Updated Arrival Tree

I was wrong.  I don’t have 13 boat-riding French immigrants in my family tree, I have 51.  51 different French ancestors took ships to get here in the seventeenth century!

My arrival tree doesn’t look like this …

My hastily drawn arrival tree.  March 2013

My hastily drawn arrival tree. March 2013.

It looks like this …

Updated Arrival Tree (still hastily sketched.) March 2013.

Updated Arrival Tree (still hastily sketched.) March 2013.

And now I am fascinated by my ancestors sheer numbers, and I am curious to unlock their stories.  This is what I know so far …

Angele Houde dit Desrochers paternal and maternal lines descend from the same immigrant ancestor, Louis, born 1617 — but are traced through separate sons.  The paternal side descends from Louis, born 1675; the maternal side descends from Simon, born 1680.

There is more of this duplicitous poetry in my enlarged tree (which is really Louis Hubert Boisvert’s enlarged family tree) – it begins (paternal paternal) and ends (maternal maternal) on the same three immigrants: Etienne Boisvert, Thomas Hayot, and Jeanne Boucher.

Indeed, 10 of my ancestors show up more than once in this arrival tree.  Plus there are two sets of siblings.  I guess these duplications will save me some research time down the road.

And I should probably mention that I took a short cut to find all this information so quickly.  In my original arrival trees, there are several branches that ended in unknown — but the only one that I hadn’t really looked into yet was the line for Louis Hubert Boisvert’s mother.  I started with his parents’ marriage certificate as a source for his maternal grandparents’ names (there are a lot of Houdes out there to sort through) and then entered them into the search engine at the highly respected, and PRDH verified, Genealogy of Canada.

Detail of Antoine Boisvert and Angele Houde dit Desrochers marriage record.  Drouin Collection, accessed April 13, 2013.

Detail of Antoine Boisvert and Angele Houde dit Desrochers marriage record. Drouin Collection, accessed April 13, 2013.

Amongst my new ancestors is Helene Desportes, reputed to be the first French child born in Canada (1620.)  I also have a couple of less famous ties that intrigue me because they intersect with stories that I am familiar with through my research into my Boisvert line and Sillery, Quebec: I am a descendent of one of Pierre Pinel’s victims and a descendent of neither his (nor Gilles’) sister, Marie Pinet, too.

There is still a lot of mystery here.  One thing I do know is that my arrival tree looks even more top heavy than it did before.  And I am shocked.  Shocked that 51 ancestors made the trip here in the seventeenth century.   I would have been terrified to spend that much time at sea.



Antoine Boisvert’s Ancestors

Etienne Boisvert by 1650

Thomas Hayot about 1636

Jeanne Boucher about 1636

Michel Lemay about 1655

Marie-Michelle Dutost about 1655

Pierre Pichet about 1655

Catherine Durand about 1665

Nicolas Silvestre about 1660

Jean Nepveu about 1650

Anne Leodet about 1653

Mathieu Choret about 1645

Sebastienne Veillon about 1647

Marguerite Lerouge about 1680

Total: 13

Angele Houde-Desrocher’s Paternal Ancestors

Louis Houde by 1658

Marin Boucher by 1636

Perrine Mallet by 1636

Gervais Bisson by 1654

Marie L’Hereux by 1654

Mathurin Trut by 1658

Pierre Garemon by 1631

Madeleine Charlot by 1631

Jean Demers about 1643

Jeanne Voidy about 1653

Jean Lavoie by 1684

Michel L’Homme by 1658

Marie Barbe Valade by 1658

Andre Bergeron by 1673

Jean Demers (repeat)

Jeanne Voidy (repeat)

Pierre Grenon by 1676

Marie Lavoie (sister of Jean Lavoie) by 1676

Jean Huard by 1662

Mathieu Amiot about 1635

Marie Milville by 1650

Guillaume Jourdain by 1678

Guillaume Constantin by 1661

Pierre Masse by 1644

Marie Pinet by 1644

Total: 25 (minus duplicates, 23)

Angele Houde-Desrocher’s Maternal Ancestors

Louis Houde (repeat)

Marin Boucher (repeat)

Perrine Mallet (repeat)

Francoise Frechet by 1677

Simon L’Herault by by 1655

Suzanne Jarousell by 1655

Gervais Bisson (repeat)

Marie L’Herault (repeat)

