buildings. During his visit in 1699, Diereville could not tell the church at Port Royal from the other buildings, writing "I should have been more inclined to take it for a Barn than for the Temple of the True God."81 Most of the churches were small wooden structures, and when Bishop Saint- Vallier toured Acadia in 1686, he noted that all the churches were severely lacking in Villebon received accounts from the churchwarden of Port Royal in 1693, see Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 50; Pierre Bugeaud was the churchwarden of Minas, Edith Tapie, "Les structures socio-^conomiques de Grand Pre": communaute acadienne" (M.A. thesis, University de Moncton, 2000) 98. 79 Allan Greer, Peasant. Lord, and Merchant: Rural Society in Three Quebec Parishes. 1740-1840 (Toronto, 1985) 117; DechSne, Habitants and Merchants. 265; Lavallee, La Prairie. 133. 80 Although finished in 1705, the stone church was not paid off until 1717, Lavage, La Prairie. 116-119, 140. 81 Sieur de Diereville, Relation of the Voyage toPor t Royal in Acadia or New France. (Toronto, 1933 (1708)) 83. 418 ornamentation and sacred vessels, and in much need of repairs. Churches also tended to be targeted during English raids. The church at Port Royal was burned in 1690, and those at Beaubassin (1696) and Minas (1704) were looted. In 1701, a visiting nun remarked that the church at Port Royal was in a frightful state, resembling the "stable of Bethlehem" because all of its items had been stolen by the English. It was only after the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) that a period of relative peace and population expansion led to major investments in churches. In 1755, Winslow reported that the small stone church at Riviere des Canards was beautiful and well stocked with an "abundance of ye Goods of the world." At Grand Pr6, as we have seen, he permitted the Acadians to remove the sacred vessels from the church before his soldiers occupied it.84 Acadia expanded from one to seven parishes by 1755, and several of the churches were transformed from wood to stone buildings. Unfortunately, no records of any deliberations or contributions for these matters have survived. All we can say for certain is that the Acadians did have vestries, did appoint churchwardens, and were responsible for the repair, upkeep, and decoration of their churches, like their counterparts in the Loudunais. In fact, it was an even bigger job because the Acadians were building from scratch or rebuilding in stone and would have had to provide all of the labour themselves. Their efforts were complicated by the frequent wars and disturbances in their colony. It is likely that, as in New France, peasants sometimes argued over the costs of the vestry, 82 Saint-Vallier, Estat present de l'feglise. 55; Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 312. 83 27 Oct 1701 letter of Sister Chason on the Mi'kmaq and the state of the church at Port Royal in Acadia. LAC Nouvelle-France: correspondence officielle 3e serie, Vol 25, p. 13540. 84 Winslow's Journal, 3 Sep 1755; on Grand Pr£, see note 64. 419 such as how much to spend on building projects and ornamentation. At those times, the assembly would have to make a decision. The Assembly and the Community At first glance, it appears that the assembly would have had a reduced role in Acadia. There were no taxes to collect, and the dispersal of the households throughout the marshlands of the Bay of Fundy inhibited community political life and association.86 In New France, participation in the assembly was even smaller than in the Loudunais. Depending on the importance of the subject under discussion, particularly its financial implications, an assembly might include just ten to thirty per cent of the heads of household.87 Yet the march conditions of Acadia made political decisions and the choice of representatives very important; most Acadians appear to have at least shown up for meetings. In the face of raiders, conquerors, and officials, the community needed to choose leaders to negotiate the demands of these outsiders. Governors demanded much, but had few officials to make their requests stick.88 As a result, particularly in communities outside Port/Annapolis Royal, the assembly acquired a heightened importance in local government and civil affairs. As in the Loudunais, there is no indication that Acadian communities had much collective property or revenue; the assembly was not important in an economic sense. Its significance was as an institution through which the principal heads of household could 85 Colin Coates, "The Boundaries of Rural Society in Early Quebec: Batiscan and Sainte-Anne de la Pelade to 1825" (Ph.D. thesis, York University, 1992) 409; Lavallee, La Prairie. 44,116. 86 Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia. 222; Tapie, "Grand Pre"," 34; Regis Brun, LesAcadiens avant 1755. Essai (Moncton, 2003) 10. 87 A visit by the subdelegate to La Prairie managed to rouse 40 households in 1722, see Lavalle"e, La Prairie. 177. 88 See Part 1,2 on frontiercondition s and Part 1,3 on the demands of the state. 420 discuss and negotiate the demands placed on them. The very dispersal of the Acadian farms made a centre point of political life necessary for creating and preserving on community identity and developing a common response. It is clear that the Acadians, if not unified in their views, generally showed solidarity in the face of their supposed colonial masters. They chose to fighta s militia against the English invasion of 1707, and not to do so in 1710. They decided to emigrate, and then to stay, in the years following the Treaty of Utrecht. They refused to swear an unconditional oath of allegiance to the British king, but agreed to one that guaranteed their right to live in peace. This sort of collective action would not have been possible without a strong identity forged in community life and expression. The Assembly's Representatives, from Delegates to Deputies The first known delegates (syndics) of Port Royal (1639) were Claude Petitpas and Michel Boudrot, men closely associated with the seigneur and governor, Charles Aulnay.90 When Port Royal surrendered to Robert Sedgwick in 1654, a new delegate, Guillaume Trahan, negotiated the terms alongside the seigneur, Emmanuel Le Borgne, and the colony's priest, a Capuchin friar named Leonard de Chartres.91 The delegates Ren6 Landry and Daniel Leblanc represented Port Royal and Minas during the surrender to William Phips in 1690. Before Phips left, he included both men in a council he appointed to administer the colony until he could send officials from New England. 89 Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 384. 90 Genevieve Massignon, "La Seigneurie de Charles de Menou d'Aulnay, gouverneur de I'Acadie, 1635- 1650" Revue d'histoire de l'Amerique Francaise XVI (1963): 469-501. 91 Capitulation of Port Royal, 1654 in Collection de manuscrits. 145; Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 77. 92 Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 29; Emerson W. Baker and John G. Reid, The New England Knight: Sir William Phips. 1651-1695 (Toronto. 1998). 421 We know about these early delegates because their names were recorded on documents relating to major political events. Over time, the political role of the delegates appears to have grown from simply representing the community to leading local administration. This change can also be seen when government institutions at Port Royal broke down in the 1690s. After Phips' invasion and capture of Acadia's governor, the French commandant, Villebon, moved the remaining French soldiers to Fort Nashwaak, on the other side of the Bay of Fundy and much further inland on the Saint John River. It was a more defensible location, but far from the Acadians. The officials who had been present in Port Royal went with him. In 1692, the assembly of the settlement at Minas wrote to Villebon asking him to approve their choice of three people to settle local disputes over property and other civil matters. The community at Beaubassin took advantage of Villebon's visit in the winter of 1693 to do the same, selecting three "among them to settle such disputes as might arise."93 This was not unlike the way in which the chosen delegates in the Loudunais were registered with the subdelegate each year. But given the increased discretion and powers with which the assembly was endowing these individuals, official approval was even more important since it would add legitimacy to any judgments they made. This helped enforce the decisions made, making opposition from within the community more difficult, and also ensured that the government could not return at a later date and claim these decisions were made without its knowledge or authority. What did Acadian delegates actually do in this period? There are several clues in the correspondence and journal of Villebon. From his perspective, the delegates were 93 Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 35. 422 there to execute his orders. They arranged for provisions and timber to be sent to Fort Nashwaak, sent workers on contract to help build his fortifications and buildings, and to get his own crops going, and assigned billets in their communities for wounded soldiers or officials passing through. It seems that the low prices and wages offered by the French made it difficult for the delegates to fulfill many requests, especially when English privateering made crossing the Bay of Fundy a dangerous undertaking.94 The ongoing hostilities placed the Acadian communities in harm's way on several occasions and made being a delegate a potentially dangerous job. In 1693, the delegate Germain Bourgeois of Beaubassin assembled the habitants and repelled a pirate attack.95 In 1696, when a far larger force arrived under the command of Benjamin Church, the Acadians retreated into the woods and Bourgeois was left to negotiate with the raiders. Church, disappointed in his hopes of wreaking vengeance on aboriginals like those who had helped the French capture English-held Fort Pemaquid, settled instead for killing some Acadian livestock and burning a few homes, but threatened to return if French and aboriginal attacks on Massachusetts continued.96 Bourgeois' efforts must be considered a success, since he managed to convince Church not to pursue the other Acadians. Some of the buildings and livestock were also saved, though perhaps only because it was too much trouble to destroy all of the dispersed farms. During a veritable famine in 1699 caused by crop failure, urgent letters had to be carried to John Nelson, a Boston merchant who traded in Acadia, Jean Daigle, "La famine de 1699 en Acadie," SHA 7,3 (1976): 147-149; Richard R. Johnson, John Nelson. Merchant Adventurer: A Life Between Empires (Oxford, 1991). In 1696 Villebon had three disabled soldiers sent to Minas for winter quarters. He wanted to hire Acadian laborers in 1696, but the offered wage of 10s / day and the lengthy contract of three years were hardly incentives and it appears the delegates could not fill the request, Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 19,129. 95 Villebon's journal, 28 Apr 1693 in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. 47. 96 Villebon's journal, 29 Oct 1696 in Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenm Century. 97; George Rawlyk, Nova Scotia's Massachusetts: A Study of Massachusetts-Nova Scotia Relations. 1630 to 1784 (Montreal and London, 1973) 81-83. 423 Another potential duty of the delegate was to negotiate with the Mi'kmaq, either with or without the assistance of a missionary. Unfortunately we know almost nothing about these discussions. If there was an explicit accommodation that kept the Acadians out of the forest hunting grounds, this had to be revised each time a settlement was founded or expanded. Even if there was a less formal understanding, many Mi'kmaq groups came to hunt, fish and gather fromth e rich marshlands in the Bay of Fundy, a potential source of tension and squabbles with farmers building dykes.98 Perhaps the good relations and occasional intermarriage in the earliest days of the colony helped avoid conflict, but it is likely that many Mi'kmaq would have regarded Acadian expansion, cultivation, and cattle-raising, especially outside Port Royal, as a threat." Negotiations would have been required to keep the peace. The return of the French government to Port Royal in 1699 led to new demands on the Acadian communities, such as the creation of militia companies. Orders for provisions and billets for soldiers also increased. The Acadians did in fact rally to Governor Subercase in 1707, helping him defeat two different English landing forces at Port Royal. The fighting left many of their homes ruined, however, and Subercase was unable to secure financial aid or supplies fromFranc e because of the war in Europe. The few reinforcements for the garrison that arrived were teenagers. Out of money and with sickness and dissension growing in the garrison, Subercase faced a new and larger attack of over 2 000 men in 1710. This time only one hundred Acadians reported to the fort 97 John Mack Faragher, A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of the French Acadians from their American Homeland (New York, 2005) 48. 98 Geoffrey Plank, An Unsettled Conquest: The British Campaign Against the Peoples of Acadia (Philadelphia, 2001) 84. 99 See Part 1,2 for more on relations between the Acadians and the Mi'kmaq. 424 when ordered, and the majority of these soon deserted, realizing it was a lost cause. The Acadians had shown that they were willing to fight, but would not throw their lives and farms away on hopeless struggles. After the fall of Port Royal, the conquerors demanded contributions from the Acadians there and at Minas. The Acadians chose collectors (subject to British approval) to assign and gather the required amounts from the community.101 It is likely that, as in France, these collectors were nominated by the delegates. The first decade of the eighteenth century had proved a demanding time for the village assemblies and their delegates. It appears that the delegates were already becoming deputies, leaders with considerable discretion and tasks that went beyond simply representation. From organizing a military force for defence to negotiating land use with aboriginal people, to settling local disputes among the other Acadians, their responsibilities went beyond those of their counterparts in the Loudunais. It is interesting to note that a similar process was underway in New France, where militia captains took on a wide range of local responsibilities. Significantly, however, these militia captains were named by the governor rather than chosen by the habitants. It is important to emphasize that these delegates were still subject to the assembly, composed of the principal heads of household, who made the important political decisions, represented the collective will of the community, and chose the delegates on a regular basis. 100 Ren6 Baudry, "Daniel d'Auger de Subercase" DCB. I. 101 LAC CO 217 Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island - Original Correspondence Colonial Office, 16 Nov 1710; Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 241. 102 Fernand Ouellet, "Officiers de milice et structure sociale au Quebec (1660-1815)" Histoire sociale- Social History XII, 23 (1979): 42; Decbine, Habitants and Merchants. 200. 425 The Assembly and its Deputies after the Treaty of Utrecht The British Council at Annapolis Royal was composed of military officers who were not entirely sure what the future held. They hoped that English-speaking, Protestant settlers would soon arrive, from New England or Europe, either assimilating or displacing the Acadians altogether. Naturally, they expected to benefit from the subsequent growth of trade and settlement in Nova Scotia. In the meantime, however, their hands were full simply keeping their disaffected and frequently disease-ridden garrison together. At other times, they had to contend with aboriginal raids, even outright war with the Mi'kmaq in the 1720s. Competition with English officials, merchants, and fishermen in Boston did not help. These men wished to pursue their own perceived rights in Nova Scotia without having to go through the Council. Overall, British power in Acadia was very limited outside Annapolis Royal. Once it became clear that New Englanders would not be flocking to the colony, and also that the Acadians would not all depart for lie Royale, the Council had to decide how to work with the French population.103 The Acadians, particularly those in Annapolis Royal, had already been sending their delegates regularly to negotiate with their new governors. The assembly at Beaubassin "introduced" its deputies to the Council in 1715 on its own initiative, since no British At one point, almost every Acadian household in Annapolis Royal and Minas had declared they were moving to lie Royale. However, the Acadians had sent representatives to scout the land there and they returned saying the soil was unsuitable for farming. The British, afraid that there would be nobody left in the colony at all, also encouraged them to stay. Felix Pain discusses moving in a 1713 letter to Governor Costabelle, LAC Nouvelle-France: correspondence officielle 3e serie, Vol 5,139-141. Samuel Vetch advised the Lords of Trade that if they were allowed to leave it would cause "the greatest danger and damage to all the British colonies" 24 Nov 1714 in Akins, Public Documents. 6. Also see Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 261. 426 official had yet visited the community. Not surprisingly, the British chose to formalize the existing political system, calling the delegates "deputies." Beginning in 1721, the British ordered an annual election every autumn. The Acadians gathered in their parish assemblies, and then divided into sections that would choose one person each "to be their Deputy, to Represent them, and to act and do all things as foresaid." The number of sections in each parish was based on population size but also the layout of the community. This was most evident in Minas, where the sections were based on the various river settlements. At first, Annapolis Royal was assigned six deputies, and Minas and Beaubassin, four each. In the 1730s, this increased to eight for Annapolis Royal, twelve for the villages in Minas, and six for Beaubassin.105 This was more than the number of delegates chosen under the French regime, but it did not result in a council or assembly of deputies and no "chief deputy" was chosen. Why expand the number of Acadian representatives? Perhaps it reflected a British parliamentary viewpoint of governance based on the inhabitants being divided into constituencies, or a desire to involve more of the wealthier Acadians in the administration or even an attempt to divide the Acadian communities into more manageable districts. Perhaps they wanted to ensure that no individual Acadian became too prominent - a political leader around whom opposition could gather. In practice, the deputies in a particular parish worked together to ensure they spoke and acted from a common perspective. Given the political demands and local administrative responsibilities the 104 LAC CO 217 Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island - Original Correspondence Colonial Office, 28 Mar 1715. 105 28 Apr 1720,4 May 1720 in Akins, Public Documents. 23-25. The number of deputies was increased in 1732, see Adam Shortt, et al., Currency. Exchange, and Finance in Nova Scotia. 1675-1758 (Ottawa, 1933); N. E. S. Griffiths, The Contexts of Acadian History. 1686-1784 (Montreal & Kingston, 1992) 42. 427 deputies had increasingly taken on, it made sense for the work to be shared among a number of prominent Acadians. What did the deputies do? They continued to resolve local civil matters, though many Acadians took their individual disputes directly to the British Council at Annapolis Royal. When this happened, the Council usually consulted the deputies of the community concerned, referring minor matters to them and asking for their recommendations on more serious concerns.106 In return, the British, of course, expected the deputies to enforce official decisions, so involving them in the process made sense. Both sides were committed to order and attempted to support each other. During the Mi'kmaq war, the Council issued an arrest warrant for Joseph Broussard on suspicion of conspiracy with the Mi'kmaq expedition that laid siege briefly to Annapolis Royal in 1724. The deputies of Minas brought in not only Broussard, but two other men who confessed to having concealed the expedition from the British. They petitioned the Council for pardons and, surprisingly, the British released all three men "uniquement du a la fidelite des delegues au gouvernement d'Annapolis Royal."107 By 1730, the British had appointed a number ofjustice s of the peace and local judges fromamon g the inhabitants to deal with civil matters.108 This permitted the deputies to concentrate on their role as political representatives. Several examples published in Jacques Vanderlinden, Histoire du Droit en Acadie et en Nouvelle- fecosse aux XVIIe et XVM" siecles: Cartes Documents et Tableaux. 