Marin Boucher (repeat)

Perrine Mallet (repeat)

Jean Beaudet 1664

Marie Grandin by 1670

Francois Garnier Pellerin by 1662

Jaqueline Fresson by 1662

Francois Garnier dit Pellerin by 1662

Jacqueline Fresion by 1662

Jean Hamel by 1666

Nicolas Gaudry by 1653

Noel Marin by 1640

Pierre Desportes by 1620

Francoise Langlois by 1620

Jacques Gauthier by 1672

Etienne Boisvert (repeat)

Thomas Hayot (repeat)

Jeanne Boucher (repeat)

Total: 25 (minus duplicates, 15)

Tagged , , , ,

Rethinking my family tree

Next spring my son will face the family heritage project at school.  I have been thinking about this a lot lately because he is currently expressing grief over not knowing his birth parents.  And I feel for him — enough to talk to our post adoption counselor about search policies (he must wait until he is 18,) and enough to start thinking about how we will handle the heritage project when it comes up.

Our school tries to make the heritage project inclusive of adoptees by making the family tree just one part of what must be displayed on the poster board.  The bulk of the poster is actually dedicated to one’s family’s heritage.  But what exactly is that supposed to mean.  The Korean-ness I have managed to pass on to him is half-baked and I have pretty much failed to pass on any of the other family ethnic traditions we can lay claim to.  Sure we have attended some Korean cultural events and eat kielbasa and wide varieties of pasta, but if I am honest, I have been raising my kids less on ethnicity and more on sports, Ipads, and cheddar cheese.

My mental preparations for how I will support my son through this school-sanctioned identity crisis has gotten me to think about genealogy in a different way.  Instead of focusing on the question of who are my people, what if I focused on the question of how did my family get here?  This might not solve any issues for my son (or domestic adoptees), but it gives me a way to include my adoptive kids more significantly into my family tree.  Below is a quick sketch of the when and where of my family’s migration to North America.

My hastily drawn arrival tree.  March 2013

My hastily drawn arrival tree. March 2013.

I love this oddly branching tree.  It is a quick reminder of the push and pull of how my family got here.  We came in three waves.  We arrived in the seventeenth century after as the Reformation and Counter-Reformation and the Scientific Revolution shook up European practices and created opportunities in the “New” World.  We arrived in the nineteenth century as the Industrial Revolution changed economic practices and sent people searching for new stability.  And we came in the 2000s, products of globalization and adoption politics.

This tree makes me feel closer to all my accumulated ties – the Italian, the French, the Irish, the German, the Jewish, the Korean, the Norwegian, the Swedish, and the Polish.  And it gives me confidence that if I can find a tree that I feel is particularly suited to me, my son will too.

If thinking about the when and why rather than the who of your family inspires you, I would love to see your arrival trees too.

Tagged , , , , ,

Fighting the Odds

360x640I ran across an interesting fact in Elizabeth Gilbert’s historic novel The Signature of All Things.  1816 was “The Year Without a Summer” because ash flew into the stratosphere and remained there for months following the eruption of an Indonesian volcano.  This fascinated me because my great great grandfather, Louis Hubert Boisvert, whose family had resided in Ste. Croix for five generations but who himself moved on sometime after his father’s death of cholera in 1834 and before he married ten years later in Kingsey Falls, was born in 1816.

I thought: wow, what a tough year to survive.  Infants are incredibly vulnerable.  Nearby Quebec saw twelve inches of snow that June.  Crops must have been damaged, food must have been scarce, but Louis Hubert, who was born in March, lived on until 1866.

Tagged , , , , ,

Snag: Marie Pinel

Marriage record of Pierre Masse and Marie de la Chesnaye.  15 May 1644.

Marriage record of Pierre Masse and Marie de la Chesnaye. Notre Dame, Quebec, 15 May 1644. Drouin Collection.

Who was Marie Pinel?  Some claim she is the sister of Gilles Pinel.  I am inclined to doubt this.  First, that would have meant that in 1672 Gilles’ daughter Catherine married her first cousin, Denis Masse.  Kind of gross to the modern imagination.

But there are other reasons that I doubt the relationship too.  Marie Pinel, wife of Pierre Masse and neighbor of Gilles Pinel, had an unrelated “dit” name.  Gilles father was known as Nicolas Pinel dit LaFrance.  Marie was known as Pinel dit de Lachesnaye.  I know sons often picked up their own dit names in this era, but it seems very unlikely for a daughter to do it.