1603-1755 (Moncton, 1996) 104-105, 199,239-244,319-323. 107 Maurice Basque, "Conflits et solidarity familiales dans I'ancienne Acadie: l'aflaire Broussard de 1724" SHA 20.2 (1989): 67. 108 For example, Alexandre Bourg was named king's attorney for Minas, and Prudent Robichaud and Jean Duon were appointed justice of die peaces in Annapolis Royal in 1729, Archibald MacMechan, ed., A. Calendar of Two Letter Books and One Commission Book in the Possession of the Government of Nova Scotia. 1713-1741 (Halifax. 1900) 171-172. 428 Ongoing hostilities between the British and Mi'kmaq frequently put the deputies in a difficult position. Some Mi'kmaq took action against Acadians deemed too friendly with the British. For example, in 1744 several aboriginals burned the home of Rene Leblanc, who had recently been appointed notary and rent-gatherer in Minas and was seen as pro-British. Of more concern to the British was the fact that New England traders outside of Annapolis Royal were sometimes attacked and plundered. The Council, believing that the Acadians and Mi'kmaq were in fact allies, and having little contact with the Mi'kmaq themselves, ordered the deputies to account for these robberies. After one incident in 1737, the deputies of Minas were expected to "assemble the Indians and get restitution."109 Obviously the deputies were in no position to force the Mi'kmaq to do anything they did not want to do, nor were they likely to catch those involved in the raid. Nevertheless, in 1742, the deputies did meet with local Mi'kmaq and succeeded in getting partial restitution for another robbery. The Council was "well satisfied with the Behaviour of the Inhabitants and also with the Good Intention of these Honest and Well- Minded Indians."110 This event demonstrates that at least some Mi'kmaq both understood the Acadian situation and also had their own reasons to collaborate and preserve peace. Finally, in 1743, the Council ordered all deputies to summon the habitants to take up arms and protect British traders threatened with Mi'kmaq attack or robbery.111 The deputies appear to have prudently ignored this directive. Much was required of the deputies. They received no salary from their office and had considerable responsibilities. They had to travel frequently to Annapolis Royal, a 109 20 Jun 1737, Ferguson, Minutes of his Majesty's Council. 18. 110 9 Apr 1742, Ferguson, Minutes of his Majesty's Council. 38. 11110 Oct 1743, Ferguson, Minutes of his Majesty's Council 41. 429 particular hardship for those from the more outlying villages. The position also required significant status and the ability to work with the other principal heads of household in the community. All of these criteria narrowed the possible choices, and as a result, deputies were invariably prominent and prosperous Acadians. Indeed, the constant election of deputies from a small group of families -14 of the 28 deputies chosen at Annapolis Royal up to 1749 were Prudent Robichaud and his relatives — demonstrated how strong this "small world of influential families and individuals" was, and how willing they were to use local institutions to "promote and protect their own interests."112 Partisans of France and Britain might be found among the Acadians, but the deputies and the wealthier Acadians who chose the deputies pursued neutrality almost immediately after 1710 because they had most to risk in another conflict.113 The limits of this policy are apparent to us now, especially in the period after the British founded Halifax (1749), bringing larger imperial forces and new Protestant settlers into Acadia. The deputies failed at that point to come to grips with the new determination of the British, and unwisely believed they could avoid making a new accommodation with Governor Cornwallis and his successors.114 But we can hardly fault the principal Acadian families for not realizing that this time Britain would achieve total victory over France and its aboriginal allies. Maurice Basque, Pes hommes de pouvoir: histoire d'Otfao Robichaud et de sa famille.notable s acadiens de Port Royal et de Neguac (Neguac, 1996) 70; Maurice Basque, "The Third Acadia; Political Adaptation and Societal Change" in John G. Reid, et al., The Conquest of Acadie. 1710: Imperial. Colonial, and Aboriginal Constructions (Toronto, 2004) 159. 113 Basque, "The Third Acadia," 155. 114 Griffiths, Contexts of Acadian History. 91. 430 The Assembly's Importance and the Oath of Allegiance Given the wide responsibilities and increased numbers of the delegates, now turned deputies, it would be reasonable to assume that the village assembly diminished in importance. This did not happen. The deputies were still chosen annually and were ultimately accountable to the village assembly. They always worked in accordance with the assembly's direction. An ineffective or controversial deputy was unlikely to be re elected and could be removed. The assembly still made the important political decisions, such as what oath to swear to the British king. Every time the British renewed their demand for an unconditional oath, the Acadians called an assembly and made a collective decision. Each community sent its own version of the oath that they were willing to swear. As early as 1717 the deputies of Annapolis Royal began to request that all Acadian deputies be called together before answering the Council's latest demand for an unconditional oath. 15 The significance of this act should not be exaggerated. It was not, as has been proposed by some, a claim for full Acadian independence, but rather a political tactic designed to increase negotiating power. Indeed, the real purpose was to delay a definite response altogether, and thus preserve the status quo.116 The deputies were always sure to emphasize that their actions were based on the decisions of the village assembly they represented. For example, the deputies of Annapolis Royal, Minas and Beaubassin presented nominal rolls of habitants who had attended the assemblies in 1715,1720 and 1727.117 The attendance rate was 115 Annapolis Royal Acadians to Lieutenant-Governor Doucette, 1717, in Akins, Public Documents. 16. Naomi Griffiths, The Acadians: Creation of a People (Toronto, 1973) 27. 116 Griffiths stresses the development of an Acadian "emergent ethnicity", Migrant to Acadian. 310. 117 LAC CO 217 Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island - Original Correspondence Colonial Office, 13 Jan and 22 Jan 1715,28 Mar 1715,1720. 431 high -178 signatures (or marks) from Minas and 135 from Beaubassin. Even if the deputies were chosen from the rural elite, most households were at least present during the assembly's deliberations. When the Acadians finallydi d swear a conditional oath - in all three communities by 1730 - there was no doubt that the majority of the heads of household supported this decision. From one perspective, the Acadians had been surprisingly successful in negotiating the recognition of their property and religious rights in exchange for a limited recognition of their allegiance due to the "sovereign seigneur" of Nova Scotia. They could leave, with their movable possessions, at any time, and would not be compelled to bear arms. They had achieved neutrality.'l8 It would be wrong to conclude that the Acadians naively believed they had heard the end of this; for all they knew, another round of imperial war would again lead to a regime change. They hoped, however, that they had created a foundation that would let them live in peace. Conclusion The importance of the village assembly and vestry endured in Acadia and in the Loudunais in the eighteenth century. In both places, peasants were integrally involved in the running of their church, deciding what kind of building to construct, what renovations were required, and how it should be decorated. Every year, they gathered to review the vestry's accounts and talk about any changes for the coming year. The community's political interests were represented by delegates they selected on an annual basis. The state decided to work with and formalize this system, seeing the delegates as convenient 1,8 Brebner, New England's Outpost. 96; Griffiths, Contexts of Acadian History. 43. 432 local officials who could pass on and execute orders and also provide information. In the Loudunais, these delegates were called upon infrequently; the main responsibility of the assembly was to assess and collect state taxes, and to administer military matters like troop billets and the militia. But the delegates were there if required, representing the community in royal courts, seigneurial manors, and government offices. In Acadia, where administrative and judicial institutions were weak and often distant, especially outside Port/Annapolis Royal, the delegates accumulated wider responsibilities in civil matters and negotiated greater demands fromcolonia l governors. This gradually transformed them into deputies. But what did this distinction actually mean? First, it began at the initiative of the peasants themselves, who needed an effective administration to regulate the gradual expansion of their communities and were filling a gap left by the government. Second, the deputies never turned into leaders in their own right; they always represented the assembly's decisions, taking orders and new demands back to the other heads of household. Third, the deputies continued to be selected on an annual basis, giving the assembly an opportunity to choose someone else. The French and British imperial context in Acadia created significant new demands on rural communities, but it did not change the way in which these communities functioned. As the Acadian communities expanded, it made sense that more deputies were required to represent them. If the peasants of the Loudunais had faced similar circumstances, they probably would have responded in the same way. The assembly and the delegates were a flexible structure that could meet as little or often as required to ensure order was maintained. Its purpose was to guarantee that the senior peasants remained in control of local matters and 433 responses and to keep the state out of its affairs. In both Acadia and the Loudunais, the village assembly was remarkably successful in fulfilling this purpose. CONCLUSION TO PART III In this section, we compared the seigneurial system, the rural economy and differences in wealth among peasant groups, and the community institutions of vestry and assembly in Acadia and the Loudunais. The first task was to deal with the rule of the seigneurie, and to establish its importance in the system of landholding and in the social structure of both regions. In the Loudunais, the seigneurs were most important as landlords and creditors, but usually relied on their agents to deal directly with peasants. As nobles and clerics, often with many different estates in other parts of France, they were chiefly concerned with the landed revenues they enjoyed and otherwise left their censitaires alone. In Acadia, it was important simply to prove that the seigneurie not only crossed the Atlantic to the new colony, but that it also survived the political turmoil and isolation of the place. In fact, it remained the framework for landholding among the Acadians until they were deported, and, just as in the Loudunais, dues continued to be collected there. Another similarity was the distance and virtual irrelevance of the lords with regard to social life in the community and the administration of local justice. In Acadia, and unlike the Loudunais, the seigneurs normally resided, but were more interested in trade and political matters than in being lords. The priority of these men and women, many with commercial backgrounds, lay with securing their claims to the colony's limited natural resources.1 A few, such as Aulnay and La Valliere, invested in the initial development of their lands, but were overtaken by political events and responsibilities - both served as colonial governor but soon fell from power (Aulnay died and La Valliere was fired). As a result, 1 Discussed in more detail in Part 1,1. 435 they generally relied on prominent Acadians to administer their concessions. After the Treaty of Utrecht (1713), both the Acadians and the British saw the value of maintaining the system, as it helped keep order and gave them a way to relate to each other. The Council earned an acknowledgment of their "ownership" of the colony, a small amount of revenue, and some degree of support from the centre group of families, while the Acadians obtained official recognition of their property rights and the preservation of their customary law. The chapter on the rural economy brought together and built upon themes developed in several parts of this dissertation. For example, the analysis of market and trade opportunities reflected the different natural and political conditions discussed in Chapters 1 and 2 of Part I, while the budgets quantified the weight of state fiscal demands (Part 1,3), tithes (Part III, 9) and seigneurial dues (Part HI, 7), finding that these were relatively light burdens on peasants in both places. A major finding of this chapter was the common degree of economic stratification among peasant groups, thereby developing and reinforcing the findings about social hierarchy from Part II. Of course there is always a degree of arbitrariness in assigning such categories, but it is clear that there were large gaps between the larger and smaller farmers in both places, with considerably different interests, concerns, and potential profits. In the Loudunais, credit through leases and loans were fundamental to the economy and credit structures paralleled this hierarchy, with seigneurs, estate managers, merchants, and priests lending to ploughmen, and ploughmen lending to day-workers. Ploughmen also possessed the livestock and equipment needed to run larger farms; their advantage in this regard was obvious from household inventories and evaluations of marriage communities. In Acadia, the oldest 436 families benefited from securing the best land, building up large holdings which could support future generations. They had links to seigneurs, merchants, and officials, as well as to each other, which helped them thrive in the colony. But the Acadians did not benefit from a large, established trading network and their system of dykes made them vulnerable to natural and human disruptions. This placed considerable limits on the earning power of their crops and led most to invest heavily in livestock for which it was easier to find a market. In comparison with the Loudunais, the amount of land each household actually cultivated was quite small. Perhaps the strongest similarities this section uncovered between the rural societies of Acadia and the Loudunais were in the ways that peasants organized and administered themselves through their vestries and assemblies. Peasants made their own decisions about how much to contribute to the upkeep of their church, when to repair or expand it and how to decorate it. They chose their own delegates to represent their interests in courts and with officials, rotating the position among the senior heads of household by annual elections. They also chose their own tax collectors, who together with the delegate managed the demands of the state for money, information, troop billets, and soldiers for the militia. While the state set the requirements for each parish, the peasants decided how the burden would be shared amongst themselves. An important feature of these institutions was their flexibility. In the Loudunais, tax collection was the primary concern and followed a regular schedule, but the assembly might also be called upon to deal with a range of potential problems, such as a lack of security in the parish, disputes over common rights with seigneurs, or organizing billets for troops. In Acadia, there were no taxes, but there were a host of other demands fromth e state that had to be 437 negotiated, some of which were considerably disruptive and dangerous. There could be serious consequences for actions deemed to be "collaboration" in a march colony contested by European and aboriginal powers. Further, delegates helped resolve civil matters in the community because of the distance of courts and state officials. In general, these institutions were the foundation of a collective identity and outlook, though certainly one shaped by social and economic hierarchy. In Part I, the emphasis was on the very different natural and political conditions of Acadia and the Loudunais. In Part II, we saw how the mortality and growth rates in the two places were also very different, but that over time demographic practices were becoming more similar as the Acadians in the principal communities, led by the centre group, sought to consolidate their gains. Part III has argued that the social, economic, and political structures of these rural communities retained and/or developed remarkable similarities. In short, it was in these structures, largely created and maintained by the peasants themselves, that rural societies in Acadia and the Loudunais were most alike. Peasants in the Loudunais enjoyed stability, security, and a reasonably prosperous living. Clearly the Acadians were trying to establish and maintain the same degree of security, using methods that their ancestors had brought over from France and that continued to make sense for tackling the particular challenges and vulnerabilities of living in their colony. 438 CONCLUSION This dissertation began with the conviction that Acadian history before the Deportation should be interpreted through an understanding of early modern rural communities in France. I selected the Loudunais as my basis of comparison because it was the probable place of origin for some of the Acadian founding families, but also because, like Acadia, it was a relatively distinct and prosperous rural area that had plenty of experience with frontier conditions. Those who have examined Acadia in isolation, or only as part of New France, have offered general characterizations such as the following: Acadia was "a republic of subsistence farmers" with neither parishes nor tithes. The seigneurial system did not function after 1670 and it was not "a rank-ordered society." In general, it is "fair to regard the colony as something of a peasant paradise. "l The Acadians "around what is now called the Bay ofFundy, created a unique society, an independent blend of European and aboriginal cultures," a "democratic society" in which they could "master their own destiny. "2 Acadia "was virtually free from 'positive checks' to the natural increase of the population. "3 "The selection and role of deputies meant political activity and negotiation within the village communities. Those who accepted this position learned not only how to persuade their fellow villagers but also how to argue with officials... [This was] a crucial step in the continued evolution of a distinct Acadian identity. '** These views can no longer be sustained. In fact, the Acadians established a rural society that over time became increasingly like that of the Loudunais, largely retaining 1 James Pritchard, In Search of Empire: The French in the Americas. 1670-1730 (Cambridge, 2004) 71, 111; Allan Greer, The People of New France (Toronto, 1997) 97; N. E. S. Griffiths, The Contexts of Acadian History. 1686-1784 (Montreal 1992)20-22. 2 Clive Doucet, Lost and Found in Acadie (Halifax, 2004) 23,49,63. 3 Gisa I. Hynes, "Some Aspects of the Demography of Port Royal, 1650-1755" Acadiensis 3,1 (1973): 8. 4 N. E. S. Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian: A North American Border People. 1604-1755 (Montreal, 2005) 308. 439 institutions, practices, and perspectives that had served them in France. There was little of aboriginal culture in the principal Acadian villages, and of course they did have parishes and paid tithes. Peasants in both Acadia and the Loudunais paid dues to seigneurs, and regularly elected political representatives from among the rural elite to negotiate the demands of the state and to assist with local administration and concerns. This is not to say that the Acadians were not independent or distinct, but they appear no more so man their counterparts in the Loudunais. It is true that France and Great Britain, in some ways, did not treat the Acadians like other peasants. We saw in Part I that state demands for oaths of allegiance and active service in Acadia were out of all proportion to the obligations placed on the residents of the Loudunais. For example, in France (after 1688) each rural parish was required to provide a single person for militia duty when called. In Acadia, every able-bodied man was expected to fight for the imperial cause. In this regard at least, the Acadians no doubt wished to be treated like other peasants.5 At the same time, the Acadians faced greater threats to their security than most peasants after 1648; the area they occupied and cultivated was part of a much larger strategic borderland, a march that no European power was able to effectively control, yet was constantly disrupted by military raids and invasions. This was hardly a peasant paradise - the conflicts of the European powers and the efforts of the Mi'kmaq to preserve their territory and influence shaped Acadian destiny far more than the Acadians themselves. 5 Griffiths wrote that France and Great Britain "assessed the Acadians not as a community to be understood but as an obstinate peasantry to be brought to a proper sense of their obligations" in From Migrant to Acadian. 419. In fact, the obligations on the Acadians were quite different from those placed on the peasants in the Loudunais - and considerably more onerous. See Part L 3. 440 The demographic analysis in Part II shows that although the Acadians clearly had more children and a lower rate of mortality than the peasants of the Loudunais, this difference should not be exaggerated. For example, lower mortality in the Loudunais also led to considerable population growth, and the greater number of children in Acadia was in part the result of an earlier age at first marriage. Further, the Acadians did experience disease, suffering a true mortality crisis around Annapolis Royal in 1727. In both areas, as communities became larger and more established, their population grew more slowly, and their age distribution changed. Indeed, Acadian demographic practices looked increasingly more like those of the inhabitants of the Loudunais, led by the centre group of families seeking to consolidate their gains. Birth intervals were similar in both places, and the age at firstmarriag e in Acadia for both brides and grooms was rising. The results of Part II also reveal that Acadians living in the major communities had few connections with aboriginals, and formed marriage alliances amongst themselves based on a parochial social hierarchy that favoured the centre group. This endogamy, which can also be seen in the selection of godparents, appears even stronger in Acadia than in the Loudunais. In both places, there was also considerable differentiation in the wealth and status of peasants. Hierarchy was important; in both Acadia and the Loudunais there were distinct groups of large and small farmers, with the wealthier dominating economic relationships such as work, trade, and credit, as well as leading community institutions such as the vestry and assembly. Property, including land, livestock, and farm equipment 6 Jacques Vanderlinden found the same thing in the period 1670-1710 in Se marier en Acadie francaise. XVIIe et XVIIT siecles (Moncton, 1998). See Part II, Chapter 6. Griffiths, in what must rank as a serious understatement, noted that the Acadians had a "not entirely egalitarian social structure" in "The Golden Age: Acadian Life, 1713-1748" Histoire Sociale - Social History 17,33 (1984): 29. 441 like plough teams, was the essential divider. Like the day-workers of the Loudunais who held only small plots of land, many small farmers in Acadia did not produce enough food to feed their families, and so needed to exchange labour or other services with larger farmers to get by. We can also put to bed the idea that the Acadians farmed as a collective.7 Small groups of families certainly worked together to build and maintain dykes in their part of the marshland, but these farms were dispersed throughout the area and such groups were not connected to each other. Despite periods of English rule, and scholarly claims to the contrary, the seigneurie endured in Acadia, though its importance did change.8 The seigneurs in both areas maintained their traditional rights and dues throughout the period; however they were economically much stronger in the Loudunais, but politically more significant in Acadia. The seigneurial system remained the basic framework of property holding. Interestingly, after the Treaty of Utrecht, both the British Council and the principal Acadian families supported the preservation of this arrangement because they believed, for different reasons, that it served their purposes to do so. The continuity between the Loudunais and Acadia is perhaps best seen in the political life of the community. N. E. S. Griffiths' claim that the Acadians had an independent "general temper" could be extended to the inhabitants of the Loudunais, who also managed their own affairs quite happily with little interference from state officials.9 Similarly, historians who refer to the Acadians as being "democratic" or "republican" 7 These claims are made by Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 68 and Yves Cormier, Les Aboiteaux en Acadie: Hier et auiourd'hui (Moncton, 1990) 73. 8 John G. Reid describes me seigneurial system as an "annoyance rather than social institution" in Acadia. Maine, and New Scotland: Marginal Colonies in the Seventeenth Century (Toronto. 1981) 141; Leslie Choquette argued it was "virtually meaningless" in Frenchmen into Peasants: Modernity and Tradition in the Peopling of French Canada (Cambridge. 1997)288-290. 9 Griffiths, Migrant to Acadian. 100. 442 seem to be unaware that they organized themselves and behaved in ways very similar to their French counterparts. Their delegate (syndic), whom the British would call a "deputy", had similar powers, responsibilities, and importance in both places. Ultimately it was the community assembly, led by the senior heads of household, which made the decisions. These traditions of local government were flexible and representative in the narrow sense of the word, but hardly democratic. It is not my intent to argue that the Acadians were not a distinct people, but the case for historical exceptionalism should not be overstated.10 There is no question that the Grand Derangement was a defining and tragic experience for the Acadian people. The findings of this work should in no way be taken to detract from the accomplishments and identity of modern Acadians, who over generations recovered and thrived fromthi s displacement and loss. At the same time, this dissertation provides a freshloo k at Acadian history before the Deportation, and challenges several long-held views. It follows on fromth e writings of several other historians who have examined local arrangements, interests, and reactions to political events in Acadia. Where I differ from them is my focus on interpreting Acadian experience with an eye to that of peasants in France, and my belief that the parish registers are a critical resource to be included in our analysis. The Acadians were French peasants who adapted their perspective and methods to a new natural and political landscape. Over a century of expansion, they held onto many of the traditions and practices that they had used in the Loudunais. The Acadians were not unique in farming marshlands, living in borderlands, experiencing growth, or 10 A. J. B. Johnston, "La seduction de l'archftype face au d6fi de l'histoire de l'Acadie" SHA 36,1 (2005): 12-46. 443 enjoying a prosperous economy. Their independent temper and their pursuit of neutrality were entirely consistent with the behaviour of other French peasants. Clearly, peasants on both sides of the Atlantic continued to share a common perspective, and pursued similar goals. This conclusion should not diminish our regard for the Acadians; rather it should highlight their commitment, adaptability, and resilience. At the same time, we can examine the Deportation without lamenting the destruction of some ideal Golden Age or "peasant paradise." What about the Loudunais? There is little historical literature on the Loudunais and what there is makes no general interpretive claims to question; yet comparing the experience of peasants in the Loudunais with that of the Acadians has resulted in several findings which update or modify conventional views of rural societies in western France. This small province between Poitou and Touraine proved to have been quite different from its neighbours in a number of ways. Perhaps most obviously, it was not part of the bocage; instead, peasants in the Loudunais lived and worked in a relatively uniform landscape of fertile plains and small, centralized villages. Peasants produced wheat in large quantities for export through the Loire trading network, and usually enjoyed a good standard of living. They had little livestock and few woods, marshes, or other uncultivable areas, which made their agriculture even more focused on wheat, and in certain parishes, wine. The region also had a uniquely long experience as a battleground, military frontier and borderland that went back to the medieval period and continued through the Wars of Religion in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. When the tide of war receded, it remained a 444 borderland in an administrative and fiscalsens e until the Revolution. This may explain why, unlike so many of their counterparts in other areas of western France, the peasants of the Loudunais did not engage in the tax revolts and other uprisings that were so common in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.11 The demographic results of the parishes of Aulnay, La Chauss6e, and Martaize, emphasized that homeostasis was far from a state of "inertia" but instead should be understood as cycles of crisis, recovery, and growth.12 Indeed, when mortality rates dropped, growth could be both considerable and rapid. In a region where there was little new land for expansion, this put significant pressure on the rural economy and the holdings of individual families. We tend to see population growth as inherently positive, but in the Loudunais it was an indication that existing methods to control fertility had failed. There were some additional surprises. First, there was a surprisingly high degree of pre-marital and extra-marital sex in the Loudunais. Second, although groups of ploughmen and day-workers remained generally distinct parts of a hierarchy of wealth, caste-like behaviour as demonstrated by a tendency to endogamy within these groups, was less apparent, and certainly less marked than in Acadia. For example, the most prominent ploughman families showed only a modest preference for marriage alliances amongst themselves. Most peasant families maintained a broad social network composed of marriages and godparent selections from across the parish and the larger region. 11 Jean Nicolas, La rebellion francaise: mouvements populaires et conscience sociale (1661-1789) (Paris, 2002). 12 David L. Elliott, International Migration and Population Homeostasis: An Historical Study (New York, 1989) 24; Jacques Dupiquier, Histoire de la population francaise. Vol 2: de la Renaissance a 1789 (Paris, 1995)417. 445 There were however significant differences in the relative wealth, potential for profit, and expectations of ploughmen and day-workers in the Loudunais. Quite simply, ploughmen had the land, equipment, seed, and credit needed to get started, while day- workers were unable to save very much fromyea r to year to get ahead. Ploughmen needed labour for their large farms, and day-workers needed wages; they had a logical but certainly an unequal relationship. Yet day-workers were not miserable or starving, nor were they crushed by debt. While there were more day-workers in the Loudunais than many other parts of western France, the term is misleading because most of them farmed as well.13 In fact, some day-workers held a considerable amount of property. Even those holding just one boissellee (3.2 ha) could expect to break even most of the time. When conditions were difficult, they borrowed small amounts of money in the short term, and usually paid it back promptly. Further, the living conditions of many ploughmen and day-workers were not substantially different from each other. When compared with the dominance of the emerging rural elite in Acadia, the advantage enjoyed by the wealthier ploughmen of the Loudunais seems significant, but not extreme. No doubt if new lands to cultivate had been available, the ploughmen's greater ability to amass resources and credit would have widened the gap. The findingso f this study also support the arguments of those who have emphasized the economic influence of the seigneurs.14 In the Loudunais, few lords actually lived on their estates or even visited them, relying on estate managers and other agents they appointed. The seigneurs were chiefly important as landlords. They 13 Annie Antoine, Fiefs et Villages du Bas-Maine au XVIIF siecle (Mayenne, 1994) 57. 14 Antoine, Fiefs et villages du Bas-Maine. 456; Brigitte Maillard, Les campaenes de Touraine au XVIIT siecle; structures agraires et gconomie rurale fRennes. 1998) 74. 446 controlled leases, bought up certain properties and sold others, issued loans and other forms of credit, and collected rents and dues. But they had little coercive power; a concession or lease granted by a seigneur could only be cancelled after years of non payment and extensive legal action. In general, seigneurs did not control the lives of the peasants who worked on their lands, and they did not interfere with community political life. Most rural families held property in more than one seigneurie and often in several. As a result, there was little social attachment to any particular lord. Further, peasants took their legal concerns and claims to royal courts rather than seigneurial judges, which were rare in the region. There is no doubt that the lords enjoyed a degree of social prestige and respect, but the seigneurial system in the Loudunais was fundamentally an economic institution, and the lords were chiefly interested in their landed income. It is often remarked that the Acadians benefited from not having to pay taxes. There is no question that this was an advantage, but how much of one? In the Loudunais, taxes represented just six to seven per cent of the annual expenses of both ploughmen and day-workers. Admittedly, this could rise to over ten per cent during wartime, particularly for ploughmen since their earnings were targeted by so-called "extraordinary" taxes like the vingtieme. But even then, such burdens on peasants ranked far behind operating costs like seeding and ploughing, and living expenses such as food, heat and light. The cost to ploughmen of leases, workers, and tithes was far greater than what they spent on taxes. The Acadians paid most of the same expenses to run their farms and households. We might also consider what the inhabitants of the Loudunais received in exchange for their fiscal contributions. We are so used to thinking of the old regime state as a totally negative force that we risk forgetting that it did provide some basic services. The 447 Loudunais received, among other benefits, security and police personnel, well-staffed and accessible courts, resident notaries, and a host of other local officials and institutions. Of course there were problems with these state services, but compared to the situation in Acadia, where there was no security, few officials, and constant state demands on the population for food, labour, information, and even military service, the modest tax burden on the peasants of the Loudunais seems relatively bearable. A French Atlantic World? Was Acadia part of a French (or British) Atlantic World? Historians have pointed out the weakness of imperial structures in the French colonies generally.15 There is no doubt that both France and Great Britain failed to build an effective colonial government, a secure environment, and consistent markets in Acadia. As a result, the Acadians had little connection to their supposed masters. It also seems clear that they were not connected to other regions of New France or to French Atlantic ports by the networks of merchants, travelers, media, and communications whose existence has been explored by some historians for other parts of North America.16 Further, the Acadians do not seem to have kept up much contact with their former homeland; at least no evidence has ever been found that they wrote home to relatives in the Loudunais, nor did any of those relatives follow the original group of families in their choice of destination. The Acadians did not appear particularly connected to the Mi'kmaq either. Indeed, every 15 Pritchard, In Search of Empire. 72. 16 For example, Ian Kenneth Steele, The English Atlantic. 1675-1740: an Exploration of Communication and Community (New York, 1983); Kenneth Banks, Chasing Empire across the Sea: Communications and the State in the French Atlantic. 1713-1763 (Montreal, 2002). 448 indication is that the colony's inhabitants were isolated and marginalized, both politically and economically. The results of this dissertation suggest, nevertheless, the existence of a French Atlantic World linked by common social perspectives and practices among peasants. Rural societies in Acadia and the Loudunais developed under extremely different conditions yet not only retained but developed remarkable continuities. As time went by, the similarities were actually increasing, as in demographic patterns, for example. Clearly peasants were actively trying to reproduce aspects of the society and order they had left behind. Even in 1740, one hundred years after the original colonists arrived, a French peasant, particularly one from Poitou or Touraine, would recognize rural society in Acadia and could fit in quite comfortably. This is not to say that French peasants everywhere blindly and invariably followed a set of traditions. Instead, they constantly made choices: how to respond to the demands of the state, what to buy, when to get married and when to have children. Those who came to Acadia chose to keep some practices and to discard or adapt others. Throughout, the Acadians "consistently acted in what they considered their own best interest."17 Of course, this evaluation could be applied to just about anyone, at any time in human history. The point here is that French peasants in both Acadia and the Loudunais had a common understanding of what their best interests were, and common methods of achieving and protecting them. 17 John Mack Faragher, A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of the French Acadians from their American Homeland (New York, 2005) 96. 