Marie’s name is also confusing because it varies over time.  She is de la Chesnaye when she marries in 1644.  She is Pinel at her first child Denis’ baptism in 1645.  She is Pinet or Pinette at the baptisms of her children in 1649, 1652, 1655, 1658. and 1660.  So there is a chance that she was never a Pinel at all.

But assuming she was a Pinel, another reason that I suspect Marie is not Gilles’ sister (as is widely claimed on the web) is the seemingly good documentation at the Ste. Marguerite chapel in La Rochelle for Nicolas Pinel’s marriage and the baptisms of his sons .  Nicolas married Madeleine Maraud on 29 September 1630.  They had their first son on 7 September 1631, and additional sons in 1635 and 1636.  If the records at Ste. Marguerite are good, why doesn’t Marie show up on the list?

It could be that she was overlooked. I can imagine her fitting in, let’s say in 1633 – but that wouldn’t makes sense with what we know of her life in New France. The first Canadian record of Marie Pinel is her marriage to Pierre Masse on the 15th of May, 1644 at Notre-Dame de Quebec. Around this time her “father” Nicolas Pinel was arranging to spend three years working for hire in Acadia, not Quebec, and her “mother” Madeleine Marauad was preparing to stay behind in France to watch their boys. If Marie Pinel had been born in the gap of Nicolas and Madeleine’s childbearing (1633,) then she would have been about 11 on her wedding day — and this would have been after her family sent her across an ocean to find a husband on her own.  Seems a bit heartless.

And then there are the other records that give us data about Marie Pinel’s age.  She would have been born in 1624 according to her 1659 confirmation where she was listed as 35, she would have been born in 1626 according to the 1666 census where she was listed as 40, and she would have been born in 1617 according to the 1667 census where she was listed as 50.  Nicolas Pinel was born @1605 — he would have been anywhere from 12-19 and unmarried if he were truly her father.

Still, I like the idea of Marie’s presence in Sillery (her husband acquired land there in 1645) drawing Nicolas to the area after his service in Port Royal, Acadia was completed.  As heartwarming and tidy as that story could be though, I don’t think she is Nicolas Pinel and Madeleine Maraud’s daughter.  My guess is that she is Nicolas Pinel’s young sister, a cousin or a niece, if she was any relation at all.

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Skeletons in our closet

I have been keeping a few seventeenth century skeletons in the closet.  Not because I think that the stories are shameful, but out of respect for other people’s toes.  This hasn’t been much of a problem until recently when I have found myself holding back newly discovered information because I am pretending that certain stories don’t exist.  So, even though only one story really calls for sharing, I have decided to spill all the family “secrets” now in one fell swoop.  Afterall, if I am having a moment of honesty …

First skeleton.  Anne Leodet and Gilles Pinel were not married when they conceived their first daughter, Catherine.  They married September 9, 1657.  Catherine was born seven months later on April 10, 1658.  Customs about birth and marriage have a tendency to shift with time, place, and politics – I know that this would not have been a big deal in 18th century Maine (thanks Laurel Thatcher Ulrich and Martha Ballard,) but it does seem unusual among the records that I have found in my seventeenth century Sillery family tree.

Second skeleton.  Anne Leodet and Gilles Pinel’s second child, (Barbe Nepveu’s half-sister), Francoise, was disabled.  I don’t know disabled how but she was one of six individuals that Tanguay referred to in his genealogical dictionary as an idiot/e.  Two-thirds of these disabled people died before they turned 14 years old.  None of them went on to be parents.  Francoise was born in 1660 and lived for forty-three years.  Of all her disabled peers, she lived the longest.

This is not the skeleton.

The skeleton involves the fact that Francoise Pinel had a baby, a stillborn son.

Anonymous. Pinel.  17 May 1682.  Drouin Collection.  Note Francoise Pinel is labelled "innocent" and the father is "inconnu."

Anonymous. Pinel, burial. 17 May 1682. Drouin Collection. Note Francoise Pinel is labelled “innocent” and the father is “inconnu.”

The year before she buried her son, Francoise was listed as living with her parents and some of her younger siblings in the 1681 census.  She was never made a godmother and she never married.  This set of facts makes me worry that there was a scandal, and probably sadness, in her story — but in the end I don’t know enough to say anything more than my ancestors dealt with disability and pregnancy outside the confines of marriage back in the seventeenth century.