449 Where from here? The Loudunais proved to have been a region with a dynamic economy, active legal and political institutions, and a diverse population seeking to advance itself while maintaining order. In the early modern period, the inhabitants of the Loudunais were able to put several centuries of frontier violence and civil war behind them and establish a prosperous and stable rural society. There was nothing static or lethargic about these peasants; their demographic practices responded to changing conditions, and they included a surprising degree of pre and extra-marital sexual relations. Clearly, a better understanding of how people lived, worked, and organized themselves in France helps contextualize what was going on in its colonies. But there remains much to do with regard to our knowledge and understanding of demography, social hierarchy, and community institutions in the rural societies of France. The importance and role of the delegate, the activities of the vestry, peasant use of courts, and credit relationships and property exchanges among peasants are just some of the topics that beckon with possibilities for additional research. More broadly, examining and comparing rural societies in the Loudunais and Acadia has suggested a new "social" way of looking for and understanding the Atlantic World. This approach could be extended to include other parts of New France, the West Indies, and western France. Perhaps the Acadians' isolation and lack of urban areas made them a special case. Perhaps colonists elsewhere, becoming more involved in the fur trade, fishing or sugar plantations, had larger towns to visit and work in, and, under the direction of stronger official elites, broke more considerably from their past and followed a more divergent path. The key to understanding these other societies may well 450 be whether moving to the New World changed their goals and/or gave them new methods to work with. There is potential to take the analysis even further in places like the St Lawrence Valley or Martinique, because these societies were not destroyed in the way that the Acadians' original communities were - though these other colonies were of course also profoundly affected by imperial conflict. Quebec could be of interest because it too came under British control eventually. Several historians have already argued that traditional institutions like the seigneurial system actually became stronger in Quebec after the Conquest.18 It would be interesting to see whether demographic practices, social hierarchy, and other community institutions also endured. In places like Martinique where French control was not lost, it would be interesting to see what, if any, changes to rural society were caused by the upheavals of the Revolutionary period. Additional comparisons with France and between colonies could, in time, lead to a larger social history of the French Atlantic World: one defined not by the number of ships, letters, newspapers, or bills of exchange that crossed the ocean, but rather by the degree to which ordinary people shared common interests and methods in the communities that they built. For example, Allan Greer, Peasant Lord, and Merchant: Rural Society in Three Quebec Parishes. 1740- 1840 (Toronto. 1985)90. 451 APPENDIX A RURAL BUDGETS FROM PART III, CHAPTER 8 Introduction The purpose of this appendix is to present and explain the rural budgets discussed in Part III, Chapter 8. In general, the budgets convert all revenue and expenses into their monetary value in order to provide a simple basis of comparison. The following notes explain the sources and methods used to generate the figures used in the budgets. The Loudunais There are budgets for both a day-worker and a ploughman, presented as a series of tables. The first examples are for an average year, that is, with ordinary crop yields and no wartime taxes. Prices from 1765 were used. The subsequent examples are for the years 1762 through 1765, using the details about harvest results and prices provided by the primary sources.1 Revenue 1. Cultivated grains. The amount of grain produced is based on the extent of cultivated land multiplied by the crop yield. The size of the respective farms is estimated from the varying amounts of land that day-workers and ploughmen appeared to hold in the records. I used an average production ratio of 1 ha to 9.63 hi2, which was adjusted for 1 AD I-L C83 1720-1765, 11 Aug 1761, 1 Aug 1762, Jul 1763, Jul 1764,28 Jul 1765; C. Chevalier, Tableau de la Province de Touraine. 1762-1766: administration, agriculture. Industrie, commerce, impdts (Tours, 1863)115-118. 2 Paul Raveau, L'agriculture et les classes pavsannes: la transformation de la propriete dans le Haut-Poitoa au XVT siecle (Paris. 1926): Almanach de rarrondissement de Loudun. 1861 (Loudun. 1862). 452 the years 1762 through 1765 by the proportion above or below an ordinary year's results Indicated by the subdelegate. 2. Livestock and garden vegetables. As livestock was not a commercial endeavour in these parishes, I have assumed that whatever eggs, dairy, wool, or meat produced by the peasant's animals were used by his household. These would have reduced the amount of such items that he needed to purchase on the market. Similarly, whatever vegetables were grown in his garden were also consumed at home, making it impossible to evaluate their worth. 3. Labour. I have estimated that the day-worker was paid for 250 days of labour at a wage of 15s each day. A lower wage might have been paid if the employer had also provided food.3 4. Rent of plough team. There was no indication of how much it cost to rent a plough team in the records. I have estimated that, like other loans, the provider would charge about five per cent of the value of the principal. A complete plough team cost between 300 and 400 It, so the charge may have been 20 It. This ploughman rented out a plough team twice a year. 3 Leon Biollay, Etudes 6conomiques sur le XVIIP siecle: les prix en 1790 (Paris, 1886); Paul Raveau, L'agriculture et les classes paysannes, 235; P. Boissonnade, Histoire de Poitou 0?aris, 1977 (1926)) 235. 4 See Part III, 8 on other forms of leases and loans. Brigitte Maillard estimated that a team of oxen cost up to 300 It and we also have to consider the cost of the plough itself, Les campagnes de Touraine au XVnT siecle: structures aeraires et foonomie rurale (Rennes, 1998) 227. 453 Expenses 1. Tithe. The tithe was set at one-twelfth of the crops and was typically leased out by the priest to a group of collectors in exchange for an advance payment in money. I have applied it to grain crops, but not to livestock and garden vegetables, which were only grown for consumption at home.5 2. Cens et rentes. This seigneurial due applied equally to all land, whether owned or leased. Those ploughmen leasing demesnes land may not have paid the cens et rentes. The charge varied somewhat among seigneuries, but generally consisted of several deniers of cens on each boissellee of land, plus a large flour cake and a pound of butter and an additional amount of money, grain, or a number of capons in rentes.6 3. Lease payment to landlord. Most leases to ploughmen were in money (bail a ferme) at a set rate over several years. I calculated an average rate of 20 It for each boissellee of good land (6.25 It / ha), from the examples of these kinds of leases available in the notarial records for Aulnay, La Chauss£e, and Martaize.7 4. Tattle and ordinary taxation. No taille rolls have survived for the parishes of Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaize. The figures I have used are based on the average 5 AD V G961 Cure of Martaize, 21 Jan 1699 and 20 Sep 1707. 6 AD V 4E 110 15-26 Ren<5 Lanlaud, Saint-Clair, 1727-1760; 109/66 Pierre Rivereau, Martaizd,1761-1764. 7 AD V 2 C 1931-1943 Contr61e des Actes, bureau de Moncontour, 1737-1765; AD V Serie 4E (Notaires) 110/15-26 RenS Lanlaud, Saint-Clair, 1727-1760; 109/66 Pierre Rivereau, Martaiz6,1761-1764. Of course, there was considerable variety; for more on leases see Part HI, Chapter 8. 454 assessment on day-workers and ploughmen in other parishes of the Loudunais. I have not tried to calculate amounts for the aides and other indirect taxes; there are no usable records of these taxes, generally thought to have been primarily a tax on urban consumption habits, and insofar as they weighed on countryfolk, their weight would have varied with the quantity of alcohol and other such goods purchased by peasants each year. 5. Wartime taxes. For 1762 and 1763, these figures reflect the amounts for winter quarters, the ustencile and other smaller direct wartime assessments.9 6. Salt tax. This was a set rate applied to all peasant households annually.10 7. Extraordinary taxes. These levies were originally meant to be temporary, but after 1749 a permanent vingtieme was assessed. The number of vingtiemes increased during the Seven Years' War. There are no surviving tax records for Aulnay, La Chaussee, and Martaiz6, but we can estimate the assessment of the vingtieme by calculating six per cent of the peasant's projected net income (the standard rate across France) and then multiplying this by the number of vingtiemes in that year. The results broadly correspond with the tax rolls that are available for the nearby parish of Assay (about fifteen km southwest) in 1765.11 8 Melika Louet, "Le pays loudunais et mirebelais au XVHIeme siecle (d'apres les roles de taiile)" (D.E.A. memoire, Universite de Poitiers, 2000) 82. 9 See Part I, Chapter 3. 10 See Part I, Chapter 3. 11 Of course, the assessment did not change fromyea r to year in response to poor harvests or variable prices, so the calculation is based on the "average year" model. AD V C8 Election de Loudun, vingtiemes, parish of Assay, 1765; Michael Kwass, Privilege and the Politics of Taxation in Eighteenth Century France: liberte. egalite. fiscalite(Cambridge , 2000) 90. 455 8. Housing rental. In the Loudunais, few peasants owned their homes outright. Larger leases often included a house and garden. Day-workers tended to rent only part of a house, depending on the size of their families. The amount is an estimate based on examples of rental agreements from the notarial record.12 9. Heating and Lighting. The costs for wood and oil are taken from estimates calculated by Lebrun which were modified to reflect that day-workers normally rented only part of a house, and so had to spend less on heating and lighting, 10. Mills and ovens. We know that the seigneurial rights of banalite were collected in the Loudunais, though the rate is not stated in the documents. Across France, it was usually one-fourteenth of the grain processed.14 11. Clothing and effects. I have estimated the amounts that peasants spent to repair, replace, or purchase personal and household items, based on their value indicated in inventories found in the notarial record. The day-worker had little or no money to spend in this category. 12 For examples of peasants renting houses see AD Vienne 4E 53/509 Saint-Cassien 4 Jul 1695,4E 110/26 Saint-Clair 26 Nov 1757 and4E 109/66 MartaizS 17 May 1762. 13 Francois Lebrun, La vie conjugate sous I'Ancien Rigime (Paris, 1975) 68. 14 Pierre Le Proust, Commentaires sur les coustumes du pays de Loudunois (Saumur, 1612) 15; Allan Greer, Peasant. Lord, and Merchant: Rural Society in Three Quebec Parishes. 1740-1840 (Toronto. 1985) 136; Antoine, Fiefe et villages du Bas-Maine. 231. 456 12. Plough team. The day-worker needed to rent a plough-team in order to cultivate his land. As indicated above, I have estimated a charge of 20 It, which was equivalent to about five per cent of the value of the plough team. 13. Seed. I have used ratios of seed to crop from other good grain-growing land in France -1:6 for wheat, 1:8 for barley and oats - to determine the amount that each peasant would have had to reserve for the following year's planting.15 14. Grain merchant. Day-workers typically sold their crops to small, itinerant merchants (bldtiers). Ploughmen may have sold to the same men, to larger merchants in the towns, or sold directly to other peasants at market. Whatever the arrangements, I have assumed costs for transportation, storage, and/or commissions to be ten per cent of the grain to be sold. 15. Repair of buildings and equipment. Many leases required the tenant to keep up the farm, the house, and/or the equipment, and of course peasants would also need to maintain their own possessions. Such costs are likely to have varied widely from year to year, so I have estimated an amount based on a percentage of the estimated value of this capital. 15 Donald Sutherland, The Chouans: The Social Origins of Popular Counter-Re volution in Upper Brittany. 1770-1796 (Oxford, 1982) 84; Marcel Lachiver, Les annees de misere: la famine au temps du Grand Roi (Paris, 1991)36. 457 16. Feed for livestock. It is probable that the peasants used areas of uncultivated land to nourish their livestock with grasses and wild vegetation. I have included an expense of 10 It in the budget to cover small quantities of hay used during the winter months. 17. Bread consumption. This figure is derived fromth e amount of bread required to feed the peasant and his family and contemporary prices. The day-worker purchased his bread on the market, while the ploughman made his own bread from his mixed wheat crop.16 18. Meat consumption. There was no discussion of meat consumption in the records for the Loudunais. I have taken general estimates for France provided by Lebrun and speculated that a day-worker may have purchased twelve pounds of meat for each family member each year, while the ploughman bought twenty pounds for each person. I then applied contemporary prices to the total amounts.17 19. Sundries. I have assumed that in addition to whatever they produced from their animals and gardens, peasants also purchased small quantities of eggs, cheese, and fruits and vegetables at market. As with meat, the ploughman is likely to have spent more as he had a greater capacity to do so. Pierre Goubert estimated that 19.5 hi of grain were required to produce 2920 lbs of bread, or the equivalent of 8 lbs of bread a day, Beauvais et le Beauvaisis de 1600 a 1730: contribution a rhistoire sociale de la France du XVH" Steele (Paris, 1960) 165; Lachiver estimates a working man consumed an average of 2.5 pounds a day, while a woman and older children consumed 1.5 pounds a day, Les annees de misere, 39. 17 Chevalier, Tableau de Touraine. 115-118; Lebrun, La vie conjugate. 68. 458 Acadia Budgets have been developed for a small farmer (Germain Landry) and a large fanner (Francois Boudrot) using the information on cultivated land, numbers of livestock, and family size from the 1707 census. Revenue 1, Cultivated grains. The extent of land cultivated comes from the census. The prices for wheat and peas are from Quebec.18 Although there is no record of crop yields in Acadia, I have taken the higher productivity of marshland in Pokou (1 ha: 12 hi) as a reasonable estimate, though peas produced at a lower rate of 1 ha: 8 hi.19 2. Livestock. The numbers of livestock come from the census. The prices for the animals, meat, wool, dairy, and eggs come from a report of Governor Brouillan in 1701 and trade records from Louisbourg in 1740. The number of offspring, the number of animals chosen for slaughter and the quantities of milk, butter, wool and eggs are all derived from historical estimates.20 I discuss the difficulties of gaining access to markets in Acadia in Part III, Chapter 2. 18 Jean Hamelin, "Economic et soci&£ en Nouvelle-France" (Unpublished doctoral thesis, l'Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes de Paris) 59-61. 19 Jean Paul Billaud, Marais Poitevin: Rencontres de la terre et de Teau (Pms, 1984) 55. 20 Andrew Hill Clark, The Geography of Early Nova Scotia to 1760 (Madison, 1968); Annie Antoine, ed., "Des animaux et des hommes: &;onomie et society rurales en France (XT - XIXs siecles)" Annales de Bretagne et des Pays de l'Ouest Aniou. Maine. Touraine. 106,1 (1999) numeYo special; Virginia DeJohn Anderson, Creatures of Empire: How Domestic Animals Transformed Early America (Oxford, 2004); and Jean-Marc Moriceau, Histoire et geographie de l'elevage francais: Du Moyen Age a la Revolution (Paris. 2005). 459 3. Garden vegetables. As in the Loudunais, peasants had small gardens in which they grew vegetables for their own consumption. Although I can not calculate the value of these items, I have assumed that the typical Acadian did not have to purchase additional vegetables at market. Expenses 1. Tithe. In Acadia and New France, the rate of the tithe was one-sixteenth. The records do not indicate whether livestock or garden vegetables were included in the assessment. A list of goods that the Acadians provided to their priests was composed by the French official, Villebon, in 1693; it indicates that meat and butter were supplied, but there is no mention of calves, piglets or other offspring.21 I have calculated the tithe using crops and also products from animals such as meat and eggs, but not animal offspring or garden vegetables. It is likely that the application of the tithe in Acadia varied widely depending on the circumstances of the priest, if there was one resident in the parish at all.22 2. Censet rentes. The Acadians also paid seigneurial dues. The amount charged is based on examples from the remaining notarial records.23 21 Villebon to Pontchartrain, 1693, in John Clarence Webster, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century (Saint John, 1934) 50; N. E. S. Griffiths, From Migrant to Acadian: A North American Border People. 1604-1755 (Montreal and Kingston, 2005) 184. 221 discuss concerns with the availability of priests in Acadia in Part II, Chapter 2 and Part III, Chapter 3. 23 In Acadia, the typical seigneurial rent for a concession in Le Borgne's Minas seigneurie appears to be 1 denier, 1 capon, and 1 baisseau of fine wheat worth together about 40 s or 2 lc. The surviving documents of the notary Loppinot provide examples of seigneurial concessions in Port Royal and Beaubassin along similar lines, LAC Notaires d' Acadie (fhude Loppinot), concession to doctor Denis Petitot at Belleisle in 1693, and land sales mentioning seigneurial rents at Beaubassin and Minas in 1700 and 1701. See also 460 3. Rent of house and heating expenses. I have assumed that the Acadians built their own houses and collected wood freely from the surrounding area for their own use. These houses would have slowly amortized over time, but the amounts involved are too negligible to include here. 4. Mill. Although it seems that there were no seigneurial mills, the Acadians still would have paid to be able to use private mills that were constructed in the colony. I have estimated a charge of fivepe r cent of the grain processed.24 5. Clothing and effects, and lighting oil. These are simple estimates; there were no records to indicate the costs of these items in Acadia. 6. Seed. As in the Loudunais, seed ratios for wheat (1:6) and peas (1:8) are estimates fromth e historical record for above average farmland. 7. Labour. The dykes required a certain amount of repair and upkeep every year, which I have estimated at thirty days. Farmers may have completed this work themselves or hired someone else to do it. In addition, as in the Loudunais, larger farmers may have hired workers to help with their forms. Labour was generally more expensive in Acadia Regis Brun, Les Acadiens avant 1755. Essai (Moncton, 2003) 22; Jacques Vanderiinden, Le lieutenant civil et criminel: Mathieu de Goutin en Acadie francaise (1688-1710) (Moncton, 2004) 97. 24 See Part III, Chapter 7. 461 than in France, though the exchange rate on colonial currency made up some of the difference. I have estimated wages at 1 lc each day.25 8. Merchant fees. As in the Loudunais, I have estimated costs related to transportation, storage and merchant fees for items to be sold on the market at ten per cent. 9. Feed for livestock and livestock attrition. As the records do not give us insight into these costs in Acadia, these figures are based on historical estimates from New England and France. The Acadians largely relied on wild grasses and vegetation from the marshland to feed their livestock; I have estimated the cost of buying winter feed. Attrition refers to losses from disease or old age. In the latter case, these were probably the animals from which originated the meat consumed and/or sold by the farmer.26 10. Bread, meat and sundries. As in the Loudunais, some farmers bought their bread on the market, while others made their own. It appears that most Acadians produced their own meat and also their own sundries (e.g. eggs, butter, vegetables). 25 Sieur de Diereville, Relation of the Voyage to Port Royal in Acadia or New France trans., Alice Lusk Webster (Toronto, 1933 (1708)) 93. Christopher Hodson, "Refugees: Acadians and the Social History of Empire, 1755-85" (Ph.D. thesis, Northwestern University, 2004) 3 26 Anderson, Creatures of Empire: Moriceau, Histoire et geographie de l'elevage francais. 462 Average Day-worker Revenue Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Cultivated Grains 1 b of land 1 b = 3.2 ha 2 ha cultivated, 1.2 hafellow o r uncultivated Wheat 9.63hl = 88.28bx=7.36sp 115 It, 19s 2319 price = 15,15, 2/sp Oats 9.63 hi = 88.28bx = 7.36sp 46 It, 7s 927 price = 6, 5,11 / sp Livestock Domestic consumption Garden vegetables Domestic consumption Labour Day-working 250 days 187 It, 10s 3750 Wage = 15s / day TOTAL 349.8 In It Net Income Revenue 349.8 Expenses 337.64 Balance 12.16 463 Average Day-worker Expenses Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Tithe 7.36bx wheat, 7.36bx oats 13 It, 10s, 6d 270.55 1/12 of product Cens et rentes 10s, capon, 1 bx wheat gateau w/beurre 3 It, 3s, 4d 63.28 State Taxes Taille/Ordinary 4 It 80.00 Wartime Taxes 0.00 Salt tax 14 It 2s, 6d 282.50 1 minot/ family Extrordinary (Vingtiemes) 1lt 20.00 Living Rent of part of house in village 5 It 100.00 Heating - Wood 20 It 400.00 Lighting - Oil 5 It, 4s 104.00 2s / week averaged over year Banal Milt and Oven 0.00 Clothing and Effects 0.00 Cultivation Costs Plough Team 20 It 400.00 borrowed from ploughman Seeding - Froment 14.71 bx 19 It, 6s, 7d 386.58 1:6 seeding Seeding - Avoine 11.03bx 5 It, 16s 115.81 1:8 seeding Blatier 6.62bx wheat + 6.99bx oats 12 It, 7s, 3d 247.24 10% commission for local merchant Repair of Buildings/Equipment 0.00 Feed for Livestock Hay 5 It 100.00 Consumption Bread 7.5 lbs/day 182lt,0s, 11d 3640.88 2737.5 lbs rye bread (11b = 1s, 4d) Meat 72 lbs (6 pers) 17 It, 2s 342.00 1 lb = 4s, 9d Sundries (eggs, dairy, fruit/vegetables) 10 It 200.00 supplemented with own production TOTAL 337.64 in It 464 Day-worker Revenue, 1762 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Cultivated grains Wheat 4.82hl = 44.14bx = 3.68sp 44 It, 4s, 9d 884.75 1/2 yield, price = 12, 0, 5 / sp Oats 6.42hi = 58.86bx = 4.90sp 20 It, 0s, 10d 400.82 2/3 yield, price = 4, 1,10 / sp Livestock Domestic consumption Garden vegetables Domestic consumption Labour Day-working 200 days 150 It 3O0O Wage= 15s/day TOTAL 214.28 in It Net Income Revenue 214.28 Expenses 272.06 Balance -57.78 465 Day-worker Expenses, 1762 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Tithe 3.68bx wheat + 4.91 bx oats 5 It, 7s, 2d 107.19 Cens et rentes 10s, capon, 1 bx wheat gateau w/beurre 2 It, 17s, 1d 57.08 State Taxes Taille/Ordinary 4 It 80.00 Wartime Taxes 3tt 60.00 Gabetle 14 It, 2s, 6d 282.50 Extrordinary 3 It 60.00 Living Rent of part of house in village 5 It 100.00 Heating - Wood 20 It 400.00 Lighting - Oil 5 It, 4s 104.00 2s / week averaged over year Banal mill and oven 0.00 Clothing and effects 0.00 Cultivation Costs Plough Team 20 It 400.00 borrowed from ploughman Seeding - Froment 14.71bx 14 It, 15s, 5d 295.38 1:6 seeding Seeding - Avoine 11.03bx 3 It, 15s, 2d 75.22 1:8 seeding Blatier 2.35bx wheat + 4.29bx oats 3 It, 16s, 4d 76.31 10% commission for local merchant Repair of Buildings/Equipment 0.00 Feed for Livestock Hay 5 It 100.00 just enough from own production Consumption Bread 7.5 lbs/day 136 It, 17s, 6d 2737.50 2737.5 lbs (1 lb = 1s) Meat 72 lbs (6 pers) 15lt,6s 306.00 1 lb = 4s, 3d Sundries (eggs, dairy, fruit/vegetables) 10 It 200.00 supplemented with own production TOTAL 272.06 in It 466 Day-worker Revenue, 1763 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Grains Wheat 11.56 hi = 105.95bx = 8.83sp 108 It, 4s 2164.06 yield 1/1.25, price = 12,5,1 sp Oats 12.52 hi =114.77bx = 9.56sp 39 It, 18s, 3d 798.26 yield 1/1.33, price = 4,3, 6 / sp Livestock Domestic consumption Garden vegetables Domestic consumption Labour Day-working 250 days 187 It, 10s 3750 Wage= 15s/day TOTAL 335.62 in It Net Income Revenue 335.62 Expenses 287.34 Balance 48.27 467 Day-worker Expenses, 1763 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Tithe 8.83bx wheat, 9.56bx oats 12 It, 6s, 10d 246.85 Cens et rentes 10s, capon, 1 bx wheat gateau w/beurre2 It, 17s, 5d 57.42 State Taxes Taille/Ordinary 4 It 80.00 Wartime Taxes 3 It 60.00 Gabelle 14 It, 2s, 6d 282.50 Extrordinary 3 It 60.00 Living Rent of part of house in village 5 It 100.00 Heating - Wood 20 It 400.00 Lighting - Oil 5 It, 4s 104.00 2s / week averaged over year Banal mill and oven 0.00 Clothing and effects 0.00 Cultivation Costs Plough Team borrowed from ploughman 20 It 400.00 Seeding - Froment 14.71bx 15lt,0s,4d 300.38 1:4 seeding Seeding - Avoine 11.03bx 3 It, 17s, 1d 77.21 1:8 seeding Blatier 8.02bx wheat + 9.41 bx oats 11 It, 9s, 3d 229.26 10% commission for local merchant Repair of Buildings/Equipment 0.00 Feed for Livestock Hay 5 It 100.00 supplements pasture Consumption Bread 7.5 lbs/day 136 It, 17s, 6d 2737.50 2737.5 lbs (1 lb = 1s) Meat 72lbs(6pers) 15 It, 11s, 9d 311.76 1 lb = 4s,4d Sundries (eggs, dairy, fruit/vegetables) 10 It 200.00 supplemented with own production TOTAL 287.34 in It 468 Day-worker Revenue, 1764 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Grains Wheat 9.63 hi = 88.28bx = 7.36sp 94 It, 14s, 7d 1895 yield 1/1, price = 12,17, 5 / sp Oats 2.41 hi* 22.1 bx=1.84sp 8 It, 1s, 6d 161.5 yield 1/4, price = 4, 7, 9 / sp Livestock Domestic consumption Garden vegetables Domestic consumption Labour Day-working 250 days 187 It, 10s 3750 Wage = 15s/day TOTAL 290.33 in It Net Income Revenue 290.33 Expenses 288.38 Balance 1.95 469 Day-worker Expenses, 1764 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Dime 7.36bx wheat, 1.84bx oats 8 It, 11s, 5d 171.40 1/12 of product Cens et rentes 10s, capon, 1 bx wheat gateau w/beurre2 It, 18s, 5d 58.42 State Taxes Taiile/Ordinary 4lt 80.00 Wartime Taxes 0.00 Gabelle 14 It, 2s, 6d 282.50 1 minot / family Extrordinary 2 It 40.00 2 vingtiemes Living Rent of part of house in village 5 It 100.00 Heating - Wood 20 It 400.00 Lighting - Oil 5 It 4s 104.00 2s / week averaged over year Banal mill and oven 0.00 for autoconsumption Clothing and effects 0.00 Cultivation Costs Plough Team borrowed from ploughman 20 It 400.00 Seeding - Froment 14.71bx 15 It, 15s 315.09 1:6 seeding Seeding - Avoine 11.03bx 4 It, 0s, 10d 80.85 1:8 seeding Blatier 6.62bx wheat, 0.92bx oats 7 It, 8s, 10d 148.80 10% commission for local merchant Repair of Buildings/Equipment 0.00 Feed for Livestock Hay 5 It 100.00 Consumption Bread 7.5 lbs/day 147 It, 16s, 6d 2956.50 1lb=1s, 1d Meat 72 lbs (6 pers) 16 It, 10s 329.98 1lb = 4s,7d Sundries (eggs, dairy, fruit/vegetables) 10 it 200.00 supplemented with own production TOTAL 288.38 in It 470 Day-worker Revenue, 1765 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Grains Wheat 4.82hl = 44.14bx = 3.68sp 57 It, 19s 1159.12 yield 1/2, price = 15,15, 2 / sp Oats 10.59 hi = 97.11bx = 8.09sp 50 It, 19s 1018.68 yield 1/1.1, price = 6,5,11 /sp Livestock Domestic consumption Garden vegetables Domestic consumption Labour Day-working 225 days 168 It, 15s 3375 Wage = 15s/day TOTAL 277.64 in It Net Income Revenue 277.64 Expenses 329.00 Balance -51.36 471 Day-worker Expenses, 1765 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Dime 3.68bx wheat, 8.09bx oats 9 It, 1s, 6d 181.50 1/12 of product Certs et rentes 10s, capon, 1 bx wheat gateau w/beurre3 It, 3s, 4d 63.28 State Taxes Taille/Ordinary 4 It 80.00 Wartime Taxes 0.00 Gabelle 14 It, 2s, 6d 282.50 1 minot / family Extrordinary 2 It 40.00 2 vingtiemes Living Rent of part of house in village 5 It 100.00 Heating - Wood 20 It 400.00 Lighting - Oil 5 It, 4s 104.00 2s / week averaged over year Banal mill and oven 0.00 Clothing and effects 0.00 Cultivation Costs Plough Team borrowed from ploughman 20 It 400.00 Seeding - Froment 14.71 bx 19 It, 6s, 7d 386.58 1:6 seeding Seeding - Avoine 11.03bx 5 It, 16s 115.81 1:8 seeding Blatier 2.35bx wheat + 7.8bx oats 7 It, 3s, 6d 143.53 10% commission for local merchant Repair of Buildings/Equipment 0.00 Feed for Livestock Hay 5 It 100.00 Consumption Bread 7.5 lbs/day 182lt,0s, 11d 3640.88 11b- 1s, 4d Meat 72 lbs (6 pers) 17 It, 2s 342.00 1lb = 4s,9d Sundries (eggs, dairy, fruit/vegetables) 10 It 200.00 supplemented with own production TOTAL 329.00 in It 472 Average Ploughman Revenue Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Cultivated Grains 5 b owned land 5b=16ha 9.35 ha cultivated, 6.65 fallow or uncultivated Wheat 45 hi or 412.56bx or 34.38sp 546 It, 15s 10935.00 price =15,15,2/sp Meteil 45 hi or 412.56bx or 34.38sp 458 It, 19s, 6d 9179.46 price = 13,7,4/sp 5 b leased land Wheat 45 hi or412.56bx or 34.38sp 546 It, 15s 10935.00 Barley 45 hi or 412.56bx or 34.38sp 280 It 5600.00 price = 8,2, 11 / sp Livestock Domestic consumption Garden vegetables Domestic consumption Rent of plough-team 40 It 800.00 to day-workers TOTAL 1872.47 in it Net Income Revenue 1872.47 Expenses 1456.92 Balance 415.55 473 Average Ploughman Expenses Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Tithe (on 10b) 68.76bx wheat + 34.38bx barley + 34.38 meteil 151 It, 17s 3036.89 1/12 of product Cens et rentes (on 10b) 2bx wheat + 2 gateau/beurre + 4 It + 4 capons 13 It, 9s, "Id 269.04 Lease payment to landlord (5b) 200 It 4000.00 State Taxes Taille/Ordinary 30 It 600.00 Wartime Taxes 0.00 Salt tax 14 It, 2s, 6d 282.50 1 minot / family Extrordtnary (Vingtiemes) 40 It 800.00 Living Rent of House/Garden in village Included in lease Heating - Wood 72 It, 16s 72 It, 16s 1456.00 14s / week averaged over year X 2 Lighting - Oil 6 It, 10s 6 It, 10s 130.00 2s, 6d / week averaged over year Banal mill and oven 14.44bx meteil 16 It, 1s, 4d 321.29 7% of grain processed Clothing and effects 20 It 20 It 400.00 Cultivation Costs Seed 137.52bx wheat, 68.76bx meteil and barley 305 It, 8s, 8d 6108.64 1:6 Casual labour 250 person days 187 It, 10s 3750.00 1 domestique Transportation/Storage to Market 54.51 bx wheat + 10.31bx meteil + 30.94bx barley 104 It, 1s, 4d 2081.31 10% of amount to be sold Repair of Buildings/Equipment 20 It 400.00 Feed for Livestock Hay 10 It; 200.00 Consumption Grain 20.26 ht meteil (own) 206 It, 13s 4132.79 8.33 lbs bread/day from own meteil Meat 120 lbs purchased 28 It, 10s 570.00 1 lb = 4s, 9d Sundries 30 ft 600.00 supplemented with own production TOTAL 1456.92 in It 474 Ploughman Revenue, 1762 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Cultivated Grain 5 b owned land Wheat 22.5 hi or206.28bx or 17.19sp 206 It, 12s, 10d 4132.82 yield 1/2, price = 12,0, 5 / sp Meteil 15hlor137.52bxor11.46sp 111 It, 1s 2220.95 yield 1/3, price = 9,13,10 / sp 5 b leased land Wheat 22.5 hi or 206.28bx or 17.19sp 206 It, 12s, 10d 4132.82 Barley 30 hi or 275.05bx or 22.92sp 124 It, 3s 2482.92 yield 2/3, price = 5,8,4 / sp Livestock Domestic consumption Garden vegetables Domestic consumption Rent of Plough-Team 40 It 800.00 TOTAL 688.48 in It Net Income Revenue 688.48 Expenses 895.25 Balance -206.78 475 Ploughman Expenses, 1762 (tern Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Tithe (10b) 34.38bx wheat, 22.92bx barley, 11.46bx meteil 48 It, 15s, 6d 975.48 1/12 of product Censet rentes (10b) 2bx wheat + 2 gateau/beurre + 4 It + 4 capons 12 It, 4s, 2d 244.16 Lease payment to landlord (5b) 200 It 4000.00 State Impositions Taille/Ordinary 30 It 600.00 Wartime Taxes 30 It 600.00 Gabelle 14 It, 28, 6d 282.50 1 minot / family Extrordinary 45 It 900.00 Living Rent of House/Garden in village Included in lease Heating - Wood 36 It, 8s 728.00 14s / week averaged over year Lighting - Oil 5 It, 4s 104.00 2s per week averaged over year Banal mill and oven 2.41bx meteil 11t, 18s, 11d 38.92 7% of grain processed Clothing and effects 4 It 80.00 Cultivation Costs Reserved for seeding 137.52bx wheat, 68.76bx meteil & barley 224 It, 7s, 2d 4487.27 1:6 Casual labour Cannot afford day-worker wage = 15s / day Transportation/Storage to Market 33.7bx wheat + 18.34bx barley 42 It, 1S 840.96 10% of grain to be sold Repair of Buildings/Equipment 5 It 100.00 Feed for Livestock Hay 10 It 200.00 Consumption Grain 30.94bx meteil (3.37 hi or 505 lbs) + 2415 lbs 177 It, 13s, 2d 3317.79 1 lb of mixed wheat bread = 1s, 2d Meat 72 lbs purchased 15 It, 6s 306.00 1 lb = 4s, 3d Sundries 10 It 100.00 supplemented with own production TOTAL 895.25 in It 476 Ploughman Revenue, 1763 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Cultivated Grain 5 b owned land Wheat 54 hi or 495.07bx or 41.26sp 505 It, 12s 10112.00 yield 1/1.25, price = 12, 5, 1 / sp Meteil 45 hi or 412.56bx or 34.38sp 339 It, 18s, 7d 6798.65 yield 171, price = 9,17, 9 / sp 5 b leased land Wheat 54hlor495.07bxor41.26sp 505 It, 12s 10112.00 Barley 45 hi or412.56bx or 34.38sp 190 It, 1s, 9d 3801.74 yield 1/1, price = 5,10, 7 / sp Livestock Domestic consumption Garden vegetables Domestic consumption Rent of Plough-Team 40 It 800.00 TOTAL 1581.22 in It Net Income Revenue 1581.22 Expenses 1285.63 Balance 295.59 477 Ploughman Expenses, 1763 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Tithe (10b) 82.51 bx wheat, 34.38bx of meter! and barley 128 It, 8s, 5d 2568.46 1/12 of product Censet rentes (10b) 2bx wheat + 2 gateau/beurre + 4 It + 4 capons 12 It, 5s, 8d 245.68 Lease payment to landlord 200 It 4000.00 State Impositions Taille/Ordinary 30 It 600.00 Wartime Taxes 30 It 600.00 Gabeile 14 It, 2s, 6d 282.50 1 minot / family Extrordinary 45 It 900.00 Living Rent of House/Garden in village Included in lease Heating - Wood 72 It, 16s 1456.00 14s / week averaged over year X 2 Lighting - Oil 6 It, 10s 130,00 2s / week averaged over year Banal Mill 14.44bx meteil 11 It, 17s, 11d 237.98 Clothing and effects 10 It 200.00 Cultivation Costs Reserved for seeding 137.52bx wheat, 68.76bx meteil & barley 228 It, 15s, 1d 4575.29 1:6 Casual labour 250 person days 187 It, 10s 3750.00 1 domestique Transportation/Storage to Market 68.26bx wheat + 3.43bx meteil + 9.22bx barley 86 It 15s, 8d 1735.67 10% of amount to be sold Repair of Buildings/Equipment 10 It 200.00 Feed for Livestock Hay 10 It 200.00 Consumption Grain 20.26 hi meteil (own) 206 It, 13s 3061.06 8.33 lbs bread/day from own meteil Meat 120 lbs purchased 28 It, 10s 570.00 1 lb = 4s, 4d Sundries 20 It 400.00 supplemented with own production TOTAL 1285.63 in It 478 Ploughman Revenue, 1764 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Cultivated Grain 5 b owned land Wheat 45 hi or 412.56bx or 34.38sp 442 It 15s, 7d 8855.60 yield 1/1, price = 12,17, 5 / sp Meteil 49.5 hi or 453.82bx or 37.82sp 392 It, 17s, 1d 7857.11 yield 1/1.1, price = 10,7, 9 / sp 5 b rented land Wheat 45 hi or 412.56bx or 34.38sp 442 It, 15s, 7d 8855.60 Barley 11.25hlor103.14bxor8.6sp 49 It, 19s, 9d 999.75 yield 1/2, price = 5,16, 3 / sp Livestock Domestic consumption Garden vegetables ; Domestic consumption Rent of Plough-Team 40 It 800.00 TOTAL 1368.40 in It Net Income Revenue 1368.40 Expenses 1221.71 Balance 146.69 479 Ploughman Expenses, 1764 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Tithe (10b) 68.76bx wheat, 37.86bx meteil, 8.56bx barley 110 It, 14s, 7d 2214,59 1/12 of product Censet rentes (10b) 2bx wheat + 2 gateau/beurre + 4lt + 4 capons 12 It, 9s, 10d 249.80 Lease payment to landlord 200 It 4000.00 State Impositions Taille/Ordinary 30 It 600.00 Wartime Taxes 0.00 Gabefle 14 It, 2s, 6d 282.50 1 minot/family Extrordinary 30 It 600.00 Living Rent of House/Garden in village Included in lease Heating - Wood 72 It, 16s 1456.00 14s / week averaged over year Lighting - Oil 6 It, 10s 6 It, 10s 130.00 2s, 6d / week averaged over year Banal mill and oven 14.44bx meteil 12 It, 9s, 11d 249.96 Clothing and effects 10 It 200.00 Cultivation Costs Reserved for seeding 137.52bx wheat, 68.76bx meteil and barley 240 It, 9s 4809.07 1:6 Casual labour 250 person days 187 It, 10s 3750.00 day-worker wage = 15s / day Transportation/Storage to Market 54.51 bx wheat + 6.52bx meteil + 2.58bx barley 65 It, 7s, 1d 1307.10 10% of amount to be sold Repair of Buildings/Equipment 10 It 200.00 Feed for Livestock Hay 10 It 200.00 Consumption Grain 20.26 hi meteil (own) 160 It, 15s 3215.16 8.33 lbs bread/day from own meteil Meat 120 lbs purchased 28 It, 10s 570.00 1lb = 4s, 7d Sundries 20 It 400.00 supplemented with own production TOTAL 1221.71 in It 480 Ploughman Revenue, 1765 item Amount Value Sous Remarks Cultivated Grain 5 b owned land Wheat 22.5 hi or 206.28bx or 17.19sp 270 It, 16s, 11d 5416.91 yield 1/2, price = 15,15,2 / sp Meteil 22.5 hi or 206.28bx or 17.19sp 229 It, 15s, 11d 4595.92 yield 1/2, price = 13,7,4 / sp 5 b rented land Wheat 22.5 hi or 206.28bx or 17.19sp 270 It, 16s, 11d 5416.91 Barley 49.5 hi or 453.82bx or 37.82sp 308lt,2s,11d 6162.88 yield 1/1.1, price = 8,2,11 /sp Livestock Domestic consumption Garden vegetables Domestic consumption Rent of Plough-Team 40 It 800.00 TOTAL 1119.63 in It Net Income Revenue 1119.63 Expenses 1080.40 Balance 39.23 481 Ploughman Expenses, 1765 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Tithe (10b) 34.38bx wheat, 17.19bxmeteil, 37.82bx barley 89 It, 19s 1619.41 1/12 of product Cens etrentes (10b ) 2bx wheat + 2 gateau/beurre + 4 It + 4 capons 13 It, 9s, 1d 269.04 Lease payment to landlord 200 It 4000.00 State Impositions Taille/Ordinary 30 It 600.00 Wartime Taxes 0.00 Gabelle 14 It, 2s, 6d 282.50 1 minot / family Extrordinary (Vingtiemes) 30 It 600.00 Living Rent of House/Garden in village included in lease Heating - Wood 728.00 14s / week averaged over year Lighting - Oil 6 It, 10s 6 It, 10s 130.00 2s, 6d / week averaged over year Banal mill and oven 6.02bx meteil 6 It, 14s, 2d 134.13 Clothing and effects 4 It 80.00 Cultivation Costs Reserved for seeding 137.52bx wheat, 68.76bx meteil and barley 305 It, 8s, 8d 6108.64 1:6 Casual labour 60 pers days 45 It 900.00 day-worker wage = 15s / day Transportation/Storage to Market 19.12bx wheat + 34.72bx barley 48 It, 13s, 7d 973.60 10% of amountto b e sold Repair of Buildings/Equipment 5lt 100.00 Feed for Livestock Hay 10 It 200.00 Consumption Grain 77.38b meteil (1263.84 lbs) + 1656 lbs 217It,0s,8d 4340.65 1 lb mixed wheat bread = 1s, 7d Meat 72 lbs purchased 17 It, 2s 342.00 1 lb = 4s, 9d Sundries 10 It 200.00 supplemented with own production TOTAL 1080.40 in It 482 Germain Landry's Revenue, 1707 Item Primary Product Value Secondary Product Value Sous Remarks Cultivated Grains 4arp(1.37ha) Wheat 1 ha 12 hi = 110.16bx = 36.72m 1261c, 13s, 8d 2533.68 yield 1 ha: 12 hi, price = 69s / m Peas .37 ha 2.96 hi = 27.14bx = 9.05m 27 Ic, 3s 543.00 yield 1 ha:8 hi, price = 60s 1 m Livestock 12 cattle 6 calves 1501c {25 Icea) Dairy see remarks 3000.00 domestic consumption 14 sheep 6 lambs 42lc(7lcea) Wool see remarks 840.00 domestic consumption 15 pigs 16 piglets 3201c (20 Icea) Meat 60 Ic (5s / lb) 7600.00 6 pigs X 40 lbs / pig 12 chickens 12 chicks 61c (10s ea) 178 dozen eggs 44 Ic, 10s 1010.00 eggs = 5s / dozen Garden vegetables Domestic consumption TOTAL: 776.33 inlc Net Income Revenue 776.33 Expenses 762.85 Balance (in Ic) 13.48 483 Germain Landry's Expenses, 1707 Item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Tithe 6.89 bx wheat, 1.7bx peas, meat, eggs 25 lc, 15s, 6d 515.57 1/16 of crops and meat and eggs Cens et rentes 0.5 bx wheat, 1 capon 1 lc, 2 sous 22.00 ,5bx wheat = 12s, chapon = 10s Living Rent of House/Garden 0.00 built own house Heating 0.00 from nearby forest - free Mill 4.22bx 4lc, 17s, 1d 97.06 assessed at 5% of grain Clothing and effects 201c 400.00 Lighting oil 6 It, 10s 6 lc, 10s 130.00 2s, 6d per week averaged over year Cultivation Costs Seed 18.36bx wheat, 3.39bx peas 24 lc, 10s 490.16 1:6 wheat, 1:8 peas Casual labour N/A 0.00 Dyke labour 30 days work 30 lc 600.00 Transportation/Storage to Market 30 It meat and 26 It eggs to be sold 5 lc, 12s 112.00 10% commission Repair of Buildings/Equipment Upkeep 101c 200.00 Feed for Livestock pasture + oats/hay/turnips 401c 800.00 estimate Livestock Attrition 20% of cattle 2 cattle 1001c 2000.00 20% of sheep/goats 3 sheep 301c 600.00 20% of pigs 3 pigs 601c 1200.00 20% of chickens 2 chickens 11c 20.00 Consumption Bread 8.74 hi own grain + buy 2343 lbs bread 328 lc, 13s, 4d 6529.00 10 lbs / day needed, 1 lb = 2s Meat Pork from 3 own pigs 30 lc 600.00 120 lbs of meat Sundries 22.05bx own peas + own dairy, eggs 47 lc, 1s, 2d 941.22 TOTAL 762.85 into 484 Francois Boudrot's Revenue, 1707 Item Primary Product Value Secondary Product Value Sous Remarks Cultivated Grain Harp (4.8ha) Wheat 3 ha 36 hi = 330.05bx = 110.02m 379 !c, 11s, 5d 7591.38 yield 1 ha: 12 hi, price = 69 s / m Peas 1.8 ha 14.4hl=132.02bx = 44m 1321c 2640.00 yield 1 ha:8 hi, price = 60 s / m Livestock 13 pigs 16 piglets 3201c (20 Icea) Meat 50 Ic (5s/lb) 7400.00 5 adult pigs = 200 lbs of meat 35 sheep 20 lambs 1401c (7 Icea) Meat 151c (3s/lb) 3100.00 5 adult sheep = 100 lbs of meat Wool 501c (5s/lb) 1000.00 sheep - 8 lbs of wool/yr (200 lbs) 24 cattle 12 calves 3001c (251c) Meat 901c (3s /lb) 7800.00 6 adult cows = 600 lbs of meat Butter 1201c (8s/lb) 2400.00 6 milking cows = 300 lbs of butter 12 chickens 12 chicks 6lc (10s ea) Eggs 44lc, 10s 1010.00 12 chickens = 178 dozen eggs Garden vegetables Domestic consumption TOTAL 1647.07 inlc Net Income Revenue 1647.07 Expenses 1447.12 Balance (in ic) 199.95 485 Francois Boudrot's Expenses, 1707 item Amount Value Sous Remarks Dues Tithe 6.88m wheat, 2.75m peas, meat and eggs 84 Ic 2141.88 1/16 of crops and meat and eggs Cens et rentes 1 bx wheat, 2 chapons 2 Ic, 4s 44.00 .5bx wheat - 12s, chapon = 10s Living Rent of House/Garden built own house Heating from nearby forest - free Banal Mill 3.75m 12 Ic, 18s, 9d 258.75 assessed at 5% of grain Clothing and effects 20 Ic 400.00 Lighting oil 6 it, 10s 6 Ic, 10s 130.00 2s, 6d per week averaged over year Cultivation Costs Seed 18.34m wheat, 5.5m peas 79 Ic, 15s, 6d 1595.46 1:6 wheat, 1:8 peas Casual labour 1 X contract worker (365 days) 3651c 7300.00 wage = 11c / day Dyke labour 30 days work 301c 600.00 wage = 11c / day Transportation/Storage to Market 28.8m peas, 9.1m wheat, meat and eggs to sell 30 Ic, 9s, 6d 635.45 10% commission on items to be sold Repair of Buildings/Equipment Upkeep 201c 400.00 Feed for Livestock pasture + oats/hay/turnips 1001c 2000.00 estimate Livestock Attrition 20% of cattle 5 cattle 2501c 5000.00 20% of sheep/goats 7 sheep 49 ic 980.00 20% of pigs 2 pigs 401c 800.00 20% of chickens 2 chickens 11c 20.00 Consumption Bread 22.27 hi of own wheat provides all bread 234 Ic, 16s, 10d 4696.83 9 lbs+ per day Meat Pork from 3 own pigs 30 Ic 600.00 120 Ibs of meat Sundries 7m peas, eggs, 50 ibs of butter 67 Ic 1340.00 TOTAL 1447.12 ink; 486 •a -, •3« f: Ql y P 5 i U v&» r <*J^- A "si Y-\ "^ £ .{? , 1ft, *• Y /• f 1 * ft ft. "* * ^ 3^Y^5 , -^ v^£ v. \V5 ? *• - ":. 'v <*^KX^ •'M-tvl / Q '§. y i-*> i\/_ J^igj^^nl _\ 'A ;i>. S"r "^ k Si *w\ i« ?fsM ^5 Joy oiTundy $; MatDovcets A' •£ a Jj; - ft'lk-- • Montagues] to' Z^c-.s ;'•/.'/ Robichavx Vi'Il. HAP or THE TIIVER OF /INNAPOLI5 ROYAL Rj¥er 5UKVEYED IN THE YEAR 1733^ - -CORRECTION FROtl OTHER bVXVEYS h 1153 ONE MILL \\ -•fnc McjT Eliot x Najr Forbes • ^ fUtk a party of eighty men arm nii ,.'.• „* of; bu 'the Indians ftnnu Jill, V f '.' °° "•'•"• m& Us Slants $ $ Bcavhcv *> as t'ficii were'landing '<) %'••! ^ Franc MStaracha ± fc:.^\C6ddsVW- •g.Paradis tarestit r Jean P-,•:,/;:,) £astar MITCHELL; S MAP OF ANNAPOLIS RIVER, 1733, w DOCUMENTS AND SECONDARY SOURCES DOCUMENTS 1. Loudunais Archives Nationales [AN] (Paris) C3 Conseil d'etat, impositions, 1706-1789 Serie G7 Generalite de Tours Serie G7 Generalite de Poitiers K 1051 Memoire de la Province de Tours, 1698 P 730 Registre des serments de fidelite au Roy P 5818 Etat des Finances, 1760, generalite de Tours Archives Departementales d'Indre-et-Loire [AD I-L] (Tours) S6rie C C 8 Election de Loudun, vingtiemes C20 Intendance: Affaires miiitaries, 1703-1789 C 48 Milice C 62 Resultats des etats de population de la generalite C 512 Estat des Finances, 1744, generalite de Tours C 693 Election de Loudun, finances EN 641 Titres families Archives Departementales de la Vienne [AD V] (Poitiers) Serie B (Eaux-et-Fdrets) B 1262 proces verbaux des gardes B 1368 Maitrise particuliere de Fontenay-le-Comte Serie B supplement 272 registres d'ecrous, prison royale de Loudun Seiie C (Intendance) C1 Justice et police, 1696-1789 C 17 Droits Domaniaux, 1678-1776, generalite de Poitiers C 56-58 Religionnaires C 62 Fourrages C 83 Moissons C 306 Mendiants et vagabonds, 1750-1770 C 337 Prix des grains dans les marches, 1746 C 339 Denombrements, 1771-1773 C 384 Grenier a sel, Loudun C 386 Notaires C 412 Loups C 849 Tableau de departement de taille, 1789 490 Serie FI (Cartes et plans) KK 103 Plan Retrospectif de Loudun, Charbonneau-Lassay L 192 Loudunais et Mirebalais, 1635, A. Guiljelmum et I. Blaeu L 193 Gouvemement Generaux du Poitou, du Pays d'Aunis et de Saintonge-Angoumois, 1753, Sr Robert de Vaugondy Serie G9 (Fabriques et Cures) 29 La Chaussee 61 Martaize Serie 2 C (Controle des Actes) 1931-1943 Bureau de Moncontour, 1737-1767 Serie 4E (l'&at civil, notaires) 53 475-477 Simon Audemont, Martaize, 1645-1680 53 503 Andre Gry, St Cassien, 1676-1691 53 509 Pierre Voyer, St Cassien, 1695-1698 109 66 Pierre Rivereau, Martaize\ 1761-1764 110 15-26 Rene" Lanlaud, Saint-Clair, 1727-1760 Serie 5 B (Bailliage du Loudun) 1 Procedure, 1762-1785 3-6 Plumitifs d'audience, 1750-1765 14 Registre de la police S6rie 8 C 110 Recueil de tables pour faciliter la comparaison des poids et mesures du nouveau svsteme avec les poids et mesures ci-devant en usage a Paris (Poitiers, 1807) Serie 9E (l'etat civil, registres paroisses) 17/1 Aulnay, 1737-1765 82/2 La Chaussee, 1737-1765 178/2 Martaize, 1737-1765 Printed Documents: Advis proposez a Monseigneur le Prince de Condepar les habitans de la ville de Loudun pour la conclusion de lapaix. Paris: Jean Bourniquant, 1616. BNF: 8-LB3 6-795. Almanack de I'arrondissement de Loudun, 1861. Loudun: E. Mazereau, 1862. Almanack de Poitou, 1763. Poitiers: Jean Faulcon, Imprimeur du Roi, 1763. Cassini de Thury, Jean-Dominique, et al. Carte de la France, publiee sous la direction de VAcademie des Sciences: carte n° 66 - Richelieu (Paris, 1744-1787) Scale = 1/86400. Extrait du Jugement Souverain & en dernier ressort rendu par Messire Charles Tubeuf...contre Guillaume Fougeray, Urban Besnard, Francois Le Roy, Jacques Le Roy, Pierre Sachotpour avoir assassine & c. 1675. BNF: 4-FM-6199. Lettre escrite a sa Majestepar le synode national convoque a Loudun... Paris: Louis Vendosme, 1660. BNF: 8-LD176-172. Pour les reglements des gens de guerre qui entreront en Poitou... Paris: Acte Royale, 1652. BNF: F-23612 (102). Le Proust, Pierre. Commentates sur les coustumes dupays de Loudunois. Saumur: Thomas Portau, 1612. 491 Edited Documents and Collections: Boislisle, A. M. de. Correspondence des Contrdleurs-Generaux des Finances avec les intendants des provinces. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1874. Bouchitte\ M., ed. Collection de documents inedits sur I 'histoire de France, Vol 44: a la conference de Loudun. Paris: Imprimerie impe^riale, 1862. Chevalier, C. Tableau de la Province de Touraine, 1762-66: administration, agriculture, Industrie, commerce, impots. Tours: Imprimerie Ledeveze, 1863. Colbert de Croissy, Charles. Etat du Poitou sous Louis XIV, Rapport au Roi et memoire sur le clerge, la noblesse, la justice et les finances, ed. Dugast-Matifeux, Charles. Fontenay-le-Comte, P. Robuchon, 1865. De la Fond, Dumoustier. Essais sur I'histoire de la ville de Loudun. Poitiers: Michel- Vincent Chevrier, Libraire-Imprimeur de PUniversit6,1778. Isambert, F. A. Recueil general des anciennes loisfrancaises. Vols XVIII-XXII. Ridgewood: Gregg, 1964-66. 2. Acadia Library and Archives of Canada [LAC] (Ottawa) (France) Archives Departementales de Charente-Maritime (La Rochelle) Serie B Amiraute de Louisbourg Serie B Amiraute de Guyenne a La Rochelle Serie E Titres de families, 6tat civil, notaires (engages) Serie E Registres de Beaubassin, 1712-1748* Archives des Colonies - Nouvelle-France and Acadie Correspondence generate, CI ID (Acadie)* Correspondence officielle, 3e serie, 1621-1731* Descriptions de 1' Acadie, 1748* Journal de Beaujeu, 1746-1747* Ordonnances des intendants, 1705-1760 Registres de Fetat civil, recensements, et document divers* Seminaire de Saint-Sulpice (Montreal) Notaires d'Acadie (Etude Loppinot) 1687-1710* (Great Britain) Colonial Office Nova Scotia and Cape Breton Island - Original Correspondence* Nova Scotia Acts, 1749-1753* PRO High Court of Admiralty Prize Papers (Nova Scotia) Public Archives of Nova Scotia [PANS] (Halifax) Commissioner of Public Records Collection* •denotes that copies of these documents were consulted at the Centre d'etudes acadiennes (Moncton). 492 Archives of Fort Beasejour Colonel Winslow's Journal Printed Documents., Collections: Memoires des commissaires du roi et de ceux de Sa Majeste britannique sur les possessions & les droits respectifs des deux couronnes en Amerique; avec les actes publics & pieces justificatives. 4 Vols. Paris: Imprimerie Royale, 1755. Saint-Vallier, Jean-Baptiste de. Estat present de I 'Eglise et de la Colonie Frangoise dans la Nouvelle France. Paris: Robert Pepie, 1688. "Treaty of Peace, Good Coorespondence & Neutrality in America," 16 Nov 1686. Early English Books 459:12. Edited Documents, Collections: Akins, Thomas B, ed. Acadia and Nova Scotia: Documents relating to the Acadian French and the first British Colonization of the Province, 1714-1758. Cottonport: Polyanthis, 1972. Brown, Beatrice Curtis, ed. The Letters and Diplomatic Instructions of Queen Anne. London: Cossell, 1968. Collection de manuscrits contenant lettres, memoires, et autres documents historiques documents relatifs a I 'histoire de la Nouvelle-France recueilles aux archives de la province de Quebec, ou copies al'etranger. 4 Vols. Quebec: A. Cote, 1883-85. Consentino, Lucie Leblanc, "Map of Acadia before 1755" (Acadian Ancestral Home, www.acadian-home.org) Denys, Nicolas. The Description and Natural History of the Coasts of North America (Acadia), trans. Ganong, William F. Toronto: Champlain Society, 1908 (1672). Diereville, Sieur de. Relation of the Voyage to Port Royal in Acadia or New France. trans. Webster, Alice Lusk. Toronto: The Champlain Society, 1933 (1708). Ferguson, Charles Bruce, ed. Minutes of His Majesty's Council at Annapolis Royal, 1736-1749. Halifax: Public Archives of Nova Scotia, 1967. Lescarbot, Marc. Nova Francia, 1606. trans. Erondelle, P. London: George Routledge & Sons, Ltd., 1928 (1609). Reider, Milton P. and Reider, Norma Gaudet Acadian Church Records, Vol I-V. Louisiana: 1976,1977. Sainsbury, W. Noel. Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series: preserved in the Public Records Office. London: H. M. S. O., 1860-1994. Savary, A. W. Supplement to the History of the County of Annapolis: Supplement (Map of 1733) Toronto: William Briggs, 1913. Shortt, Adam, Johnston, V. K. and Lanctot, Gustave, eds. Currency, Exchange, and Finance in Nova Scotia, 1675-1758. Ottawa: J. O. Patenaude, Acting King's Printer, 1933. Thwaites, Reuben Gold, ed. The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents: travels and explorations of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France, 1610-1791. Cleveland: Burrows, 1896. Webster, John Clarence, Acadia at the End of the Seventeenth Century. Saint John: The New Brunswick Museum, 1934. 493 SECONDARY SOURCES 1. Loudunais, Poitou, Touraine Ardouin-Weiss, Idelette. Le protestantisme en Touraine au temps de Vedit de Nantes. Tours: Eglise Reformee de Tours, 1998. Bezzina, Edwin. "After the Wars of Religion: Protestant-Catholic Accommodation in the French town of Loudun, 1598-1665." Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, 2004. Boissonnade, P. Colbert et la Souscription aux actions de la Compagnie des Indes specialement en Poitou (1664-1668). Poitiers: Imprimerie Blais et Roy, 1909. Boissonnade, P. Histoire de Poitou. Paris: Honore Champion, 1977 (1926). Bouloiseau, Marc et Buchoux, Andre. Les municipalites tourangelles de 1787. Paris: Bibliotheque Nationale, 1969. Carmona, Michel. Les Diables de Loudun: Sorcellerie et politique sous Richelieu. Paris: Fayard, 1988. Charbonnier, Pierre and Poitrineau, Abel. Les anciennes measures locales du Centre- Ouest, d'apres les Tables de conversion. Paris: Presses universitaires Blaise- Pascal, 2001. Collas, Rolande. La contrebande du sel entre Touraine et Poitou. Chambray: C. L. D., 2000. Combes, Jean, ed. Histoire du Poitou et des Pays Charentes. Clermont-Ferrand: De Boree,2001. Coursault, Rene. Histoire de la Touraine: les traditions populaires. Paris: G-P Maisonneuve & Larose, 1980. Debien, Gabriel. En Haut-Poitou, Defricheurs au travail, XVs -XVlIf siecles. Paris: Armand Colin, 1952. Debien, Gabriel. "L'emigration poitevine vers 1'Amerique au XVIIe siecle." Bulletin de la Societe des Antiquaires de I 'Ouest Tome II - 4e s&ie (1952): 273-305. Debien, Gabriel. "Les Loudunais en Acadie au 17e siecle." Bulletin de la Societe des Antiquaires de I'Ouest Tome VII - 4e serie (1963): 153-161. D'Espinay, G. Le Bailliage de Loudun. Angers: Imprimerie Lachese et Dolbeau, 1891. Delaroche, Pierre. Une epidemie depeste a Loudun en 1632. Bordeaux: Imprimerie- Libraire Delmas, 1936. Desaivre, Leo. Deux Voyageurs en Poitou auXVIf siecle: Dubuisson-Aubenay & Leon Godefroy. Poitiers: Imprimerie Blais et Roy, 1903. Desaivre, Leo. Le Marquis de Chandenier et sa cour au Chateau de la Mothe en Loudunais (1655-1665). Poitiers, 1884. Dinet, Marina. "Culture materielle et vie quotidienne a Loudun et ses campagnes (1642- 1691)." Memoire de maitrise, Universite de Poitiers, 1998. Dion, Roger. Le Val de Loire: Etude de geographic regionale. Tours: Arrault et Cie, 1934. Elie, Jean. "Notes sur l'6conomie agricole en Haut-Poitou au XVIII6 siecle, La Chappelle Mouliere: un exemple ou un cas particulier?" Revue Historique du Centre-Ouest II, 2 (2003): 231-248. Eygun, Francois, ed. La topographie de Poitiers et de sesparoisses au XVIf siecle, arpentage de Le Toise de 1691. Poitiers: Societe des archives historiques du Poitou, 1947. 494 Fruchard, Louis. Histoire culturelle du Poitou. Poitiers: Editions patrimoines & medias, 1997. Gachignard, Pierre. Dictionnaire du patois du marais poitevin. Marseilles: Editions Jeanne Laffitte, 1983. Gallet-Villechange, Maguy. Fetes traditionelles et rejouissances publiques en Poitou de Rabelais a nos jours. Poitiers: Brissaud, 1987. Guiberteau, Cecilia. "Evolutions des sensibilites religieuses et des attitudes devant la mort dans le Loudunais du XVIf siecle (1650-1710)." Memoire de maitrise, Universite de Poitiers, 2001. Guillemet, Dominique, ed. Dictionnaire des communes etpays de la Vienne. La Creche: Geste Editions, 2003. Guillemet, Dominique, Poton, Didier, Vigier, Fabrice, and Leblanc, Phyllis E. "Espaces, Limites, Frontieres Centre-Ouest francais, Acadie." Les Cahiers du GERHICO 2 edition speciale (2001). Guillemet, Dominique, Pellegrin, Nicole et Peret, Jacques. Le haut-poitou au XVHf siecle: la sociite d'uneparoisse rurale, la Villedieu-du-clain. Poitiers: 1981. Guillemet, Dominique. Les ties de VOuest de Brehat a Oleron: du Moyen Age a la Revolution. La Creche: Geste Editions, 2000. Hickey, Daniel, Gallard, Laurent, and Nickler, Luc. "L'histoire des elites: quelques approches francaises et canadiennes." Les Cahiers du GERHICO 1 table ronde (1998). Honsel, Aurore. "Les attitudes face a la mort et les mentalites religieuses a Loudun, 1702-1731 et 1752-1782." M&noire de maitrise, Universite de Poitiers, 1997. Huxley, Aldous. The Devils of Loudun. St Albans: Triad/Panther Books, 1977 (1952). Jahan, Sebastien. "Approches qualitatives de la pauvrete en Haut Poitou au XVIII6 siecle." Bulletin de la Societe des Antiquaires de I 'Ouest 5e serie-tome V (1991): 97-136. Krumenacker, Yves. "La Geographie du Poitou au XVIIf siecle." Bulletin de la Societe des Antiquaires de I 'Ouest 4e serie - tome XVI (1981): 205-235. Krumenacker, Yves. Les Protestants du Poitou au XVIIf siecle (1681-1789). Paris: Honore Champion Editeur, 1998. Le Goff, Emanuelle, ed. Le Patrimoine des Communes de la Vienne. 2 Vols. Poitiers: Flohic Editions, 2002. Lemesle, Herve. "Tour la grandeur de Dieu': les mecanismes de la reforme tridentine a Loudun au XVII6 siecle." Memoire de maitrise, Universite de Poitiers, 1986. Le Quellec, Jean-Loic. Le marais poitevin: d'hier a demain. La Creche: Geste Editions, 1997. Le Quellec, Yves. Petite histoire du marais poitevin. La Creche: Geste Editions, 1998. Lerosey, Auguste-Louis. Loudun: Histoire Civile et Religieuse. Loudun: PSR Editions, 1980 (1908). Leveel, Pierre. Histoire de Touraine. Chambray: C. L. D., 1988. Longuemar, Alphonse le Touze. Excursion geologique et archeologique dans le Loudunais. 1861. Louet, Melika. "Le pays loudunais et mirebelais au XVIII6 siecle (d'apres les roles de taille)." D. E. A. Memoire, Universite de Poitiers, 2000. 495 Maillard, Brigitte. Les campagnes de Touraine auXVIIf siecle: structures agraires et economie rurale. Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 1998. Maillard, Brigitte. Vivre en Touraine auXVIIf siecle: textes rassembles par Annie Antoine. Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2003. Marcade, J. "Fabriques et fabriciens dans le diocese de Poitiers." Bulletin de la Societe des Antiquaires de VOuest 4e serie-tome XII (1975): 189-200. Marcade, J. "Le clerge du Loudunais pendant la Revolution." Bulletin de la Societe des Antiquaires de VOuest 5e serie-tome VI (1992): 57-70. Marcade, J. "Les fabriques rurales dans le diocese de Poitiers de Mgr de Caussade a Mgr de Bouill£ (1750-1840)." Annates de Bretagne et des pays de VOuest 100,4 (1993): 459-492. Marcade, J. "Les sensibilites religieuses au XVIIIe siecle dans le diocese de Poitiers." Bulletin de la Societe des Antiquaires de I 'Ouest 4e serie-tome XVII (1983): 193-206. Marcade, J. "Les visites pastorales dans le diocese de Poitiers au XVTIf siecle." Bulletin de la Societe des Antiquaires de I 'Ouest 4e serie - tome XVI (1981): 195- 203. Marcade, J. "Mourir autrefois: Poitiers au XVIII6 siecle." Revue Historique du Centre- Ouest III, 2 (2004): 255-269. Montalescot, Christelle. "Les artisans de Loudun et du Loudunais a la fin du XVIII6 siecle." Memoire de maitrise, Universite de Poitiers, 2000. Nussard, Robert. L 'heraldique medievale en Touraine. Paris: Le leopard d'or, 1989. Passerat, C. Etude sur les Cartes des Cotes de Poitou et de Saintonge, anterieures owe Levis duXIX siecle. Niort: Imprimerie Nouvelle, G. Clouzot, 1910. Pepin, Eugene. Histoire de Touraine. Paris: Barr6 & Dayez, 1991 (1935). Peret, Jacques. "Bourgeoisie rurale et seigneurs au XVIII6 siecle: les fermiers generaux du duche de la Meilleraye." Bulletin de la Societe des Antiquaires de I 'Ouest 4e serie-tome XII (1974): 357-378. Peret, Jacques. Histoire de la Revolution frangaise en Poitou-Charentes, 1789-99. Poitiers: Projets Editions, 1988. Peret, Jacques. "Le mobilier rural dans les pays poitevin et charentais au XVIII6 siecle: approche a partir des inventaires apres deces." Revue Historique du Centre-Ouest II, 2 (2003): 171-183. Pitie, Jean. Exode rural et migrations interieures en France: I 'exemple de la Vienne et du Poitou-Charentes. Poitiers: Norois, 1971. Poton, Didier. Geographic du protestantisme et reseau urbain dans le centre-ouest a Vepoque moderne (XVf -XVIf siecles). Poitiers: Societe des Antiquaires de POuest, 1993. Rapley, Robert. A Case of Witchcraft: the Trial of Urbain Grandier. Montreal: McGill- Queen's University Press, 1998. Raveau, Paul. L 'agriculture et les classes paysannes: la transformation de lapropriete dans le Haut-Poitou auXVf siecle. Paris: M. Riviere, 1926. Renaud, Madelaine. Loups du Poitou. Les amis du pays de Lussac-les-Chateaux, 1985. Robbins, Kevin C. City on the Ocean Sea: La Rochelle, 1530-1650: Urban Society, Religion, and Politics on the French Atlantic Frontier. Leiden: Brill, 1992. Rousseau, Angeline. "Les 'coqs de village' du pays Loudunais dans la dieuxieme moitte du XVIII6 siecle." Memoire de maitrise, Universite de Poitiers, 2002. 496 Sanfacon, Roland. Defrichements, peuplements et institutions seigneuriales en Haut- Poitou duX auXIIf siecle. Quebec: Les presses de l'universite Laval. Schweitz, Daniel. Aux origins de la France despays: histoire des identities de pays en Touraine (XVf -XX siecle). Paris: L'Harmattan, 2001. Sergent, Jacques et Thomas, Thierry. Lepays loudunais. Tours: Editions Alan Sutton, 2001. Souche\ A. Loudun et les pays Loudunais et Mirebalais. Loudun: Imprimerie Nouvelle, H. Robert, 1927. Trincant, Louis. Abregi des antiquitez de Loudun etpays Loudunois. Loudun: Imprimerie M. Finmin, 1994 (Roger Droualt, 1894). Tyrell, Joseph. A History of the Estates ofPoitou. Paris: Mouton, 1968. 2. France Adams, Geoffrey. The Huguenots and French Opinion, 1685-1787: The Enlightenment Debate on Toleration. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1991. Antoine, Annie. Fiefs et Villages du Bas-Maine au XVIIF siecle. Mayenne: Editions Regionales de l'Ouest, 1994. Antoine, Annie. "Justice fonciere et controle social dans le Maine, 1'Anjou et la Bretagne au XVIIIe siecle" in Francois Brizay, Antoine Follain et Veronique Sarrazin, eds. Les Justices de Village: Administration et justice locales de la fin du Moyen Age a la Revolution. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2003: 269-284. Antoine, Annie. "Systemes Agraires de la France de l'Ouest: Une rationalite meconnue?" HES 18,1 (1999): 107-132. Arber, Edward. The Torments of Protestant Slaves in the French King's Galleys and in the Dungeons of Marseilles, 1686-1707. Privately printed, 1907. Aries, Philippe. L 'enfant et la vie familiale sous I'Ancien Regime. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1975. Aubry-Humbert, Antoinette. Seigneurs et laboureurs dans les Blamontois aux XVIf et XVIIf siecles. Dombasle-sur-Meurthe: Presses de rimprimerie Serge Regniere SARL,2001. Bamford, Paul Walden. Forests and French Sea Power, 1660-1789. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1956. Beaur, Gerard. Histoire Agraire de la France au XVIIf siecle: Inerties et changements dans les campagnes frangaises entre 1715 et 1815. Paris: Editions Sedes, 2000. Beaur, Gerard. "Les categories sociales a la campagne: repenser un instrument d'analyse." Annates de Bretagne etdes Pays de l'Ouest, Anjou, Maine, Touraine 106,1 (1999): 159-176. Benedict, Philip. The Huguenot Population of France, 1600-1685: The Demographic Fate and Customs of a Religious Minority. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1991. Bergin, Joseph. Crown, Church, and Episcopate under Louis XIV. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004. Bien, David D. The Calas Affair: Persecution, Toleration, and Heresy in Eighteenth- Century Toulouse. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960. Billaud, Jean Paul. Marais Poitevin: Rencontres de la terre etde Veau. Paris: Editions L'Harmattan, 1984. 497 Biollay, Leon. Etudes economiques sur leXVIIf siecle: lesprix en 1790. Paris: Guillaumin et cie, 1886. Blayo, Yves. "Mouvement naturel de la population francaise de 1740 a 1829." Population, edition speciale (1975): 15-64. Bloch, Marc. French Rural History: An Essay on its Basic Characteristics, trans. Sondheimer, Janet. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1970. Bluche, Francois and Solnon, Jean-Francois. La veritable hierarchic sociale de I'ancienne France: le tarifde la premiere capitation (1695). Geneve: Librairie Droz, 1983. Bohanan, Donna. Crown and Nobility in Early Modern France. New York: Palgrave, 2001. Bordes, Maurice. L 'administration provinciate et municipale en France auXVIIF siecle. Paris: Societe d'edition d'enseignement superieur, 1972. Bourgoin, P. Espace ne de la mer Sud Vendeen. Lucon, Imprimerie Lucon, 1992. Bourquin, Laurent. Les nobles, la ville et le roi: I'autorite nobiliaire en Anjou pendant le guerres de Religion. Paris: Belin, 2001. Braudel, Fernand. Civilisation materielle, economie et capitalisme, XV* -XVIIF siecle. Tome I: Les structures du quotidien, le possible et Fimpossible. Paris: Armand Colin, 1979. Briggs, Robin. Early Modern France, 1560-1715,2nd Ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. Buron, Gildes. Bretagne des marais salants: 2000 ans d'histoire. Skol Vreizh, 1999. Cameron, Iain A. Crime and Repression in the Auvergne and the Guyenne, 1720-1790. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Castan, Nicole. Les criminels de Languedoc: les exigencies d'ordre et les voies du ressentiment dans une societe pre-revolutionnaire (1750-1790). Toulouse: Association des publications de PUniversit£ de Toulouse, 1980. Cavoleau, J. A. Statistiques ou Description generate du departement de la Vendee. Marseilles: Laffitte Reprints, 1978 (1844). Chare, Joelle. La Noblesse du Perigord: Aupays des 1000 chateaux. Librairie Academique Perrin, 1998. Chassagne, Serge. "Faillis en Anjou au XVIII6 siecle: contribution a l'histoire economique d'une province." Annales: Economies, societes, civilisations XXV (1970): 477-497. Chauvaud, Frederic and Peret, Jacques, eds. Terres Marins: Etudes en hommage a Dominique Guillemet. Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2005. Chenaye-Desbois, Francois Aubert de la. Dictionnaire de la Noblesse. Paris: Berger- Levrault, 1980 (1863-76). Collins, James B. Classes, estates, and order in early modern Brittany. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Collins, James B. "The Economic Role of Women in Seventeenth-Century France." French Historical Studies 16,2 (1989): 436-470. Collins, James B. The State in Early Modern France. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Collomp, Alain. La Maison du Pere: Famille et village en Haute-Provence auxXVIf et XVII f siecles. Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1983. 498 Corvisier, Andre. L 'Armee Frangaise de la fin du XVIF siecle au ministere de Choiseul: le soldat. 2 Vols. Paris. Presses Universitaires de France, 1964. Cosmos, Georgia. Huguenot Prophecy and Clandestine Worship in the Eighteenth Century, the Sacred Theatre of the Cevannes. London: Ashgate, 2005. Crouzet, Guy. Le Grande Peur du Gevaudan: une enquete historique documentee sur I'affaire de la bete. France, 2001. Crubaugh, Anthony. Balancing the Scales of Justice: Local Courts and Rural Society in Southwest France, 1750-1800. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2001. Dienne, M. de. Histoire du Dessechement des Lacs et Marais en France avant 1789. Paris: H. Champion, 1891. Duby, Georges and Wallon, Armand, eds. Histoire de la France rurale. Vol 2, De 1340 a 1789. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1975. Dupaquier, Jacques. Histoire de la population frangaise. Vol 2: de la Renaissance a 1789. Paris: Quadrige, 1995. Dupaquier, Jacques. La population rurale du bassin Parisien al'epoque de Louis XLV. Paris: Editions de l'ecole des hautes etudes en science sociales, 1979. Elegoet, Louis. Ancetres et terroirs: Onze generations depaysans de Basse-Bretagne. Rennes: Editions Ouest-France, 1990. Feneant, Jacques and Leveel, Maryse. Le Folklore de Touraine: Dictionnaire des rites et coutumes. Chambray: C. L. D., 1989. Ferber, Sarah. Demonic Possession and Exorcism in early modern France. London: Routledge, 2004. Fillon, A. "La culture villageoise dans le Haut-Maine (1750-1780)." Annales de Bretagne et des pays de VOuest 100,4 (1993): 608-630. Gallet, Jean. La seigneurie Bretonne, 1450-1680: Vexemple du Vannetais. Paris: Cedex, 1983. Gallet, Jean. Seigneurs etpaysans en France, 1600-1793. Rennes: Editions Ouest-France, 1999. Ganiage, Jean. Trois villages d'Ue-de-France auXVIIf siecle: etude demographique. INED: Presses universitaires de France, 1963. Garrisson, Janine. L 'Edit de Nantes et sa revocation: histoire d'un intolerance. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1985. Goubert, Pierre. Beauvais et le Beauvaisis de 1600 a 1730: contribution a I 'histoire sociale de la France du XVIf siecle. Paris: Editions de l'ecole des hautes etudes en sciences sociales, 1982 (1960). Goubert, Pierre. "Historical Demography and the Reinterpretation of Early Modern French History: A Research Review." Journal of Interdisciplinary History 1 (1970): 37-48. Goubert, Pierre. The French Peasantry in the Seventeenth Century, trans., Patterson, Ian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. Grimmer, Claude. Vivre a Aurillac auXVIIf siecle. Aurillac, 1983. Gutton, Jean-Pierre. La sociabilite villageoise dans la France d'ancien regime. Paris: Hachette Litteratures, 1979. 499 Hanlon, Gregory. Confession and Community in Seventeenth Century France: Catholic and Protestant Coexistence inAquitaine. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993. Hayden, J. Michael. France and the Estates General of 1614. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974. Hayhoe, Jeremy. "''Judge in their own cause': Seigneurial justice in Northern Burgundy, 1750-1790." Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland, 2001. Hoffman, Philip T. Growth in a Traditional Society: The French Countryside, 1450- 1815. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996. Hufton, Olwen H. "Le paysan et la loi en France au XVIII6 siecle." Annates: Economies, Societes, Civilisations 38,3 (1983): 679-701. Hufton, Olwen H. "Women and the Family Economy in Eighteenth-Century France." French Historical Studies 9,1 (1975): 1-22. Kaplan, Steven Laurence. The Bakers of Paris and the Bread Question. Durham: Duke University Press, 1996. Komlos, John. "An Anthropometric History of Early Modern France." Euroopean Review of Economic History 7,2 (2003): 159-189. Kwass, Michael. Privilege and the Politics of Taxation in Eighteenth-Century France: liberie, egalite,fiscalite. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Labrousse, C. E. Esquisse du mouvement desprix et des revenues en France au XVIIf sidcle, 2 Vols. Paris: Libraire Dallox, 1933. Labrousse, Elisabeth. "Unefoi, une loi, un roi? " La revocation de I'edit de Nantes. Paris: Payot, 1985. Labrousse, Ernest. Leprix defroment en France au temps de la monnaie stable (1726- 1913). Paris: SEVPEN, 1970. Lachiver, Marcel. Dictionnaire du Monde Rural: les mots du passe. Paris: Fayard, 1997. Lachiver, Marcel. Les annees de misere: la famine au temps du Grand Roi. Paris: Fayard, 1991. Lebrun, Francois. Histoire des pays de la Loire: Orleanais, Touraine, Anjou, Maine. Toulouse: Privat, 1972. Lebrun, Francois. Les hommes et la mort en Anjou auxXVIf etXVIIf siecles. Paris: Editions de 1'ecole des hautes etudes en sciences sociales, 2004 (1971). Le Goff, T. J. A. "An Eighteenth-Century Grain Merchant: Igance Adrisse Desruisseaux" in J. F. Bosher, ed. French Government and Society, 1500-1850. London: Athlene Press, 1973. Le Goff, T. J. A. "Monetary Unification under the French Monarchy" in Patrick M. Crowley, ed. Before and Beyond EMU: Historical lessons andfuture prospects. London: Routledge, 2002. Le Goff, T. J. A. and Sutherland, D. M. G. "The Revolution and the Rural Community in Eighteenth-Century Brittany." Past and Present 62 (1974): 96-119. Le Goff, T. J. A. "The Rural Property of the Hospices of Dijon during the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries." Proceedings of the conference Production et productivity agricoles dans le monde occidental (XH^-XX3 siecles) Institut National de Recherches Agronomiques / Ecole des Hautes Etudes en SciencesSociales, Paris, 18-20 December 2003. (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, forthcoming, 2008). 500 Le Goff, T. J. A. Vannes and its Region: A Study of Town and Country in Eighteenth- Century France. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981. Le Goff, T. J. A. and Sutherland, D. M. G. "What Can We Learn From Leases? A Preliminary View." Histoire & Mesure XV (2000): 289-320. Luria, Keith P. Sacred Boundaries: Religious coexistence and conflict in early modern France. Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 2005. Lynn, John A. Giant of the GrandSiecle: The French Army, 1610-1715. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Maillard, Brigitte. "Les veuves dans la societe rurale au XVIIIe siecle." Annales de Bretagne et des Pays de I 'Ouest, Anjou, Maine, Touraine 106,1 (1999): 211-230. Major, J. Russell. The Monarchy, the Estates and the Aristocracy in Renaissance France. London: Variorum Reprints, 1988. Marion, Marcel. Les impots directs sous I 'ancien regime, principalement auXVllf siecle. Geneve: Slatkine-Megariotis Reprints, 1974. Masse\ P. "Le dessechement des marais du Bas-Medoc." Revue Historique de Bordeaux et du departement de la Gironde 4,1 (1957): 25-68. McManners, John. Church and Society in Eighteenth Century France. 2 Vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. McManners, John. French Ecclesiastical Society Under the Ancien Regime: A Study of Angers in the Eighteenth Century. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1960. Mendras, Henri. Les societes paysannes. Paris: Editions Gallimard, 1995 (1976). Mentzer, Jr., Raymond A. Blood & Belief: Family Survival and Confessional Identity among the Provincial Huguenot Nobility. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 1994. Miller, Judith. Mastering the Market: The State and the Grain Trade in Northern France, 1700-1860. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Morenas, Henri Jougla de. Grand Armorial de France. 6 Vols. Paris: Frankelue, 1975. Moriceau, Jean-Marc. Histoire du mechant hup: 3 000 attaques sur I 'homme en France (XVe - XXe siecle). Paris: Fayard, 2007. Moriceau, Jean-Marc. Histoire et geographic de I 'elevage francais: Du Moyen Age a la Revolution. Paris: Fayard, 2005. Moriceau, Jean-Marc. Lesfermiers de l'Ue-de-FranceXVs -XVllf siecle: Vascension d'unpatronat agricole. Paris: Fayard, 1994. Moriceau, Jean-Marc. "Une question en renouvellement: l'histoire de l'elevage en France." Annales de Bretagne et des Pays de I'Ouest, Anjou, Maine, Touraine 106,1 (1999): 17-40. Mousnier, Roland E. The Institutions of France under the Absolute Monarchy, 1598- 1789,2 Vols, trans., Goldhammer, Arthur. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979. Mroz, Thomas A. and Weir, David R. "Structural Change in Life Cycle Fertility During the Fertility Transition: France Before and After the Revolution of 1789." Population Studies 44 (1990): 61-87. Muchambled, Robert. Societe, cultures, et mentalites dans la France moderne, XVf - XVIIf siecle. Paris: Armand Colin, 2001 (1990). 501 Muyard, Frederic. Les loups et la loi: duXIV2 siecle a nos jours, histoire d'une hantise populaire. Speracedes: Editions TAC Motifs, 1998, Nicolas, Jean. La rebellion frangaise: mouvements populaires et conscience sociale (1661-1789). Paris: Seuil,2002. O'Grada, Cormac and Chevet, Jean-Michel. "Famine and Market in Ancien Regime France." Journal of Economic History 62 (2002): 706-733. Pasquier, J. L 'impot des gabelles en France aux XVIf et XVIIf siecles. Geneve: Slatkine Reprints, 1978. Pearl, Jonathan L. The Crime of Crimes: Demonology and Politics in France, 1560-1620, Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1999. Person, Francoise de. Bateliers: contrebandiers du sel, XVIf -XVIIf siecle. Rennes: Editions Ouest-France, 1999. Pontet, Josette, Figeac, Michel and Boisson, Marie, eds. La noblesse de la fin du XVf au debut du XX siecle: un modele social? Atlantica: Anglet, 2002. Poussou, Jean-Pierre. Bordeaux et le Sud-Ouest au XVIIf siecle: croissance economique et attraction urbaine. Paris: Editions de l'ecole des hautes etudes en sciences sociales, 1983. Poussou, Jean-Pierre and Meyer, Jean. Etudes sur les villes franqaises: milieu du XVIf siecle a la vielle de la Revolution Frangaise. Paris: Sedes, 1999. Poussou, Jean-Pierre. La Terre et les Paysans en France et en Grande-Bretagne aux XVIf et XVIIf siecles. Paris: Editions CNED-SEDES, 1999. Queniart, Jean and Croix, Alain. De la Renaissance a I 'aube des Lumieres: Histoire culturelle de la France, Vol 2. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 2005 (1997). Queniart, Jean. La Revocation de I 'edit de Nantes: Protestants et catholiques franqais de 1598 a 1685. Paris: Desctee de Brouwer, 1985. Queniart, Jean. Les hommes, I 'eglise et Dieu dans la France du XVIIf siecle. Paris: Hachette, 1978. Rebaudo, Daniele. "Le mouvement annuel de la population francaise rurale de 1670 a 1739." Population 34 (1979): 589-606. Richard, Michel. La vie quotidienne des Protestants sous I 'ancien regime. Paris: Librairie Hachette, 1985 (1966). Rowlands, Guy. The Dynastic State and the Army Under Louis XLV: Royal Service and Private Interest, 1661-1701. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Royer, Bernard. La Fricasee: Histoire et tradition de Velevage porcin. Privately Printed, 1980. Schneider, Zoe A. "The Village and the State: Justice and the local courts in Normandy, 1670-1740." Ph.D. thesis: Georgetown University, 1997. Schneider, Zoe A. "Women Before the Bench: Female Litigants in Early Modern Normandy." French Historical Studies 23,1 (2000): 1-32. See, Henri. Economic and Social Conditions in France during theEighteenth Century. trans., Zeydel, Edwin. New York: Cooper Square Publishing, Inc., 1968 (1927). See, Henri. Les classes rurales en Bretagne duXVf siecle a la Revolution. Paris: V. Giard et E. Briere, 1906. Smedley-Weill, Anette. Les intendants de Louis XLV. Paris: Fayard, 1995. Smiles, Samuel. The Huguenots in France after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. London: W. Isbister, 1874. 502 Smith, Jay M. Nobility Reimagined: The Patriotic Nation in Eighteenth Century France. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005. Strayer, Brian E. Huguenots and Camisards as Aliens in France, 1598-1789: The Struggle for Religious Toleration. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press, 2001. Strayer, Brian E. and Utt, Walter C. The Bellicose Dove: Claude Brousson and Protestant Resistance to Louis XIV, 1647-1698. Brighton: Sussex Academic Press, 2003. Sutherland, Donald. The Chouans: The Social Origins of Popular Counter-Revolution in Upper Brittany, 1770-1796. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982. Tackett, Timothy and Langlois, Claude. "Ecclesiastical Structures and Clerical Geography on the Eve of the French Revolution." French Historical Studies 11,3 (1980): 352-370. Tackett, Timothy. Priest & Parish in Eighteenth-Century France: A Social and Political Study of the Cures in a Diocese ofDauphine, 1750-1791. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977. Tackett, Timothy. Religion, Revolution, and Regional Culture in Eighteenth-Century France: The Ecclesiastical Oath of 1791. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986. Tarrade, Jean, ed. La Vienne: de la Prehistoire a nos jours. Saint-Jean-d'Angely: Editions Bordessoules, 1986. Tarrade, Jean. "Le Centre-Ouest a la fin du regne de Louis XIV (d'apres la correspondence des intendants)." Bulletin de la Societe des Antiquaires de I'Ouest 4e serie-tome XV (1980): 333-350. Thompson, Kathleen. Power and Border Lordship in Medieval France: the County of the Perche, 1000-1226. Rochester: Boydell Press, 2002. Thompson, Richard H. Wolf-Hunting in France in the Reign of Louis XV. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press, 1991. Touzery, Mireille. L 'invention de I 'impot sur le revenue: le faille tarifee, 1715-1789. Paris: Comite pour l'histoire economique et financiere de la France, 1994. Usher, Abbott Paysan. The History of the Grain Trade in France, 1400-1710. New York: Octagon Books, 1973. Valmary, Pierre. Families Paysannes auXVIIf siecle en Bas-Quercy: Etude demographique. INED: Presses universitaires de France, 1965. Vige, Eliane et Vig6, Jimmy. Brouage: Capitale du sel etpatrie de Champlain. Saint- Jean-d' Angely, 1990. Vray, Nicole. Protestants de I'Ouest, 1517-1907. Rennes: Editions Ouest-France, 1993. Whelan, Ruth and Baxter, Carol, eds. Toleration and Religious Identity: The Edict of Nantes and its implications in France, Britain, and Ireland. Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2003. Weiss, Charles. History of the French Protestant Refugees from the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes to the Present Time, trans., Hardman, Frederick. London: William Blackwood and Sons, 1854. Zysberg, Andre. Les Galeriens: vies et destins de 60 OOOforcats sur les galeres de France, 1680-1748. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1987. 503 3. Acadia Arsenault, Bona. Histoire et genealogie des Acadiens. Montreal: Lemeac, 1978. Baker, Emerson W. and Reid, John G. The New England Knight: Sir William Phips, 1651-1695. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998. Basque, Maurice. "Conflits et solidarites familiales dans 1'ancienne Acadie: l'affaire Broussard de 1724." SHA 20,2 (1989): 60-68. Basque, Maurice. Des hommes depouvoir: histoire d'Otho Robichaudet de safamille, notables acadiens de Port-Royal et de Neguac. Neguac: Societe historique de Neguac, Inc., 1996. Baudry, Rene. "Charles Aulnay et la Compagnie de Nouvelle-France." Revue d'histoire de I'Amerique Frangaise. XI, 2 (1957): 218-241. Beck, J. Murray. Politics of Nova Scotia, Vol 1:1710-1896. Tantallon: Four East Publications, 1985. Bertrand, L. Correspondence de M. Louis Tronson, Troisieme Superieur de la Compagnie de Saint-Sulpice; lettres choisis, 3 Vols. Paris: Librairie Victor Le Coffre, 1904. Bleakney, J. Sherman. The Acadians at Grand Pre and their Dykeland Legacy. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2004. Bosher, J. F. "The Lyon and Bordeaux Connections of Emmanuel Le Borgne." Acadiensis 23,1 (1994): 128-145. Brebner, J. B. New England's Outpost: Acadia before the Conquest of Canada. New York: Columbia University Press, 1927. Brown, Desmond H. "Foundation of British Policy in the Acadian Expulsion: A Discussion of Land Tenure and the Oath of Allegiance." Dalhousie Review 57,4 (1977): 709-725. Bran, Regis. Les Acadiens avant 1755, Essai. Moncton: Privately Printed, 2003. Buckner, Philip A. and Reid, John G. The Atlantic Region to Confederation, a History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994. Bujold, Nicole T. and Caillebeau, Maurice. Les origines frangaises des premieres families acadiennes, le sud loudunais. Poitiers: imprimerie l'union, 1979. Casgrain, H. R. Les Sulpiciens et les pretres des missions-etrangeres en Acadie (1676- 1762). Quebec: Librairie Montmorency, 1897. Chute, Janet E. "Frank G. Speck's Contributions to the Understanding of Mi'kmaq Land Use, Leadership, and Land Management." Ethnohistory 46,3 (1999): 481-540. Clark, Andrew Hill. The Geography of Early Nova Scotia to 1760. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1968. Collard, Jean-Claude. Poutrincourt: aventurier Picard en Acadie. Inval-Boiron: Editions La Vague Verte, 2006. Cormier, Yves. Les aboiteaux en Acadie: hier et aujourd'hui. Moncton: Chaire d'etudes acadiennes, 1990. Crepeau, Andree and Dunn, Brenda. "L'etablissement Melanson: un site agricole acadien (vers 1664-1755)." Pares Environnement Canada, Bulletin de Recherches, 1986. Cyr, Michael. "Beaubassin, 1671-1763." Rapport de recherches, D. E. A., Universite de Poitiers, 1981. Daigle, Jean, ed. Acadia of the Maritimes: Thematic Studies from the Beginning to the Present. Moncton: Chaire d'etudes acadiennes, 1995. 504 Daigle, Jean. "La famine de 1699 en Acadie" SHA 7,3 (1976): 147-149. Dickason, Olive Patricia. "Amerindiens between French and English in Nova Scotia, 1713-1763." American Indian Culture and Research Journal 10,4 (1986): 31-56. Doucet, Clive. Lost and Found in Acadie. Halifax: Nimbus Publishing Ltd., 2004. Dumont-Johnson, Micheline. Apotres ou Agitateurs: la France missionaire en Acadie. Trois-Rivieres: Le Boreal Express Ltee, 1970. Faragher, John Mack. A Great and Noble Scheme: The Tragic Story of the Expulsion of the French Acadiansfrom their American Homeland. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2005. Gaudette, Jean. "Le village des Gaudet du haut de la riviere Port Royal." SHA 18,1 (1987): 35-45. Griffiths, N. E. S. From Migrant to Acadian: A North American Border People, 1604- 1755. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2005. Griffiths, N. E. S. "Mating and Marriage in Early Acadia." Renaissance and Modern Studies 35 (1992): 109-127. Griffiths, N. E. S. The Acadians, Creation of a People. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson Limited, 1973. Griffiths, N. E. S. The Contexts of Acadian History, 1686-1784. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1992. Griffiths, N. E. S. "The Golden Age: Acadian Life, 1713-1748." Histoire Sociale - Social History 17,33 (1984): 21-34. Guerry, Elsa. "L'Acadie au XVIIe siecle, entre la Nouvelle-France et la Nouvelle- Angleterre: quelle identite? Quel territoire?" in Maurice Basque et Jacques Paul Couturier, eds. Les territories de I'identite: perspective acadiennes etfrangaises XVIf -XX3 siecles. Moncton: Chaire d'etudes acadienne, 2005. Hodson, Christopher. "Refugees: Acadians and the Social History of Empire, 1755- 1785." Ph.D. thesis, Northwestern University, 2004. Hornsby, Stephen, Konrad, Victor, and Herlan, James, eds. The Northeastern Borderlands: Four Centuries of Interaction. Fredericton: Acadiensis Press, 1989. Houdaille, Jacques. "Quelques aspects de la demographie ancienne de 1'Acadie." Population 35,3 (1980): 581-602. Hynes, Gisa I. "Some Aspects of the Demography of Port Royal, 1650-1755." Acadiensis 3,1 (1973): 3-17. Johnston, A. J. B. "Borderland Worries: Loyalty Oaths in Acadie/Nova Scotia, 1654- 1755." French Colonial History 4 (2003): 31 -48. Johnston, A. J. B. "La seduction de l'archetype face au defi de l'histoire de 1'Acadie." SHA 36,1 (2005): 12-46. Jones, David R. "From Frontier to Borderland: The Acadian Community in a Comparative Context, 1605-1710." Royal Nova Scotia Historical Society Journal 1 (2004): 15-37. Lanctot, Leopold. L 'Acadie des Origines: 1603-1771. Montreal: Editions du Fleuve, 1988. Landry, Nicolas and Nicole Lang. Histoire de I 'Acadie. Quebec: Septentrion, 2001. Lavoie, Marc. "Belleisle Nova Scotia, 1680-1755: Acadian Material Life and Economy." M. A. thesis, McMaster University, 1987. 505 Lavoie, Marc. "Les Acadiens et le 'Planters' des Maritimes: une etude de deux ethnies, de 1680 a 1820." Ph.D. thesis, Universite de Laval, 2002. Lavoie, Marc. "The Archaelogical Reconnaissance of the Beaubassin Region in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, 1986." Reports in Archaeology, No 7. Council of Maritime Premiers - Maritime Committee on Archaeological Cooperation, 1990. Lavoie, Marc. "Vie quotidienne en Acadie." Cap-aux-Diamants 57 (1999): 22-27. Leblanc, Barbara. Postcards from Acadie: Grand Pre, Evangeline, & the Acadian identity. Kentville: Gaspereau Press, 2003. Leblanc, Ronnie-Gilles, ed. Du Grand Derangement a la Deportation, nouvelles perspectives historiques. Moncton: Chaire d'etudes acadiennes, 2005. Leger, Lauraine. "Le charivarie en Acadie." SHA X, 4 (1979): 164-169. Leger, Maurice, A. "Les missionaries de l'ancienne Acadie." SHA 28 (1997): 63-97. MacDonald, M. A. Fortune & La Tour: The Civil War in Acadia. Toronto: Metheun, 1983. MacMechan, Archibald. Red Snow on Grand Pre. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Publishers, 1931. MacNutt, W. S. The Atlantic Provinces: The Emergence of Colonial Society, 1712-1857. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Limited, 1965. Maritime Dykelands, the 350 Year Struggle. Halifax: Province of Nova Scotia, Department of Agriculture and Marketing, 1987. Marsaud, Myriam. "L'etranger qui derange: le process de sorcellerie de Jean Campagna, miroir d'une communaute acadienne, Beaubassin, 1685." M. A. thesis, University de Moncton, 1993. Massignon, Genevieve. "La seigneurie de Charles de Menou d'Aulnay, gouverneur de l'Acadie, 1635-1650." Revue d'histoire de I'Amerique Frangaise XVI (1963): 469-501. Miller, Virginia P. "Aboriginal Micmac Population: A Review of the Evidence." Ethnohistory 23,2 (1976): 117-127. Mousette, Marcel. "Analyse du materiel ceramique du site Acadien de Beaubassin." Pares Canada #35 1970. Nadon, Pierre. "The Isthmus of Chignecto: An Archaeological site survey of Acadian settlements (1670-1755)." Parks Canada, Report #27. Paratte, Henri-Dominique. Peoples of the Maritimes: Acadians. Halifax: Nimbus Publishing Ltd., 1998. Patterson, Stephen E. "Indian-White Relations in Nova Scotia, 1749-61: A Study in Political Interaction." Acadiensis 23,1 (1993): 23-59. Paul, Daniel. N. We Were Not the Savages. Halifax: Nimbus Publishing Ltd., 1993. Plank, Geoffrey. An Unsettled Conquest: The British Campaign Against the Peoples of Acadia. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001. Plank, Geoffrey. "The Two Majors Cope: The Boundaries of Nationality in Mid 18th C Nova Scotia." Acadiensis 25,2 (1996): 18-40. Rameau de Saint-Pere, F. E. Une colonie feodale en Amerique - L 'Acadie (1604-1881), 2 Vols. Paris: Plon, 1889. Rawlyk, George A. Nova Scotia's Massachusetts: A Study of Massachusetts-Nova Scotia Relations, 1630 to 1784. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1973. 506 Reid, Jennifer. Myth, Symbol and Colonial Encounter: British and Mi 'kmaq in Acadia, 1700-1867. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 1995. Reid, John G. Acadia, Maine, and New Scotland: Marginal Colonies in the Seventeenth Century. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1981. Reid, John G., Basque, Maurice, Mancke, Elizabeth, Moody, Barry, Plank, Geoffrey and Wicken, William C. The 'Conquest' of Acadie, 1710: Imperial, Colonial, and Aboriginal Constructions. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004. Reid, John G. "The Nova Scotia Historian: A Creature of Paradox." Journal of the Royal Nova Scotia Historical Society 5 (2002): 106-121. Rompillon, Samantha. "La migration a Beaubassin: village acadien, fruit de la mobilite et de la croissance." M. A. thesis, Universite de Poitiers, 1998. Sauvageau, Robert. Acadie: La Guerre de Cent Am des Franqais d'Amerique aux Maritimes et en Louisiane, 1670-1769. Paris: Berger-Levrault, 1987. Surette, Paul. "L'esprit du Chignectou, ou comment dejouer une expulsion." Egalite: Revue acadienne d'analyse politique 52 (2005): 81-90. Tapie, Edith. "Les structures socio-economiques de Grand Pre, communaute acadienne." M. A. thesis, Universite de Poitiers, 2000. Thorp, Daniel B. "Equals of the King: The Balance of Power in Early Acadia." Acadiensis 25,2 (1996): 3-17. Vanderlinden, Jacques. "A la rencontre de l'histoire du droit en Acadie avant le derangement: premieres impressions d'un nouveau-venu." Revue de I 'Universite de Moncton 28,1 (1996): 47-80. Vanderlinden, Jacques. "Alliances entre families acadiennes pendant la periode francaise." SHA 27,2 et 3 (1995): 125-148. Vanderlinden, Jacques. Histoire du Droit en Acadie et en Nouvelle-Ecosse aux XVIf et XVIIf siecles. Moncton: Centre d'etudes acadiennes, 1996. Vanderlinden, Jacques. Le lieutenant civil et criminel: Mathieu de Goutin en Acadie francaise (1688-1710). Moncton: Chaire d'etudes acadiennes, 2004. Vanderlinden, Jacques. Se Marier en Acadie francaise, XVIF etXVIIf siecles. Moncton: Chaire d'etudes acadiennes, 1998. Vanderlinden, Jacques. "Une colonization atypique? La France en Acadie au 17e siecle." Bulletin des Seances Academique royale des sciences d'outre-mer. 43,4 (1997): 517-541. White, Stephen A. Dictionnaire genealogique des families acadiennes, 2 Vols. Moncton: Chaire d'etudes acadiennes, 1999). Whitelaw, Marjory. The Wellington Dyke. Halifax: Nimbus Publishing, Ltd., 1997. Wicken, William C. "26 August 1726: A Case Study in Mi'kmaq-New England Relations in the Early 18th Century." Acadiensis 23,1 (1993): 5-22. Wicken, William C. "Encounters with Tall Sails and Tall Tales: Mi'kmaq Society, 1500- 1760. Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, 1994. Wicken, William C. "Re-examining Mi'kmaq-Acadian Relations, 1635-1755" in Depatie, et al., eds., Habitants et marchands, Twenty Years Later: 93-114. Wittmann, Henri. "L'Ouest Francois dans le Francais des Ameriques: le jeu des isoglosses morphologiques et la genese du dialecte acadien" in Georges Cesbron, ed. L 'Ouest Franqais et la Francophonie Nord-Americaine. Angers: Presses universitaires d'Angers, 1996. 507 4. New France Banks, Kenneth J. Chasing Empire across the Sea: Communications and the State in the French Atlantic, 1713-1763. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2002. Bosher, J. F. The Canada Merchants, 1713-1763. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987. Bran, Josette. Vie et mort du couple en Nouvelle-France: Quebec et Louisbourg au XVIIF siecle. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2006. Coates, Colin. "The Boundaries of Rural Society in Early Quebec: Batiscan and Sainte- Anne de la Perade to 1825." Ph.D. thesis, York University, 1992. Coates, Colin. The Metamorphoses of Landscape and Community in Early Quebec. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2000. Charbonneau, Hubert, Desjardins, Bertrand, Guillemette, Andre, Landry, Yves, Legare, Jacques andNault, Francois. The First French Canadians, trans., Colozzo, Paola. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1993. Charbonneau, Hubert. Vie et mort de nos ancetres: Etude demographique. Montreal: les presses de Funiversite de Montreal, 1975. Choquette, Leslie. "Center and Periphery in French North America" in Daniels and Kennedy, eds. Negotiated Empires: 193-206. Choquette, Leslie. Frenchmen into Peasants: Modernity and Tradition in the Peopling of French Canada. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997. DechSne, Louise. Habitants and Merchants in Seventeenth-Century Montreal, trans., Vardi, Liana. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1992. Depatie, Sylvie, Desberats, Catherine, Gauvreau, Danielle, Lalancette, Mario and Wien, Thomas, eds. Habitants et marchands, Twenty Years Later: Reading the History of Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Canada. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1998. Depatie, Sylvie. "L'evolution d'une societe rurale: File Jesus au XVIIf siecle." Ph.D. thesis, McGili University, 1988. Dube, Jean-Claude. Les Intendants de la Nouvelle-France. Montreal: Editions Fides, 1984. Eccles, W. J. Essays on New France. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987. Eccles, W. J. The Canadian Frontier, 1534-1760. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1983. English, John and Belanger, Real, eds. Dictionary of Canadian Biography Online. Vol I. Library and Archives Canada, www.biographi.ca. Gauvreau, Danielle. Quebec: Une ville et sa population au temps de la Nouvelle-France. Quebec: Presses de Funiversite de Quebec, 1991. Greer, Allan. Peasant, Lord, and Merchant: Rural Society in Three Quebec Parishes, 1740-1840. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985. Greer, Allan. The People of New France. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997. Hamelin, Jean. t.conomie et societe en Nouvelle-France. Quebec: Presses universitaires Laval, 1961. Hatvany, Matthew G. Marshlands: Four Centuries of Environmental change on the shores of the St Lawrence. Quebec: Les presses de Funiversite Laval, 2003. Henripin, Jacques. La population canadienne au debut duXVIIf siecle: nuptualite, fecondite, mortalite infantile. INED: presses universitaires de France, 1954. 508 Johnston, A. J. B. Religion in Life at Louisbourg, 1713-1758. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1984. Krause, Eric, Corbin, Carol, O'Shea, William. Aspects of Louisbourg. Sydney: The University College of Cape Breton Press, 1995. Laberge, Alain, ed. Histoire de la Cote du Sud. Quebec: institute quebecois de recherche sur la culture, 1993. Laberge, Alain. "Mobilite, etablissement et enracinement en milieu rural: le peuplement des seigneuries de la Grand Anse sous le regime Fran?ais (1672-1752)." Ph.D. thesis, York University, 1987. Lachance, Andre. Crimes et Criminels en Nouvelle-France. Montreal: Les Editions du Boreal Express, 1984. Lachance, Andre. Vivre, aimer et mourir en Nouvelle-France: la vie quotidienne aux XVIf et XVIIf siecles. Montreal: Editions Libre Expression, 2000. Lahaise, Robert and Vallerand, Noel. Le Nouvelle-France, 1524-1760. Quebec: Lanctdt, editeur, 1999 (1977). Larin, Robert. La contribution du Haut-Poitou au peuplement de la Nouvelle-France. Moncton: Editions d'Acadie, 1994. Lavaltee, Louis. La Prairie en Nouvelle-France, 1647-1760. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1992. Magnuson, Roger. Education in New France. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1992. McLennan, J. S. Louisbourg from its foundation to its fall, 1713-1758. Halifax: The Book Room, Ltd., 1979. Miquelon, Dale. New France, 1701 to 1744: A supplement to Europe. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1987. Moogk, Peter N. Building a House in New France: An Account of the Perplexities of Client and Craftsmen in Early Canada. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1977. Noel, Jan. "Women in New France." Canadian Historical Association, Historical Booklet No 59,1998. Ouellet, Fernand. "Officiers de milice et structure sociale au Quebec (1660-1815)." Histoire sociale - Social History XII, 25 (1979): 37-65. Podruchny, Carolyn. Making the Voyageur World: Travelers and Traders in the North American Fur Trade. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2006. Podruchny, Carolyn. "Werewolves and Windigos: Narratives of Cannibal Monsters in French-Canadian Voyageur Oral Tradition." Ethnohistory 51,4 (2004): 677-700. Pritchard, James Stewart. Anatomy of a Naval Disaster: The 1746 French Naval Expedition to North America. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1995. Pritchard, James Stewart. In Search of Empire: The French in the Americas, 1670-1730. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Pritchard, James Stewart. "Ships, Men and Commerce: A Study of Maritime Activity in New France." Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, 1971. Schott, Carl. The Canadian Marshland, trans., Ryine, J. W. Kiel: Geographical Institute of the University of Kiel, 1995. Trigger, Bruce G. Natives and Newcomers: Canada's 'Heroic Age' Reconsidered. Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1985. 509 5. General Anderson, Virginia DeJohn. Creatures of Empire: How Domestic Animals Transformed Early America. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Anderson, Virginia DeJohn. New England's Generation: The Great Migration and the Formation of Society and Culture in the Seventeenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Baxter, W. T. The House of Hancock: Business in Boston, 1724-1775. New York: Russell & Russell, Inc., 1965. Berlioz, Jacques. Catastrophes naturelles et catamites au Moyen Age. Sismel: Edizioni del Gallerzzo, 1998. Boserup, Ester. The Conditions of Agricultural Growth: The Economics of Agrarian Change under Population Pressure. London: George Allen & Unwln, Ltd., 1965. Bradley, Raymond S. and Jones, Philip D., eds. Climate since A.D. 1500. London: Routledge, 1995. Brown, Neville. History and Climate Change: A Eurocentric Perspective. London: Routledge, 2001. Calloway, Colin G. The Scratch of a Pen: 1763 and the Transformation of North America. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. Chayanov, A. V. The Theory of Peasant Economy, trans and eds., Thorner, Daniel, Kerblay, Basile and Smith, R. E. F. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1966. Cohen, Thomas V. and Cohen, Elizabeth S. Words and Deeds in Renaissance Rome: Trials before the Papal Magistrates. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993. Coleman, Jon T. Vicious: Wolves and Men in America. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004. Daniels, Christine and Kennedy, Michael V., eds. Negotiated Empires: Centers and Peripheries in the Americas, 1500-1820. New York: Routledge, 2002. Daniels, John. "The Indian Population of North America in 1492." William and Mary Quarterly 49,2 (1992): 298-320. Elliott, David L. International Migration and Population Homeostasis: An Historical Study. New York: Garland Publishing, 1989. Ellis, Steven G. "The English State and its Frontiers in the British Isles, 1300-1600" in Power and Standen, eds. Frontiers in Question. Frenzel, Burkhard, Pfister, Christian and Glaser, Birgit. Climatic trends and anomalies in Europe, 1675-1715. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer Verlag, 1994. Games, Alison. Migration and the Origins of the English Atlantic World. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991. Glass, D. V. and Eversley, D. E., eds. Population in History: Essays in Historical Demography. London: Edward Arnold Publishers, Ltd., 1965. Hinderaker, Eric. Elusive Empires: Constructing Colonialism in the Ohio Valley, 1673- 1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Hoffmann, Richard C. Land Liberties, and Lordship in a Late Medieval Countryside - Agrarian Structures and Change in the Duchy of Wroclaw. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1989. Jones, P. D., Ogilvie, A. E. J., Davies, T. D. and Briffa, K. R. History and Climate: Memories of the Future? New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2001. 510 Le Roy Ladurie, Emmanuel. Histoire humaine et comparee du climat: canicules et glaciers, XHT-XVlIf siecles. Paris: Fayard, 2004. Le Roy Ladurie, Emmanuel. Times of Feast, Times of Famine: A History of Climate since the Year 1000. trans., Bray, Barbara. Garden City: Doubleday and Company, 1971. Luterbacher, J., Rickli, R., Xoplaki, E., Tinguely, C, Beck, C, Pfister, C. and Wanner, H. "The Late Maunder Minimum (1675-1715) - A Key Period for studying decadal scale climatic change in Europe." Climatic Change 49 (2001): 441-462. Mann, Michael E., Bradley, Raymond S. and Hughes, Malcolm K. "Global Scale temperature patterns and climate forcing over the past six centuries." Nature 392 (1998): 779-787. Nester, William R. The Great Frontier War: Britain, France, and the Imperial Struggle for North America, 1607-1755. Westport: Praegar, 2000. Pluskowki, Aleksander. Wolves and the Wilderness in the Middle Ages. Rochester: Boydell Press, 2006. Post, John D. Food Shortage, Climatic Variability and Epidemic Disease in Preindustrial Europe: the Mortality Peak in the early 1740s. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1985. Power, Daniel and Standen, Naomi, eds. Frontiers in Question: Eurasian Borderlands, 700-1700. London: MacMillan Press, 1999. Richards, John F. The Unending Frontier: An Environmental History of the Early Modern World. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003. Sahlins, Peter. Boundaries: The Making of France and Spain in the Pyrenees. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989. Scott, Susan and Duncan, Christopher J. Human Demography and Disease. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Smith, Joshua M. Borderland Smuggling: Patriots, Loyalists, and Illicit Trade in the Northeast, 1783-1820. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 2006. Steele, Ian Kenneth. The English Atlantic, 1675-1740: an Exploration of Communication and Community. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983. Sylvester, Dorothy. The Rural Landscape of the Welsh Borderland: A Study in Historical Geography. London: MacMillan Press, 1969. Taylor, Alan. The Divided Ground: Indians, Settlers and the Northern Borderland of the American Revolution. New York: Vintage Books, 2007. Wanner, H. and Siegenthaler, U., eds. Long and Short Term Variability of Climate. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1988. Warden, G. B. Boston, 1689-1776. Boston: Little, Brown and Coy, 1970. Wefer, Gerold, Berger, Wolfgang H., Behre, Karl-Ernst, Jansen, Eystein, eds. Climate Development and History of the North Atlantic Realm. Berlin: Springer, 2002. Weir, David R. "Life Under Pressure: France and England, 1670-1870." Journal of Economic History 44,1 (1984): 27-47. Weir, David R. "New Estimates of Nuptuality and Marital Fertility in France, 1740- 1911." Population Studies 48,2 (1994): 307-331. White, Richard. The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes region, 1650-1815. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. 511