Third skeleton.  Gilles Pinel’s brother, Pierre, was a criminal.  Around the time of the crime, Pierre lived in Guardarville with his wife and three very young children.  Gilles and Pierre’s mother, Madeleine Maraud, lived a few parcels down, with her second husband Rene Andre.

Excerpt from Marcel Trudel's Le Terrier Du Saint-Laurent En 1663 Guardarville map.

Excerpt from Marcel Trudel’s Le Terrier Du Saint-Laurent En 1663 Guardarville map.

In neighboring Sillery, Gilles was raising five very young children and two step children, with his wife, Anne Leodet.  Also in Sillery, on the way to Gilles’ home for Pierre, were the homesteads of Mathurin Trut and Jean Hayot.  In Fall 1668, Pierre was charged and convicted of raping these habitants’ ten-year-old daughters.

The penalty was steep – and it was upheld in the face of appeal.  Pierre was charged a fine of 30 livres to be split equally between the victims and the poor at the Hotel Dieu.  Pierre’s head was shaved and he was whipped until blood ran in the public square.  He was also exiled for nine years.

The repercussions of Pierre’s actions seem to be wide ranging for his relatives.  His wife and children were made destitute.  Charlotte had to appeal to the Supreme Council to have some cooking pots and bedding returned to her.  She was last seen in the records in 1674 when she serves as a godmother to Jean Chasselin in Quebec and was never heard from again.  Pierre’s mother died by November 12, 1669.  And Gilles and Anne’s fertility pattern changed.  They had kids in 1658, 1660, 1662, 1664, 1666, 1669, 1971, 1673, 1675: basically they had a child every two years, but switched from even-numbered years to odd-numbered years during the time of Pierre’s crime and conviction.  (Though their eldest daughter also married during this period, so there could have been multiple stresses on the couple.)

But the reason I wanted to share this skeleton, was less to point out the crime and its repercussions than to point out the community.  The victims of the crime do not appear to have been stigmatized.  They went on to marry, following the customs of their era, at 13 and 15, within 5 years of the crime.  And it appears, that my Sillery ancestors reached out to help legitimate these young girls as they moved forward with life.

When I was following the godparents, I noticed a pattern.  Within a year or so of a girl’s marriage, she was often asked by a member of her community to serve as a godparent.  This pattern was replicated enough that it appears to me to be a rite of passage.  And in the story of this rape and its aftermath, the community glue of godparenting can be seen again.  In 1671, Anne Leodet and Gilles Pinel asked one of Pierre’s victims to serve as the godmother to Anne’s namesake baby.  A couple of years earlier, Barbe Nepveu and Nicolas Sylvestre reached out to the mother of the other victim (the victim who would not marry until 1673) to serve as godmother to their first child.  It seems to me, that my Sillery ancestors were using community conventions to rebuild relationships after a horrendous crime.


I have compiled this post mostly from the secondary sources listed below.  My guess is that the court records still exist.  I would love to read them some day.  If you happen to have a copy and are willing to share, I would be grateful for the opportunity to read about Pierre’s crime myself!


PRHD indexes

Genforum posting by Janet Manseau 3 Oct 2009

Nos Origines listings 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Sainte Marguerite Chapel

Sometimes a building is worth a thousand words.  Ste. Marguerite’s chapel is like that for me.  I bumped into it accidentally, while looking into the lives of Gilles Pinel and his father, Nicolas.  Ste. Marguerite is more than the place were Nicolas Pinel and Madeleine Maraud married on September 29th, 1630 and baptized their sons in 1631, 1635, and 1636, it is an icon of the power struggles of a changing Europe.

Ste. Marguerite Chapel. La Rochelle, France.

Ste. Marguerite Chapel. La Rochelle, France.

Ste. Marguerite started as a convent in La Rochelle in the twelfth century and its walls witnessed the complicated history of the Protestant Reformation, Catholic persistence, and political upheaval that came several centuries later.  During the 16th century, political and religious concerns combined to fracture the Christian tradition of Western Europe.  La Rochelle became an early stronghold of Protestant thought, often Calvinist, in the 1530s.

Unsurprisingly, the convent of Ste. Marguerite saw a decline in its population of sisters as the Protestant Reformation made inroads into La Rochelle’s social fabric.  In 1531, there were eleven sisters.  By 1557, there were only five remaining.  In 1560, La Rochelle saw religious riots.  In 1568, La Rochelle became a Huguenot (French Protestant) stronghold.  The White Sisters of Ste. Marguerite’s numbers shrunk even farther.  In 1572, two sisters remained.  In 1573, only one sister was left.

But despite the declining numbers (and maybe because of its location in the north central section of La Rochelle – away from waterfronts,) Ste. Marguerite became a center for both Protestant and Catholic life.  In 1568 Huguenot leaders demolished most of the Catholic parish churches, and then repurposed the church stones to fortify La Rochelle’s walls.  This decline in sacred space gave greater importance to Ste. Marguerite’s remaining chapel – which served members of both Catholic and Protestant faiths as a site for both baptisms and marriages from the late 1500s until 1630. The chapel returned to single faith use when Cardinal Richelieu made a play to consolidate royal power for Louis XIIIth and regained Catholic control over La Rochelle in 1627-28.

After 1630, the Ste. Marguerite chapel served an exclusively Catholic clientele again. Nicolas Pinel and Madeleine Maraud’s marriage at the Ste. Marguerite chapel reminded me that the sixteenth and seventeen centuries were full of religious and political turmoil.

The Pinel family’s connection to the chapel marked the beginning of unique period in the convent chapel’s history. It had been 60 years since it served only one faith — and Ste. Marguerite’s role as a center for Catholic life celebrations would only last a short while.   By the 1660s, Catholic churches were rebuilt in LaRochelle.  The convent chapel at Ste. Marguerite no longer celebrated life events as the focus of Catholic religious life returned to parish churches  once again.

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Asian brussels sprouts?

In the absence of knowing his parents — a great grief to my 8 year-old son — food and flavor are one of the few ways I have to keep him connected to his ancestors.

Bulgolgi.  Kalbi.  Jap chae.  Bi Bim Bap.  Soondubu chigae.  They are all possibilities.  But quite honestly, I fail miserably at this.  I hardly cook Korean food at all.  And I don’t cook Asian dishes much more — though my fried rice is my son’s favorite food.

My fried rice recipe is pretty simple.  Dice onions, shred carrots, chop kimchi (if we have it.)  Heat up sesame oil.  Give the onions and carrots a head start but brown the first three ingredients together.  Add cold rice and chopped ham.  Add soy sauce and scrambled egg.  Mix until egg is cooked.  Serve.

I used to feel bad about my fried rice because I knew that it was supposed to be a leftover dish and mine most certainly was not.  I wasn’t doing it Asian enough.  So I started to experiment with it.  I would put in whatever I found in the fridge.  Then one day I added brussels sprouts to my kimchi fried rice.  Man, was that a bad pick.  The whole dish fell apart.  And I decided that East and West couldn’t meet.  I stopped experimenting with my fried rice.  I stopped trying to let East and West mix on our plates.

Imagine my surprise then when I came across a brussels sprouts and kimchi recipe in Roy Choi’s L.A. Son.  My world stopped.

The cover of Roy Choi's L.A. Son.

The cover of Roy Choi’s L.A. Son.

Roy Choi is the creator of the Korean taco truck.  He came from a family with a flair for food and climbed up the ranks of corporate cooking through hotels like Hilton.  He has fed thousands, if not millions of people — and he was saying that brussels sprouts and kimchi can mix.

I was reading L.A. Son because I read whatever I can get my hands on about the Korean-American experience.  It is one of my projects since becoming an adoptive parent.  Reading helps me understand what is assumed of my children when they are away from me and tells me a bit of the generational experiences that they are missing out on because they are raised in a white family. Reading also gives me greater understanding of the experiences of the Korean Americans that I encounter as an adoptive parent — though I am pretty sure I am not going to run into anyone as badass as Roy Choi in my suburban circles….

Anyway, Choi’s recipe doesn’t bend West to East like my recipe did.  It bends East to West. Instead of placing the brussels sprouts with sesame oil, soy sauce, and rice, the kimchi is placed with European flavors of olive oil, butter, lemon, and shiso (yes, Asian but apparently similar to mint.)  I haven’t tried it yet but plan to give it a go.  My willingness to experiment with food renewed.

And another thing I picked up from Roy Choi’s L.A. Son — a single culinary heritage doesn’t make a man — but a parent’s unwavering belief can help lift a man up.

Tagged , , , , , ,

Greenwood: Gilles Pinel

When I first ran into Gilles Pinel in the family tree, I didn’t trust him.  I don’t share blood with him.  He was Anne Leodet’s second (and enduring) husband and Barbe Nepveu’s step-father.  Gilles and Anne’s first-born daughter, Catherine, married the boy next door, Denis Masse – even though Denis had been of marriageable age for years.  I thought maybe Gilles tried to save the “best” for his own blood, that maybe he didn’t accept my kin into his heart.

But it turns out that Denis Masse was not such a great catch.  He was dead within a few years of marriage to Catherine. Besides, Gilles did not abandon Barbe in her adult life.  Instead, he served as a godfather for her first child (1669) and he asked her husband, Nicolas Sylvestre, to serve as godfather to his son (1673.)  He couldn’t have been that bad of a guy.

So I came to wonder: how did Gilles come to Sillery where he met and married Anne Leodet?  Well, the answer is simple: he followed his father, Nicolas Pinel.

Nicolas Pinel was born around 1605 in Champagnoles, Normandy, France.  He married Madeleine Marault at Ste. Marguerite chapel, in La Rochelle, France on 29 September 1630.  Together they had five sons: Antoine (b. 1631), Gilles and Pierre (b. 1635, only Gilles survived), Pierre (b. 1636), and later, Isaac (b. 1645).**  In 1645, Nicolas signed a three-year contract to work at Port Royal in Acadia.  It is believed that Madeleine remained in France to raise their boys.  After Nicolas’ contract was completed, he settled outside Quebec.  On 16 September 1650 he acquired land and a home near the Cap Rouge River, next door to Sillery.

Screen Shot 2014-01-20 at 2.32.50 PM

Nicolas Pinel’s original concession at Cap-Rouge (Gaudarville) of 3 arpents (acres) frontage was split into two plots by his widow in 1662.  The original concession included all of plot #11 and half of plot #10.  The map is from Marcel Trudel’s Le Terrier Du Saint-Laurent En 1663.

It is believed that Nicolas Pinel had his sons Gilles and Pierre join him and that they worked the land there together.

It is hard to figure out exactly how Gilles first met Anne Leodet, but it is easy to imagine that they would have come to know each other quickly in small neighboring communities.  Gilles was definitely in the community by 1651, Jean acquired his Sillery land in November 1652, Anne Leodet arrived in Quebec in December 1652, and Jean and Anne married in January of 1653.

I don’t know whether Gilles knew Jean well before he knew Anne (Jean was 10 years his senior) — but Gilles must have been, or become, close to the couple somehow.  On October 11th, 1655 Jean and Anne had Gilles stand as their second daughter Suzanne’s godfather.  But whether it was friendship — or a neighborly show of support for a man who had just lost his father– it is impossible to uncover. Gilles’ father, Nicolas, had died a few weeks earlier on September 18, 1655.

A couple of years later, everything would be different.  Jean would be exiled on bigamy charges and Gilles would marry Anne.***  Together Gilles and Anne raised a family that included Anne’s two children with Jean Nepveu and nine children of their own.  Anne and Gilles would remain in Sillery on Jean Nepveu’s land until about 1680, and then see the remainder of their days in nearby Neuville.  Anne and Gilles died within a year of each other: he passed in January, and she died in December, of 1700.


* Catherine Pinel went on to an enduring second marriage with Jean Prou after her first husband, Denis Masse, died.

** Disclaimer – this information on Nicolas Pinel is culled from the internet, and not fact-checked with primary sources – though I have sought multiple references and weighed credibility.

*** This timeline shows how much happened in two and a half short years.

  • September 18, 1655 — Gilles’ father, Nicolas Pinel, dies
  • October 11, 1655 — Gilles stands as godfather for Jean Nepveu and Anne Leodet’s daughter, Suzanne
  • November 1656 — Gilles buys land in Sillery, two plots away from Jean and Anne from Nicolas Patenostre for 80 pounds
  • July 28, 1657 — Gilles sells Sillery land for 120 pounds to Guillaume Routhier
  • September 2, 1657 — Gilles marries Anne Leodet
  • April 7, 1658 — Gilles and Anne’s first child, Catherine, is baptized.
Tagged , , , , , , ,

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 52 other followers

%d bloggers like this: