Sir Francois Levron dit Nantois (c1651-1714), and Acadia’s Pirate – 52 Ancestors #444

“Sir,” you ask?

Francois was a “Sir”?

Yes, indeed, yes, he was. You never know what secrets are tucked away in old, musty records.

Francois Levron was born around 1651 in France. His dit name, Nantois, seems to suggest he may have originated in or near Nantes.

Francois is absent in the first Acadian census of Port Royal taken in 1671.

André-Carl Vachon, Acadian historian, believes Francois Levron was a soldier who originally settled in Pentagouet, at the fort, shown on the map, above.

The remains of Fort Pentagouet have been located near present-day Castine, Maine, which is only about 110 nautical miles from Port Royal.

The Fort, or where it used to stand, has been excavated and marked with a cross, today.

Vachon reports that in 1672, a famine struck Fort Pentagouet, causing several men to be relocated to Port Royal for the winter.

As a soldier, after arriving in Port Royal, Francois would have lived in the barracks within Fort Anne.

If Francois was, indeed, at Pentagouet, that means he served alongside the man who would one day become his neighbor along the Riviere Dauphin at Port Royal – Pierre Doucet. Half a century later, their grandchildren would marry.

Based on the birth dates of their children, Francois Levron married Catherine Savoye/Savoie around 1676.

Port Royal was a sleepy little town, referred to by the priest, Louis Petit as “a mere depot for pelts.” Only 68 families lived in Port Royal and scattered up and down the river valley. It may have been a depot for pelts, but surprisingly, Petit requested a Nun be dispatched to open and run a boarding school for girls. It’s unclear whether that ever happened.

In the 1678 Port Royal census, Francois and his wife are living with the Widow Pesselet, along with one child, a boy, age 1. They have no livestock and no land, so it’s entirely possible he was still a soldier and the young family was living with the widow as a mutually beneficial arrangement. Based on the neighbors, I can’t tell exactly where they are living, but it seems to be quite close to Port Royal which would make perfect sense if he was or had been a soldier. The census may not have been taken or recorded in house-to-house order.

The widow Pesselet is Barbe Bajolet (1608-c1678), who was married to Isaac Pesselet before being widowed by Saviniue de Courpon. She was one of the few people to make the trek back to La Rochelle, remarry in 1654, then return to Acadia. The 1671 census shows that she had eight children living in France, with two married daughters in Acadia; Marianne Lefebvre, 21, who married Etienne Comeau, and Marie Peselet, 26, married to Jean Pitre. They lived 3 and 4 houses from their mother, respectively. Barbe had 1 cow and 5 sheep, but no land under cultivation.

Was there some relationship with Barbe Bajolet other than a young couple living with an elderly widow? Why was Barbe living with Francois Levron instead of living with her children?

By 1686, when the next census occurred, we find Francois Levron, age 33, living with his wife Catherine Savoye, age 20, which is clearly in error, with children Jacques, 9, Magdelaine, 5, Anne, 2, Marie 1, 8 cattle, and 7 sheep. They have no land under cultivation, once again, and notably, no gun.

They are living between Vincent Brun and Charles Melanson, which tells me which side of the river and corresponds to later mapped locations, showing their land directly across the river from Port Royal.

Fortunately, we have a map of Port Royal drawn in 1686. Based on later maps and the census, Francois Levron and family lived across from Hogg Island, the easternmost area of Port Royal, shown above.

We can easily see the location of the fort, which included barracks, and the Catholic church, then located outside the fort, where Francois would have worshipped, both as a soldier, and later, with his family. Nearby, a cross marks the cemetery where he may well be buried.

Today, the Acadian graves are unmarked, but landmarks such as the officer quarters, fort ramparts, church remains, later English burials and LIDAR data identify the location of the Acadian cemetery.

A New Governor

In 1687, a new Governor, Louis-Alexandre des Friches de Meneval was appointed in the ever-turning revolving door of Acadian governors. His orders were to encourage colonization and agriculture and prevent the English from trading and fishing in Acadia. Meneval brought 30 additional soldiers with him, raising the strength of the garrison to 90, but found the fort in significant disrepair.

His engineer, Pasquine, had suggested a complete rebuild of the fort, but Meneval hesitated and then denied the request to save money – a decision that changed history. Sometimes not to decide is to decide.

Ultimately, the cost was much, much greater.

By 1688, Acadia was having challenges. The younger people began moving to Beaubassin and points north in 1682, causing a labor shortage. Additionally, the Acadians were experiencing a shortage of manure, necessary for fertilizing fields. Who knew a manure shortage was even a thing?

Meneval’s report written in the fall of 1688 stated that:

The cost of living was high; there was a shortage of flour and of workers; some of the soldiers were old and disabled and had ceased to be of any use; the contingent of the preceding year had received bad muskets and that of 1688 had only 19 muskets between 30 soldiers, so that half of them were without arms; the surgeon was a drunkard, and the court had neglected to supply funds with which to pay him; a hospital and medical supplies were needed; his own gratuity had not been renewed, and he sought permission to go to France to report to the minister and settle some personal affairs.

I surely wish we knew who those old and disabled soldiers were. Were they married to local women?

Was the drunkard surgeon Jacques Bourgeois who founded Beaubassin in 1682, but continued to live at Port Royal? Did an area this small, and from France’s perspective, insignificant and “back-woodsy,” have more than one surgeon? It’s doubtful.

Meneval’s report went on to say that he, like his predecessor, Denonville:

Recommended that soldiers be allowed to marry and to become settlers; he also recommended that fishing, the country’s best resource, be developed by advancing loans to the settlers and protecting the coasts with armed barks; the settlement at Les Mines (Grand Pré, N.S.) was developing, and he had issued a few ordinances.

Does this mean that no soldiers had married local women, or simply that it was discouraged? We know that by the time Francois Levron’s daughter, Marie, married Jean Garceau in 1703, her husband was a soldier at the fort because the priest recorded that tidbit in the parish register, and the Governor signed as a witness.

Meneval closed his report by saying that the English “very much wanted Acadia.”

As his report was being written, English pirates were attacking and pillaging other French forts and seizing French ships as prizes, many of which had been destined for Port Royal carrying badly needed supplies.

In 1689, William of Orange, the new King of England declared war on France, which reverberated through the colonial holdings of both countries.

Acadia was the weakest, most exposed, and most poorly defended of the French colonies.

The situation in Acadia continued to deteriorate, with political infighting. In 1689, Meneval requested to be recalled to France, and said he would go even without permission, “preferring 100 times to remain three years in the Bastille rather than one single week here.”

That’s ugly, and I’m sure that attitude did not go unnoticed by either the soldiers or the Acadians.

In October of 1689, French ships did eventually arrive. On board was another new engineer, Vincent Saccardy, carrying court orders that instructed him to build a fort at Port-Royal forthwith, and sent a further sum of 5,000 livres. Saccardy had the old fort razed completely and drew up a plan for a vast enceinte, or wall enclosing the fort, with four bastions that would strengthen security by enclosing the governor’s house, the church, a mill, and the guard-houses. Importantly, it would also be able to hold barracks and receive the settlers in case of attack.

Saccardy set to work immediately, and in 16 days, with the help of the soldiers, settlers, and 40 sailors, succeeded in building half of the enceinte before it was time for the ship to leave again. Saccardy received an order to re-embark from from the Governor General of New France, Buade de Frontenac, leaving the fort unfinished. Robinau de Villebon, Meneval’s lieutenant, was also ordered to go to France, thus leaving the unhappy governor without an officer and a half-finished fort. I can only imagine his complete exasperation.

Meneval did not leave, but all things considered, he probably lived to wish he had.

Tensions were rising in the region and would soon boil over.

Battle of Port Royal

1690 was a horrible year.

Acadia needed an exceptional, courageous leader. They only had a reluctant one who wished nothing more than to go home to France, regardless of the repercussions.

Acadia had become increasingly enmeshed in the escalations between England and France, and specifically New England. In early 1690, two Indian raids in New England, one in New York and one in New Hampshire, spurred colonial governors to combine forces and launch a retaliatory attack on the French Acadians, whom they blamed for riling up the Indians and encouraging the attacks.

Prior to this time, Acadia and the New England colonies had a trading partnership. This alliance caused at least one of the logical picks for the retaliatory expedition’s commander to be rejected in favor of Sir William Phipps, a man with no military experience but who had found a treasure ship in the West Indies.

Lest we dismiss his prowess, Phipps sailed on April 28th from Boston with five ships, 446 men, and 58 mounted guns.

On the way, he rendezvoused with additional ships, and by the time Phipps approached Acadia, he had seven ships, 78 cannon, and 736 men, 446 of whom were militiamen. That was a force to be reckoned with.

On May 9th, Phipps sailed into the harbour, making contact with Pierre Melanson dit Laverdure, a bilingual French Huguenot who lived closest to the mouth of the river, near Goat Island.

It’s unclear whether or not Melanson knew Phipps was gathering intelligence information, but regardless, after discerning the state of the town of Port Royal with Melanson, Phipps proceeded to sail further up the river, to Port Royal. It was about 20 miles from the sea to Port Royal, with Melanson residing roughly half-way inbetween.

Alerted by sentries, Meneval had a gun fired to warn settlers of the approaching English ships, but only three men came to the fort. I wonder why. Did they not hear the gun? Did they think it wasn’t serious? Were they that angry with Meneval? Were they “too busy” planting?

Acadia was entirely unprepared for the coming onslaught.

The garrison itself only had about 70 soldiers. A few Acadian men in the area were available to help, eventually bringing the total available fighting men to somewhere between 85 and 90, according to different sources. Forty-two Acadian men were absent from the area.

Worse yet, thanks to years of neglect, deterioration, and being half-rebuilt, Fort Anne was in a terrible state of disrepair. Governor Meneval objected when the engineer was sent elsewhere, but to no avail. His protests went unheeded, the engineer did not return, and the fort remained incomplete.

The worst part was that the protective wall surrounding the fort was unfinished, none of the fort’s 18 cannons were mounted, and the entire fort only possessed 19 muskets. Of the Acadian households, which were scattered for another 20+ miles up the river, just over half, 53, had a gun of any kind. Of those, 14 households, mostly those with older sons, had more than one gun. To say the Acadians and French soldiers, together, were unprepared and unable to defend Port Royal was an understatement. Sitting ducks was more like it.

Whatever information Melanson had shared with Phipps, it may not have been everything.

Phipps did not go ashore at Port Royal, at least not initially. The following day, May 10th, Phipps sent an emissary to demand the fort’s surrender. Governor Meneval had little choice, given that they couldn’t defend themselves, not even in the slightest, not to mention they were outnumbered about 10 to 1. Having said that, Meneval was strongly criticized for putting up no resistance at all and simply capitulating.

Meneval dispatched the local priest, Father Louis Petit, to the English ships to negotiate the terms of surrender with Phipps.

  • Phipps agreed not to harm the Acadian settlers or their personal property, and to continue to allow unrestricted Catholic worship.
  • Meneval agreed that the fort, cannon, and merchandise belonging to the king and the company would be handed over to the English.
  • The officers and French soldiers would retain their liberty and be transported to Quebec.

However, Phipps refused to sign a document stating such, even when Meneval arrived onboard the ship on May 12th to seal the deal.

Several eyewitnesses confirmed the verbal agreement.

Never fail to obtain a signed document, although it’s unclear if that would actually have made any difference. However, it is probably the reason that the 1690 oath signature document survives today. The Priest took it with him because he didn’t trust Phipps – with good reason – as we’ll soon see.

Furthermore, the fact that Phipps refused to sign gives credence to the Acadian version of what happened after their surrender.

Surrender

What occurred next is without dispute. Why it happened remains debated.

When Phipps came ashore and saw how weak the fort and garrison were, he regretted the surrender terms he had agreed to – or he had planned this all along.

He immediately imprisoned the soldiers in the church and confined the governor to his home, under guard. Then, Phipps unleashed his men. All of which was counter to the agreement.

Despite the surrender agreement, the English soldiers completely destroyed both the fort and the town, running amok for the next 10 days and looting everything, including the property of the Acadians. Nothing was spared – not their clothes, not their gardens, not their livestock – nothing. The English then burned what was left, including homes, the stockade, and barns. At least 28 residences were torched. Some reports said 35, which assuredly included every home in Port Royal and probably every other home within visual sight of the fort, including the Levron homestead across the river.

Additionally, the English plundered and desecrated the church. Then, for spite, they killed the livestock.

Per the agreement, only the fort and the king’s property was to be surrendered to English control, not the residents’ personal property.

Instead, Acadia was essentially destroyed during planting season.

In a strange twist of fate, the English did not burn the mills, and didn’t bother to travel further upriver to the farms there. That’s probably what saved the Acadians and prevented them from starving.

The English claimed that while Meneval was meeting with Phipps, French soldiers and Acadians were seen carrying items away from the fort – booty which should have been included in the spoils for the English captors after the French surrender.

If Phipps couldn’t see the condition of the fort prior to signing, how, then, did English sailors see men INSIDE the fort carrying things away while Meneval was meeting with Phipps?

When Phipps learned of this “breach of trust,” he reportedly flew into a rage and declared the agreement void – turning the English soldiers loose to do whatever they wished.

The French said that Meneval hadn’t left detailed orders when he departed to meet with Phipps, so the French soldiers began drinking, then broke into a store belonging to one of Meneval’s political opponents. If those goods were privately owned, which it seems they would have been, they would not have been included in the surrender agreement, so while the soldiers were clearly up to mischief, it did not breach the agreement since the goods were private property.

Had it breached the agreement, it could have been easily remedied. Meneval didn’t seem inclined to quibble about anything and would probably have given Phipps anything he asked for. Phipps simply used this as an excuse to destroy Acadia.

Regardless, Meneval must have been furious with the men, but it no longer mattered.

Meneval and his second-in-command reported that when Phipps came ashore, he was extremely unhappy with the condition of the fort and the size of the garrison that he had obtained, suggesting that he had been taken advantage of.

However, given that Phipps spoke with Melanson before arriving at Port Royal, it’s unlikely that Phipps was unaware – not to mention that he could clearly see that the fort had no walls and no cannons were in view. The fort is within full sight from the river.

Phipps’ lament did, however, make a good excuse for what followed.

Biographers later suggested that Phipps needed the plunder to pay for the expedition, and he simply sought, and found, a “reason” to dispose of the verbal agreement. Given that he refused to sign the terms of surrender document, this may have become part of his plan as soon as he found out from Melanson that the fort was in horrible repair.

However, that still does not explain away the choice to destroy everything in sight. Burning the homes, destroying the Acadian farms, and killing their livestock was nothing short of cruel sport.

The English weren’t done yet. After forcing the Acadians to sign a loyalty oath, Phipps put an Acadian council in place to conduct business after the English left.

Then, Phipps kidnapped Governor Meneval, Father Abbe Trouve (of Beaubassin) and Father Louis Petit, holding them hostage along with between 50 and 58 of the French soldiers from the Fort Anne garrison. Sources differ on the number of soldiers that were transported with Phipps and the others back to Boston on the English ships. The soldiers at the garrison who were not transported had managed to escape to Les Mines.

Later in 1690, at least some of the men were exchanged for English hostages in Quebec.

One Acadian man, Pierre Maisonnat dit Baptiste, known often as just “Baptiste,” who would go on to become a notorious privateer, escaped his captors in Boston and made his way back to Acadia.

The destruction of Port Royal and the annihilation of Acadian homes and property, acts of intentional and explicit betrayal, not the actual act of warfare, destroyed any goodwill or trust between the two peoples. Up until that point in time, they had enjoyed at least a halting trade relationship – overtly, covertly, or both.

The 1690 Loyalty Oath

The English required that all of the Acadian men sign a loyalty oath which I transcribed here.

Wee do swear and sincerely promise that wee will be faithfull and bear true allegiance to his Majesty King William King of England, Scotland, France and Ireland.

So helpe us God.

This document was important, because unlike the verbal surrender agreement, no one could dispute that the Acadian men had signed. This signed oath was a critical protective piece, because the English could not claim that the Acadians had never sworn loyalty. Given the breach of trust between the English and French, the priest secreted this document beneath his garb when they were kidnapped and taken to Boston – protecting his parish flock.

We know the Acadian men were required to sign. What we don’t know is what happened to the French soldiers inhabiting the fort who were married to Acadian women, assuming that there were some.

Were they allowed to stay in Acadia? If they stayed, they assuredly would have been required to sign the oath.

What we do know is that Francois Levron did NOT sign the required oath in 1690, but we don’t know why.

Was he still a soldier in 1690?

Regardless of whether he was still a soldier or had previously retired, all available men were called to defend the fort, and Port Royal, so he assuredly would have been involved.

Was he one of the three men who showed up to help the soldiers?

Did he not sign the oath because he was one of the soldiers who escaped?

History tells us that 42 Acadian men were absent from the area.

Was he one of those men?

Where were they?

The 1686 census holds clues:

  • The 1686 census tells us that there were 104 households at Port Royal. Of those, almost half, 51, had no gun. Not for hunting, and not for defense.
  • Eight 1686 households were widows, none of whom signed in 1690. Apparently, the English weren’t worried about women swearing loyalty, only the heads of household – which I presume means the people most likely to rebel. They clearly didn’t know the women in my family😊
  • Nine 1686 households were males 70 or older who did not sign the 1690 oath, and who were not recorded in the 1693 census, so I presume they probably died before 1690. The English clearly weren’t concerned with these men either.
  • Of the 1686 households, another 16 are accounted for in 1690 by being known to have relocated to the northern Bay of Fundy colonies, such as Beaubasin, Pisiquid or Les Mines.

That reduces the number of 1686 heads of households that were eligible to sign the 1690 oath to 71.

  • Of those, a total of 36 signed in 1690, leaving a balance of 35 heads of household in the 1686 census who are unaccounted for, and not known to have died, who did not sign.
  • Of those, two were elderly and living with their children, but were alive in 1690 because they are recorded in the 1693 census.
  • In two more families, the men died and the widows had remarried by 1693, so it’s likely that their first husbands had died by the time the 1690 petition was signed.

After eliminating the people who were in the 1686 census, and who signed in 1690, there are still 13 men who did not sign, who were still living in 1693. So, why didn’t they sign?

Recall that 42 men were reported to have been away. Some probably returned during the 12 days that Phipps was anchored in the harbour, and they would have been forced to sign.

  • Are these 13 men ones who might have been away, perhaps in the northern settlements, scoping out their options and debating whether to move there or stay at Port Royal? Genealogy research shows that many families had moved north between 1686 and 1690, which is why they didn’t sign the loyalty oath.
  • Were those 13 men soldiers who escaped, then made their way back to their families after the British left in 1690? One would think the English would have made them sign when they were discovered back in Port Royal, although that didn’t happen with privateer Pierre Baptiste, who we know unquestionably escaped and is found in the 1693 Port Royal census.

Conversely, a few people had certainly been old enough to be recorded in the 1686 census, and had families, but were apparently missed in the Port Royal enumeration. They signed the 1690 oath and were recorded in the 1693 census.

All of that said, what this tells us is that there was a lot of upheaval and churn occurring in Acadia, and the 1690 attack certainly made things worse.

Imagine being away and returning to find your home gone, everything burned, and your family traumatized, if not worse.

Francois Levron did not sign, but the oath was required. No one was allowed to refuse, so he was clearly one of the men who was absent for some reason.

We can only speculate as to why, but given that they had no land in 1686, they would have been prime candidates to move North to where land was more plentiful and easier to acquire. If he had still been a soldier, he would not have been allowed to leave – at least not until French surrendered to the English in 1690. I can’t imagine that the English would have been receptive to any able-bodied French soldiers remaining – viewing them as potential sparks of dissent.

For whatever reason, Francois Levron and his family stayed at Port Royal.

By 1693, they have 15 arpents of land under cultivation, which perhaps explains why they did not move to Beaubassin or points north. It would be interesting to know how they obtained this land, and if it was before or after 1690.

Had they relocated, their children would have married different spouses, and history would have been completely different for their 15,000+ descendants.

They dug in and stayed, perhaps making the more difficult decision. Life was anything but easy.

After the Oath

Not long after Phipps left, two English pirate ships arrived and burned the rest of what had been spared. More livestock was killed, and more theft and plundering took place, including the desecration of the church.

Indeed, 1690 was just a horrible year.

I can only imagine how discouraged Francois must have been. He had four children under 13 and a new baby. How would he provide for them if his home burned, his land was ruined, and his livestock killed? How could he protect them?

What followed was an anxious, uneasy “peace” in Acadia, with frayed nerves and absolutely everyone constantly on edge. A smoldering quiet hung uneasily in the air, like the smoking embers of their homes.

Life was difficult at best. Homes had to be rebuilt, fields repaired as best they could, somehow crops had to be planted, assuming they could be given the salinity of the seawater if their dykes had been broken. Food was in short supply, and the people were emotionally and spiritually wounded.

English vessels from New England arrived to trade and check on the inhabitants, and of course, to take French prizes if they could find French ships lurking nearby.

When the English were gone, French privateers operated out of Port Royal, boosting the beleaguered economy by outfitting their ships from local merchants and tradesmen. The privateers also attracted local young men as crew with the promise of prizes and plunder and a way to exact revenge upon the despised English who had caused, and continued to cause, such pain.

In fact, the Acadians had their own privateer who didn’t even bother to hide.

Meet Pierre Baptiste!

Pierre Baptiste – Acadia’s Legendary Pirate

Pierre Maisonnat dit Baptiste, or simply Baptiste as he was commonly called, was a famous or maybe infamous pirate whose crew was primarily Acadian.

Baptiste had defended Acadia, standing with the brave Acadian men at Fort Anne in 1690. He was taken prisoner, along with other unnamed Acadians, and transported to Boston, but escaped.

Bravo Baptiste! I hope you took other Acadian men with you!

Now hot under the collar, he renewed his efforts against the English, and committed to protect Acadia. It’s unclear, but this may have been when Baptiste actually turned to privateering, commissioned by the French who governed the rest of New France.

Baptiste was quite successful, taking eight ships in 1691 on his first mission, one within sight of Boston Harbour.

Brave, intelligent and incredibly confident, there was nothing Baptiste wouldn’t try. On the flip side, he was also wiley, scheming and willing to do whatever was necessary to accomplish a goal. I’m not sure if those were good qualities or bad, considering. He was both renowned as a celebrated hero and a brazen, rascally scoundrel, depending on who was doing the telling. One thing was certain, he was a colorful character and one you assuredly wanted on your side.

France praised Baptiste and celebrated his successes. England detested him.

The English retaliated. Again. In 1693, they attacked Port Royal, burning a dozen houses and three barns that were full of grain.

Pierre, our privateer friend, is actually recorded on the 1693 Port Royal census, married to Magdelaine Bourg, with 30 arpents of land and, wait for it…15 guns. In that census, three men had four guns, and five had three. No one else even came close to Pierre’s arsenal.

I can hear the census taker now:

“How many guns to you have?”

Baptiste: “Guns…hmm…let me see. Do you mean here in the house?”

“No, altogether.”

Baptiste: “Altogether meaning here in Port Royal or everyplace?”

You can see where this is going, right?

Whatever the “real” answer, the recorded answer was 15, which dwarfed everyone else’s count.

Francois Levron would have known Baptiste well. In 1690 at the fort, a brother-at-arms, and at church, of course. Every time an English scare materialized, the men would have rushed to the fort together. Sometimes, it wasn’t just a scare. All too often, the alarm was the real deal. The Redcoats were coming!

The town of Port Royal was actually quite small, with most of the population scattered between Port Royal and and the upriver communities – sprinkled over the next 15 or 20 river miles. Everyone pretty much knew everything about everyone.

If you’re a privateer, you’re going to anchor your ship right in front of the fort, which is also adjacent to the Port Royal “business district,” such as it was. It would be where the blacksmith shop was located, the armorer, the tavern, merchants, and so forth.

The local merchants would have loved Baptiste, because he came with money or goods to trade. They all needed to rebuild.

It was also where all the local people congregated to attend to business, attend church services, or bury the dead – so a pirate sure to make contact with the local boys who were your next starry-eyed recruits.

Large ocean-going ships couldn’t travel further upriver due to the shape of the land, river, rocks, and tidal flow.

Know who lived right across the river from the fort? Francois Levron.

In 1693, Francois Levron, age 42, is living with Catherine Savoye, age 34, and their children, Jacques 14, Madeleine 11, Anne, 9, Marie, 7, Elisabeth, 3, Joseph, 2, and Jean Baptiste, 1. They have 10 cattle, 12 sheep, 6 pigs, and are living on 15 arpents of land. The family has one gun.

Interesting, isn’t it, that his child born between 1691 and 1692 was named Jean Baptiste. That could be entirely unrelated to Baptiste, or maybe not.

Francois Levron is still living in the same area, very near Pierre Doucet and Laurens Grange(r), across from the fort, just to the right of the white church. .

In 1686, Francois Levron had no land and no gun, but in 1693, the family had both.

In 1686, only 53 of the 104 households had guns.

In 1693, almost all families owned at least one gun, but some, especially with older sons, had more. Every family, with only three exceptions, is armed – and that probably just means that Pierre Baptiste hadn’t gotten those three men a gun yet.

Never again would Acadia be vulnerable and unarmed. Never again would they be left unable to defend themselves – at least not if Baptiste had anything to do with it. He probably had spare guns from the English prizes he took.

After what happened in 1690, these guns would have been as much for defense as hunting. You can fish without a gun, but you can’t fight off the British without one.

Baptiste armed the Acadians right under the noses of the British – who were in essence absentee landlords. Not only that, Baptiste lived at Port Royal, married a local woman (apparently among other wives elsewhere, but that’s a whole other story), and was recorded in the census – in plain sight. It looks like he lived right in Port Royal, probably in the house closest to his ship.

Talk about thumbing your nose at the English. I love this guy, regardless of his personal issues.

Not everyone in Acadia was happy with that arrangement, though. Some felt that Baptiste’s presence focused the wrath of the English upon Acadia.

Who’s to say if they were better or worse off for his presence?

Get the Popcorn!

Baptiste was entertaining, to say the least, and assuredly kept every tongue anywhere near Port Royal wagging.

In 1693, the census shows Baptiste, age 30, with his wife, Madeleine Bourg, age 16. He was actually about 34.

Madeleine Bourg, after having Baptiste’s child about 1695, wound up going back home to live with her parents when it was discovered that he already had at least one wife in France, Isabeau (Judith) Subiran – who he eventually brought to Acadia to live with him.

I kid you not!

Madeleine’s marriage to Baptiste was annulled for bigamy.

Lord have mercy on this rascally man.

Baptiste’s luck changed a bit in 1695, with his vessel running ashore. He escaped with his crew, as always. Escaping was his forte, and he seemed to be the luckiest man ever.

By 1697 he had been outfitted with a new ship and been sent raiding along the New England coast. He spent the rest of his life vacillating between being imprisoned in Boston, and escaping to return to someplace in Acadia – often Port Royal. His nickname should have been Houdini, or maybe Houdini should have been named Baptiste..

Baptiste was living in Port Royal in 1703, or at least his French wife was. She died on October 19th, 1703, and is noted as the wife of “Sieur Captain Baptiste” by Father Felix Pain, and was “buried in the presence of relatives” which would have been either her daughter(s) or Baptiste himself. Pirate or not, bigamist or not, he is addressed as “Sir” by the priest who was clearly aware of the situation. Everyone was “aware” of the situation, and I can’t imagine that there was any love lost between Baptiste and Madeleine Bourg’s family. After all, that marriage anullment made the child illegitimate and brought shame onto Madeleine – whether it should have or not. Fortunately, she remarried about 1697 and seemed to have a “normal” marriage the second time around.

Baptiste, it appears, was none the worse for that indiscretion.

In 1706, Baptiste became the port Captain of Beaubassin.

In January 1707, in Port Royal, Baptiste married yet another wife, Marguerite Bourgeois, after her second husband died. She was the daughter of the founder of Beaubassin. This marriage, frankly, shocks me given that Baptiste was a known bigamist. However, Marguerite’s father was the surgeon, Jacques Bourgeois, who was probably the man referred to as a drunkard in 1690 – so he probably had a few skeletons in his closet too. Baptiste and Bourgeois probably tipped a few together.

Maybe Baptiste was also an expert at “explaining” his behavior, too. Plus, he seemed to be something of a legandary “favorite son.” In all fairness, he defended Acadia when Acadia couldn’t really defend itself, and may have saved Acadia multiple times. Obviously his playboy ways were overlooked – although I doubt strongly if his first Acadian wife’s family forgave him.

Once again, in 1707, Baptiste came to the aid of Port Royal, serving with distinction when the British launched another brutal attack. Francois Levron was probably very glad to see his old friend once again.

Baptiste presumably died in Beaubassin, sometime after the 1714 census where he is listed as Sr. (Sieur) Maisonnat, along with Marguerite Bourgeois.

Regardless of his spicy personal life, especially in Catholic Acadia, he was always treated with respect in any written document. I’m guessing that everyone knew that without him, there might not have been an Acadia – and if so, their lives would have been much more difficult.

Everyone needs a folk hero, and perhaps better even yet, if they provide popcorn-grade entertainment. An Acadian soap-opera. I mean, who WASN’T interested in the latest chapter of “Baptiste – Acadia’s Beloved Bad-Boy Pirate”?

“Have you heard about Baptiste?”

“No, tell me, what did he do NOW?”

I’m still left wondering if Francois Levron was one of those unnamed Acadian men who escaped in 1690, and if he was in the company of Baptiste. Does our family owe the life of our ancestor to our unconquerable Acadian privateer?

Orchards

In the 1698 census, Francois Leveron, now age 50, is living with Catherine Savoye, age 38, along with children Jacque, 23, Anne, 14, Marie, 12, Elizabeth 10, Jeanne, 4, Jean-Baptiste, 7, and Pierre, 2. They have 10 cattle, 13 sheep, and two hogs on 15 arpents of land, along with 20 fruit trees.

Ah yes, Acadian orchards are, yet today, known for their wonderful fruit – especially apples. Many of the old apple trees remain on land that was once Acadian farms. On the census, almost every family had fruit trees.

These trees remain in the marsh where Catherine Savoye’s parents lived. Perhaps Francois and Catherine planted seeds from Catherine’s parents’ trees.

Next door to Francois in 1698, we find Clement Vincent, 22, married to Magdelaine Leveron, age 16, with 5 cattle and 8 sheep.

Francois’s oldest daughter has wed, although no church records from this time remain. The church had been burned, so she likely married in the rectory or perhaps in the little Chapel at BelleIsle.

MapAnnapolis shows both the Levron and Vincent properties.

On the Google Maps image, below, the left red arrow near the bottom, beside the creek, is the Clement Vincent land, whose wife was the daughter of Francois Levron.

On the map above, using the creek as an anchor point, and Hogg Island across the River, the Levron land was between the rightmost red arrow below Granville Road at the Public Works building, and the red arrow on the map below, where MapAnnapolis places their marker.

You can’t see these yards from the road, but I wonder what that circle in the back yard is.

However, the 1698 census itself is somewhat confusing, because both Francois Levron and Clement Vincent are reported smack dab in the middle of the group of families on the south side of the river, a dozen miles upriver, including the Girouard family near Tupperville whose land today still sports a large apple orchard.

Rene Forest is the household just before Francois, and Emanual Hebert is the household on the other side of Vincent. Are Francois Levron and his son-in-law actually living upriver, or is their census report stuck in the middle of those families, out of order? It seems unlikely that they are living upriver, especially since the 1700 census shows him among the same families across the river from Fort Anne at Port Royal

But then, 1714 shows the family upriver again.

Port Royal Becomes French Again

In 1697, Acadia was returned to French control by the Treaty of Ryswick which ended the King William’s War.

However, the transfer wasn’t effectuated until 1699 when Joseph Villebon, the new Acadian Governor, wrote:

It is more than 60 years since Port Royal was founded and the work of clearing the land and the marshes began. The latter have, up to the present time, been very productive, yielding each year a quantity of grain, such as corn, wheat, rye, peas and oats, not only for the maintenance of families living there but for sale and transportation to other parts of the country.

Flax and hemp, also, grow extremely well, and some of the settlers of that region use only the linen, made by themselves, for domestic purposes. The wool of the sheep they raise is very good and the clothing worn by the majority of the men and women is made of it.

Port Royal is a little Normandy for apples… [Several] varieties of apple tree are found at Port Royal, and russet pears. There are other varieties of pears, and cherries… There is an abundance of vegetables for food… cabbage, beets, onions, carrots, chives, shallots, turnips, parsnip, and all sorts of salads; they grow perfectly and are not expensive. Fine green peas… Beef…The sheep are very large… suckling pig… Hens, cocks, capons, pullets, tame geese… Eggs, butter… These are the things which can be obtained from them for food. They are hunters… hare and partridge are very numerous …there are also wild fowl.

In the 1700 census, Francois is listed as Leuron. This wasn’t the most accurate census ever taken. His age has decreased, which is a neat trick if you know how to do it. Catherine is 41, son Jacques’ age has also decreased and he is now 21, Madelaine is recorded as living at home again and is 18, and her husband is missing, Marie is 14, Elizabeth is the same age as two years earlier, 10, Joseph who was missing in 1695 is 9, Jean-Baptiste is 8 and the baby Marie Jeanne, is not shown at all. They still have 15 arpents of land, 12 cattle, 18 sheep and one gun.

There is a 1701 Acadian census, but the entire family is missing, with the exception of Marie who is now age 15 and working as a servant upriver in the home of Emanual Hebert. This is quite confusing.

By 1702, the fort had fallen into disrepair again – which seems like a constant refrain. Perhaps a more accurate telling of the saga is that France continually neglected Acadia, sometimes going 4 or 5 years without resupplying the soldiers, or bringing new recruits.

Is it any wonder things fell into disrepair and morale plummeted?

Once again, a new, expanded fort was planned, but progress was halting.

With only about 100 men, the new fort was estimated to be completed in 1703 or 1704. Not wanting to take that risk, Port Royal residents contributed as much as they possibly could. A new church and hospital was added inside the fort.

The governor in charge at the time, Jacques-Francois de Brouillan, was incompetent at best, and criminal at worst.

In the 1703 census, Francois Leuron is listed with his wife, unnamed, with 2 boys and 4 girls. Two are arms-bearers. Clement Vincent lives two houses away with his wife and one female child.

1704

Sure enough, the Acadian’s worst fears came to pass once again.

Angry again about Indian attacks in New England, the English sought revenge by attacking Acadia again in 1704. They burned homes, destroyed crops, killed cattle, tore down dykes and laid both the Fort and the town of Port Royal under siege.

For 17 days, the soldiers and possibly the townspeople holed up in the fort. The English attacked during that time, but there was no devastation like there had been in 1690. This seemed to be more spur-of-the-moment and focused on retaliation than a planned assault focused on capitulation. After 17 days, the English, apparently satisfied with their revenge, simply left.

The next year, in 1705, the English returned with 550 men in two gunboats, 14 transports, 36 whaleboats, and a shallop. They killed people and captured prisoners along the way as they sailed around Acadia – leaving destruction in their wake everyplace they went.

De Brouillan was replaced in 1705 with an acting governor, thankfully, and not long thereafter, 600 feet of the unfinished fort’s ramparts washed away into the river, caused by torrential spring rains.

I can only imagine the horror as the Acadians witnesses the devastation and wondered why God was betraying them.

Many of the 185 soldiers at the fort were young and inexperienced, and frankly, didn’t want to be there.

Governor Daniel Subercase arrived in 1706. A competent leader, Subercase realized the massive task that he faced. The fort remained unfinished, no supply ship from France had arrived for some time, and morale was at an all-time low.

Port Royal had come to depend heavily on privateers for protection. They kept the English ships at bay and transported supplies. They also brought captured English sailors to Port Royal to be used for exchange barter in the future. Because that inevitable “future” always came with the English.

The first thing Subercase did was to take 35 English prisoners to Boston to exchange for Acadian men being held. I’d surely love to know who those Acadian men were.

Subercase knew the fort needed to be completed quickly, and even sold his own belongings, including his clothes, to raise the funds to do so.

The problem was, he just couldn’t do it fast enough. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and neither was Fort Anne.

1707

The 1707 Acadian census lists Francois Levron using his more familiar name. “Le bonhomme Nantois,” which means “the good man Nantois,” with his wife, 2 boys 14 or older, 2 younger boys, 2 girls 12 or older and 1 younger girl. They are living on half an arpent of land with 2 cattle, 2 hogs and one gun.

What happened to his land?

That’s a lot less than the 15 arpents of land under cultivation in 1700, before the depradations of 1707 – so the census may have been taken after the English “visited” again. He may have still had the land, but it wasn’t under cultivation because – well, the English had destroyed everything again. Dykes kept seawater out and you can’t farm salty soil. Using the Acadian dyking system, it takes about 3 years for the salt to wash out of the soil and for it to become productive again.

Clement Vincent lives next door with his wife and 2 children, also with half an arpent of land under cultivation.

It’s not uncommon for military men to have a “dit” name, such as Nantois, which might reflect a location, something about them, or even a humorous nickname – long after they were no longer soldiers.

Nantois suggests someone from Nantes, a beautiful medieval town with a complex history that includes Romans, Protestants, and Catholics.

Was this castle in Nantes part of Francois’s life before Acadia?

Did he sail from Saint-Nazaire, a seaport on the Loire River, in Nantes, which is located about 30 miles upriver from the Atlantic Coast, one of the largest ports in the 17th century?

How I wish I could ask him.

In the 1707 census, Francois Levron’s neighbor is his son-in-law, Clement Vincent. Beside him is Pierre Doucet, and on the other side Julien Lore/Lord who is recorded using only his dit name, LaMontagne. This places Francois Leveron unquestionably on the north side of the river, which is documented in a 1708 map.

This close-up image of the river was drawn by Labat in 1708, reflecting the depredations of 1707. You can see the word, “nantois” written along the road. You can see 5 structures. Two or three are probably homes, given that at least one son-in-law is living right beside him. His other son-in-law, Jean Garceau is probably living there too. The other structures are probably barns. We can also see that most of the area is treed. No fields are evident, but the small area around the buildings looks like it’s marsh when compared with other known marshy areas.

Francois’s 1707 reduction in land on the census may very well reflect what occurred in 1707, depending on when the census was taken.

Yes, the English attacked – again.

The 1707 Attack

Assuming that Francois arrived in colonial France as a soldier, we don’t know how long that lasted. He could potentially have served until 1690 when the French surrendered Fort Anne to the English, and then became an Acadian resident with his wife and children. In 1690, he would have been about 40.

In 1693, Francois was assuredly NOT a French soldier, so he would have been earning a living from his 15 arpents of land.

In 1697, when France recovered Acadia, it’s unlikely that Francois would have begun serving again, although once a military man, always a military man.

Those skills never leave you and would have served to protect his family in 1704 and again, in 1707.

Acadia, for the beautiful bucolic river valley that it is, was not necessarily a peaceful place.

I suspect that some periods calmed down and lulled the residents into complacency, right up until something happened. Then, the old ever-present anxiety returned with a vengeance. Always living on the edge, and half expecting an attack any minute became a way of life all over again.

The fort was dilapidated. The old powder magazine was leaky and wet. You can’t fire cannons without dry powder. The fort was in terrible condition, and morale was at an all-time low. The Acadians at Port Royal were, once again, sitting ducks, but Subercase heroically attempted to rectify the situation as best he could – going so far as to sell his clothes to do so.

The next attack came in March of 1707, the governor only had 160 soldiers to defend not only the fort, but the town as well. Many of his soldiers were inexperienced and had no desire to fight. Essentially, they had been recruited from the “quays of Paris” and likely had no choice in the matter. Some had run away and defected to the other side.

Now, all Acadian men who could carry a gun were soldiers defending their homes, families, and homeland. No question remained about what happened when the fort could not be defended. Everyone remembered 1690 and their homes having burned multiple times by now.

They knew it would happen again – and it did.

Governor Subercase managed to hold the fort, somehow, against more than 1000 men from New England, but the sheer imbalance foreshadowed the future.

Having no other choice, the governor recruited pirates who were more than happy to assist the Acadians by taking English ships as “prizes.” While France ignored Subercases’s pleas for help, the Acadians lived off the booty of the corsairs for the next three years.

This did help, but it also enraged New England, whose ships were being lost and who could no longer easily access the fishing grounds on the Grand Banks.

They would steam and their anger would fester for three years. The attack in 1710 was unlike any other.

1710

Captured English sailors had been warning the Acadians for three years. 1708, 1709, and then 1710 that an attack was coming.

When the promised attack didn’t happen, perhaps the Acadians became a little complacent. What they did accomplish was to finish the fort. Almost.

On a crisp October day, Armageddon arrived in the form of 3400 English soldiers on 43 ships, with more firepower than existed in all of Acadia. Their sheer number of soldiers was three times the number of entire people, including women and children, in all of Acadia – not just Port Royal.

Can you imagine the shocked looks on Acadian faces as they realized the magnitude of the invasion and what was about to unfold – as the ships just kept coming and coming – one after another until they could no longer see the end of the ships in the river.

The Acadians stood no chance – yet – unlike 1690, they were not about to give up without at least some sort of resistance.

These people were incredibly brave!

Imagine how they felt seeing their former French comrades with the English – soldiers who had once served with them in the garrison – but had deserted and betrayed them.

The river began to look like a parking lot. There were so many ships that it took several days for them to all sail into position in the river.

Their only prayer now was for the long-absent French fleet to show up and barricade the English fleet into the river where they could be dealt with accordingly.

While that was a nice fantasy, maybe a dream, and assuredly a prayer, it didn’t happen.

No, the Acadians were entirely alone.

The sentry near Goat Island had sounded the alarm, so there was at least a little time to gather the women and children in the fort. The soldiers and Acadians rushed around inside the fort to finish as much as possible. They had received no supplies, pay or rations from France in four years – so they had been “making do” a lot – with whatever they had.

Francois’s wife and children, and his daughters and their children, who lived right across the river, were probably sheltered inside the fort. The upriver homesteads likely had a different safe plan.

The most secure location in the fort, by far, was the “Black Hole,” formerly the old powder magazine.

It was also the most terrifying – a subterranean chamber. Only one way in and the same way out.

I hyperventilate even looking at this, yet I forced myself to stand there last summer – to experience what my ancestors had.

What would happen if no one ever came and opened the door? There was only one answer.

By 1710, Francois was no spring children. He was 60ish, but I’m sure as long as he had a breath in his body, he was going to fight.

Francois’s oldest son, Jacques was 31, had just married Marie Doucet that January, and she was three months pregnant. Francois’s second son, Joseph, 19, and Jean-Baptiste, 18 would certainly have been standing beside their father, facing down the English. Pierre would have been 15, so I’m not sure where he would have been. My guess would be standing right beside his father and brothers.

Daughter Madeleine’s husband, Clement Vincent would have been fighting, and she and their four children would probably have been sheltering with her mother, Catherine Savoye, wherever she was. Catherine could have gone upriver to BelleIsle where she grew up, and hid in the hills behind the river. The English would never find them there.

Daughter Anne wasn’t married, but Marie had married Jean Garceau and probably lived in the third house on the Levron homeplace. Their third child was just a few months old. Jean Garceau would have been fighting with his father-in-law, and Marie was probably in the Black Hole with her mother. (I’m not even Catholic and I’m crossing myself.)

Daughter Elizabeth had married Michel Picot and had one child. Daughter Jeanne was 16 and Madeleine was 10.

If the fort fell and everyone inside died, literally the entire Levron family – three generations – would be wiped out in one fell swoop. Eight men fighting, and 16 women and children in the black hole. Nothing will motivate a man to fight more than that. Francois must have felt an incredible weight and desperation on his shoulders that day – far greater than any earlier battle – because his family was larger and he was responsible for every soul, including his unborn grandchild.

Maybe what he felt was unflinching determination.

And so, they stood firm, the Acadian men, French soldiers, a few Mi’kmaq, their brethren who had come to stand and die with them, and about 20 men from Quebec who had the bad luck to be there when the English arrived. Incredibly outnumbered, they held off the invading English as long as humanly possible.

I’m sure they prayed to all that is holy.

The English landed and advanced on both sides of the river, eventually surrounding the fort so closely that the people inside the fort could hear their mocking voices.

TheEnglish 1710 siege map shows their landing locations, along with the Acadian homesteads, and, of course, the fort.

The English had done their homework well and knew a great deal about the fortifications.

Hell’s Fire rained down on the Acadians for days. Gunfire and grenades were lobbed over the fort walls.

The French were being squeezed from all sides.

I wonder if Francois Levron could glimpse his home across the water. Was it standing? Was it burning? Had he let his livestock loose in the hills, hoping they would survive?

The Acadian men turned to guerrilla-style resistance – a fighting style they had learned from the Mi’kmaq, and one the English were unfamiliar with.

Still, they were vastly outnumbered, and the English had been able to mount their cannon on the dykes behind and across Alain’s Creek from the fort.

Armageddon! Hell’s utter fury!

And then…

Silence.

Uncanny, eerie silence.

The French were quite confused, but soon saw two English officers approaching the fort waving flags of truce. Truce, not surrender.

The English had to know that the Acadians really didn’t want to commit suicide, and after the beating they had been taking, were probably ready to surrender. The Acadians clearly saw the handwriting on the wall.

The English demanded a surrender. Subercase negotiated. Everyone’s future rested on him and his skill. What a heavy weight to hear.

Given his circumstances, Subercase did a fine job.

The Acadians would not be massacred, and neither would their families. The English prisoners were released from the fort, and the English boats headed upriver to fetch the Acadian women and children who had sheltered there. The absolute worst thing that the English could have done was to harm the Acadian families. However, the Acadians could do nothing except trust them.

The Acadians were allowed to keep six cannons and two mortars, although I have no idea why. Maybe as salve to their dignity. The English received the rest of what was inside the fort as spoils of war.

The men could not hold the fort, although they did their best in the face of insurmountable odds, and managed to last for 19 days. They also managed, thanks to Subercase, not to be slaughtered. They would live to raise their families, and perhaps, to fight another day.

The French soldiers were provided passage back to France on the English ships, and once again, England controlled Acadia and renamed Port Royal, Annapolis Royal.

On October 16th, the key to the fort was ceremonially passed from Subercase to Nicholson, the English commander, and the Acadians were allowed to march out of the fort with full honors, carrying the French flag, “arms and baggage, drums beating and colors flying,” even in defeat.

I can see Francois Levron marching through this archway, probably staring straight ahead, defeated, but head unbowed.

Labat drew another map in 1710.

This map shows the Nantois land once again, with four divisions of some type, but unlike the other homesteads that depict fields. There’s a 5th square to the right of the other four, too. That could have been the son who had just married.

To the left, around the bend in the river, Labat also drew the English camp of 1707. With the English camped right there, you know for sure that Francois Levron’s homesteads were burned.

On both the 1707 and the 1710 maps, you can see other settlers’ fields that were under cultivation. How did Francois Levron survive with no fields? Did he have another skill or trade? And what are those little Xs along the shore? Perhaps markers to keep ships from running ashore or encountering rocks?

Today, you can’t see much of anything from the road, unfortunately.

Based on the shape of the road, the shore and the river, it looks like the Levron home was located down this driveway, behind the houses.

I sure would like to know what those rough areas are in the back of the houses. I wonder if the homeowners have found anything resembling homestead remains. Generally rocks formed the foundation and make mowing or plowing impossible.

This 1753 map drawn and enhanced from a 1733 house map of Acadia shows the “Nantois” Levron property.

1714

There was only one more Acadian census, taken in 1714. But Francois had aleady died earlier in the year.

ChatGPT translated his death record thus:

On the twenty-third of June in the year 1714, I,
the undersigned, serving as parish priest at Port Royal in Acadia,
have solemnly buried François Levron, a resident of Port Royal,
about sixty years of age, who died of illness
after receiving the sacraments. In witness of which
I have signed the present register on the same day and year as above.
Fr. Justinen Durand, Recollect missionary

It looks like Francois died and was buried the same day. Perhaps he died early, and it was hot.

The Nova Scotia Archives translates his age as about 70 years old. I see soixante, not soixante-dix, and although I struggle with this old handwriting, I do think they are wrong this time. I’m very grateful for these indexed records, but I’ve learned always to retranslate.

How old was Francois when he died? What evidence do we have.

Using the various censuses that provide ages, we have the following:

  1678 1686 1693 1698 1700 1707
Francois 33 (1653) 42 (1651) 50 (1648) 49 (1651) Listed
Catherine 20 34 38 41 Yes
Jacques 1 9 14 23 21 Yes
Madeleine 5 11 M Clement Vincent 18
Anne 2 9 14 16 Yes
Marie 1 7 12 14 M 1703 Jean Garceau
Elisabeth 3 10 10 M 1705 Michel Picot
Joseph 2 9 Yes
Jean-Baptiste 1 7 8
Jeanne 4
Marie Jeanne 2 Yes
Pierre
Madeleine

Based on the various census documents, his birth year averages 1650. It looks like Francois was born about 1651, which means he was about 63 when he died. In any case, he was closer to 60 than 70.

Francois Levron may rest someplace in the garrison cemetery, in the fort where he probably lived at one time as a soldier, and where he so bravely fought against the English at least half a dozen times. Where he stood with Baptiste. Just a few feet from where Acadian history had been made over and over.

Francois still stands guard, someplace.

It’s possible that Francois was buried in the St. Laurent’s Chapel cemetery at BelleIsle, where many of the upriver Acadians are buried – most church records don’t specifiy which cemetery – only that they were buried and when.

We know that several residents were buried at St. Laurents after 1710 when the English controlled Annapolis Royal and the church there, such as it was.

The 1714 census reflects Francois’s death, showing only the “widow Nantois”, with 2 sons, and 1 daughter. However, they are living smack dab in the middle of seven Girouard families, clearly upriver. Other families, including his son-in-law Clement Vincent are listed “near the fort.”

This is the third time that we find the Levron family among the upriver families, so there’s some connection there, but we may never know what it is.

One Final Respect Paid

It’s a huge pain, but often viewing and translating every record of someone’s children and, minimally, the births of their grandchildren yields unexpected nuggets worth their weight in gold. Baptismal records, witnesses, and more.

Generally, those ancillary people aren’t indexed, but, honestly, they should be because, among other reasons, they document relationships and serve as a different kind of census. Specifically, who is still alive. Sometimes relationships are provided as well.

Francois’s unmarried son died in 1725 and was buried in the cemetery at St. Laurents. His death record is somewhat unusual in both it’s length and phrasing – not to mention that he is working as a domestic.

The Nova Scotia Archives extracted what they considered to be the important parts of the record, but it’s the first part of Pierre’s burial record that reveals more about Francois, even 11 years after his death in 1714.

On the twenty-first of the month of January, 1725, was buried in the cemetery of Haut-de-Rivière, in my absence, the body of Pierre Levron, about thirty years old, son of Sieur François Levron, resident of Port Royal in Acadia, and of Catherine Savoye, his father and mother (both) deceased, (he died) the previous day after having confessed, in the house of Pierre Giraud as well.

This record was recorded by Father de Breslay who had only just arrived in  Annapolis Royal that year. The Priest did not know Francois Levron personally, so his reference to him using the honorific of Sir, especially when he did not use that for everyone else, has to reflect how Sieur Francois Levron was remembered in the Acadian community more than a decade after his death.

A good man, “bonnehomme Nantois,” and a brethren at arms with Acadia’s privateer, Baptiste, both known as Sieur.

Origins

Who were Francois’s parents? Is he related to Levron family members in France? Is there any possibility of tracking Francois to parish records in France?

Francois’s nickname, “Nantois” provides us with a potential clue about his origins, but his Y-DNA might give us answers – if a male Levron who descends from Francois were to take the Y-DNA test.

Y-DNA tracks a male’s direct paternal line both recently, to men with a common or similar surname, and also back in time beyond the advent of surnames.

If Francois originated in Nantes, whose residents are known as Nantais, he might match another male from that region. He might have an ancient connection to the Namnetes, a tribe of Gaul who inhabited what is now Nantes during the Iron Age, or perhaps to the Romans who followed.

If you are a Levron male who descends directly through your paternal line from Francois, I have a DNA testing scholarship for you. Let’s learn together. Please reach out.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

New Mitotree Haplogroups and How to Utilize Them for Genealogy

Have you received a new Mitotree haplogroup? Or maybe you didn’t? Are you wondering why you might not have received a new haplogroup? How do the new haplogroups work anyway? And how do you work with them?

Great questions!

Approximately 75% of full sequence testers received a new haplogroup with the Mitotree Beta release, which means that about 25% did not. Keep in mind that new sequences are being added to the database, so the tree will be sprouting new haplogroups with each subsequent release.

Check For Your New Haplogroup

Click on any image to enlarge

Sign in to your account at FamilyTreeDNA and look at the Badges in the bottom right corner of your page.

Your Beta haplogroup is your new Mitotree haplogroup, and your Legacy haplogroup is your old one – prior to Mitotree. They may be the same. My haplogroup, shown above, did not change.

This is a good place to note that the tree is not “done,” yet, nor will it ever be. New samples are added daily as more people test and as academic samples from published papers are added to the database as well. Additionally, FamilyTreeDNA is tweaking the algorithm, so the tree branching structure may change from time to time.

When your haplogroup changes, you’ll receive a notification email.

Some people’s haplogroup will remain the same. There can be several reasons why you might not have received a new haplogroup.

Before we discuss that, I’d like to stress that your haplogroup remaining the same isn’t exactly a bad thing because there is SO MUCH new content for everyone. It’s like receiving a whole new book about your mother’s direct matrilineal line.

mtDNA Discover Offers 13 New Reports for Everyone

MtDNA Discover was released with the new Mitotree, and it includes a dozen new reports for EVERY haplogroup.

Discover is available publicly, and also through your FamilyTreeDNA dashboard which provides a customized experience for mtFull testers with additional information that is not available in the free version.

Think of these Discover reports as chapters in your personal book – all about you and your matrilineal ancestors.

The Discover reports are provided in addition to the tools in the mtDNA Results and Tools section of your dashboard on FamilyTreeDNA.

There’s something for everyone, even if you don’t have a new haplogroup. There’s certainly new information that will help with your genealogy and with understanding the history and ancestral journey of your mother’s direct line maternal ancestors.

Three Reasons Why You Might Not Receive a New Haplogroup

Ok, so why might you not have received a new haplogroup?

The first reason that you might not have received a new haplogroup assignment is the simplest. The new tree is only updated periodically.

After your results are returned, and before the next Mitotree version is available, your Mitotree haplogroup Badge will show as “Analyzing.”

If one of your matches is waiting for a new haplogroup, their Mitotree Haplogroup will show as “Pending Analysis.”

There is no published tree-update schedule, but you’ll receive your new haplogroup soon.

However, you can probably determine your new haplogroup quite easily. If you have any exact matches on your mtDNA Match page, their haplogroup will be your haplogroup as well, so check your full sequence mtDNA Matches on your dashboard for a hint.

For, example, here’s one of my exact matches with their haplogroup.

The second reason you might not have a new haplogroup assignment is that you may not have taken the full sequence mitochondrial DNA test – mtFull.

Only testers with full sequence test results can receive an updated haplogroup, because the full mitochondria needs to be tested. The older HVR1/HVR2 Plus tests only tested a fraction of the full sequence – around 1000 locations of the 16,569 locations tested in the full sequence test.

If you have only taken the HVR1 or HVR1/HVR2 level test, you will only have one badge, and it will say “Predicted.”

The haplogroup for the Plus test is predicted at a high level based on those 1000 locations, while the full sequence test tests the entire mitochondria and uses all locations to confirm your most granular and detailed haplogroup possible.

On your dashboard, if both the Plus and Full icons are pink, you have taken the mtFull test. If the “Full” is grey, you have not. You can click on that grey button to upgrade.

You can also navigating to on Add Ons and Upgrades in the top bar to upgrade to the full sequence test.

The third reason why someone might not have received a new haplogroup assignment is if they didn’t match with anyone else who has the same mutations, or variants, for a particular haplogroup.

In other words, if my mitochondrial DNA has had a mutation or two since my assigned haplogroup was formed and no one else has tested that has those exact same mutations, there’s no one else to form a new haplogroup with, but there might be in the future as additional people test and the tree continues to grow.

Think of those additional mutations, called Private Variants, as foundation blocks, or haplogroup seeds since they are still private to you, and not yet used for a haplogroup.

It’s easy to see if you have any Private Variants by clicking on Discover on your mitochondrial dashboard.

Scientific Details – Private Variants, Building Blocks, Haplogroup Seeds

If you have taken the full sequence test, click through to mtDNA Discover from your dashboard. If you aren’t signed in and click through from your dashboard, you won’t be able to see your variants or other information customized for you.

Navigate to Scientific Details, then click on the Variants tab.

Click on image to enlarge

Be sure that “Show private variants” is toggled to “on,” which is blue with a checkmark.

At the very top, you’ll see two things:

  1. Your haplogroup, which is indicated by the solid pink square.
  2. An F number followed by your private variants, if any, and if so, which ones.

I have no private variants or haplogroup seeds available to form a new haplogroup, so I have no ability to receive a more refined haplogroup.

Haplotype Clusters

However, I’m NOT out of luck, because I have something else – a Haplotype Cluster, indicated by having an F#. My Haplotype Cluster is F1752176 and is indicated by the pink outlined box.

I wrote about haplotype clusters in the article, Mitochondrial DNA: What is a Haplotype Cluster and How Do I Find and Use Mine?.

In a nutshell, haplogroups are only formed around reliable, relatively stable mutations, meaning those that are reliable and don’t tend to randomly mutate back and forth.

You may match exactly with a group of other people who share the same haplogroup, PLUS the same unstable mutations that don’t qualify to become haplogroup-defining.

Those groups of two or more people who match exactly on all mutations are members of the same  Haplotype Cluster – and Haplotype Clusters can be INCREDIBLY genealogically useful. In fact, let me go out on a limb here and say that I think they are even more genealogical useful than haplogroups, although both have their strengths. Let’s look at a good example.

Using Haplogroups and Haplotype Clusters Together

My family member, Jim, had a surprise waiting for him in his mitochondrial DNA. When he received his new haplogroup, I took a look to see what new information might be forthcoming.

His legacy haplogroup was V, and his new Mitotree haplogroup is V216a2 which is significantly more refined.

Before Mitotree and Haplotype Clusters, there wasn’t much to differentiate him from his other matches.

Let’s take a look at JUST his genetic information before adding genealogy.

If I click on the Time Tree for haplogroup V216a2, I see two testers with no cluster, meaning no one matches them exactly, and Jim’s cluster number F9712482.

Keep in mind that Jim might not match everyone in his haplogroup – only people at or beneath the matching threshold.

Jim’s new haplogroup, V216a2 was formed about 1056 CE, or about 975 years ago. Note that as the tree changes and becomes more refined, haplogroup formation dates change too. A haplogroup’s birth date is an approximate year when the mutations occurred that define that haplogroup, based on surrounding mutations and mutation rates.

Many people look at a haplogroup, especially one with a birth date of, say, 1056 CE, which is long before the formation of surnames, shrug their shoulders, and give up.

Don’t. Do. That.

So, let me say this as loudly as possible.

A haplogroup’s most recent common ancestor is NOT the EKA (earliest known ancestor) with any individual match. It’s the approximate date when ALL of the people with this haplogroup share a common ancestor.

When looking at haplogroups, don’t let locations thrown you. Keep in mind that country boundaries are fluid. What was at one time Hungary could be Germany or Romania or something else just a few years earlier or later. So don’t discount that information either. Think regions and take into consideration that people move around – and some people enter incorrect genealogy/location information.

Your common ancestor with the people, individually, who share your haplogroup,  is sometime between the haplogroup formation date and today. Everything else is a clue. 

Think about it this way. You share a haplogroup with your mother, and while you are both descended from the woman who lived when your haplogroup was formed – your most recent ancestor with that haplogroup is your mother – not the woman 975 years ago. Your most recent common ancestor (MRCA) with your mother and her sister is your grandmother – a lot closer in time than 1056 CE. 1056 CE the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) date for everyone in the haplogroup, not between you and any one person in particular. The MRCA date for you plus another person is sometime between now and 1056 CE.

So, let’s take a look at Jim’s results.

Finding Jim’s Gold Nugget

Jim has 27 coding region matches, of which six share both his new haplogroup, V216a2, AND Haplotype Cluster F9712482. His other matches are split between three related haplogroups, and multiple haplotype clusters.

Most of his family, meaning three of his grandparents, were from eastern Europe, meaning Germany, Hungary or the Austro-Hungarian empire as it was recorded in American records. Many genealogical records no longer exist in that region, or if they do, you have to know exactly where to look.

We were brick-walled with Jim’s matrilineal great-grandmother, Sophia Smith, who was born about 1877 and seemed to appear out of thin air.

Thanks to the new haplogroups, combined with Haplogroup Clusters, I knew to focus on his matches in this order:

  • Same haplogroup plus same Haplotype Cluster
  • Same haplogroup plus different Haplotype Cluster, because clusters are built around identical but less reliable mutations
  • Related haplogroup – this is unlikely to yield direct genealogical results, but can be very useful in terms of origins

Of Jim’s exact matches with the same Haplotype Cluster, three showed an earliest known ancestor (EKA) and three did not. Three provided a tree, and three did not. Of the trees, one was private and the other two provided no useful insight.

Of the people who provided EKA information, one EKA matches their tree information, one conflicts with their tree. After viewing their tree, it appears that they did not understand that the mitochondrial EKA is the most distant ancestor in your mother’s direct maternal line. They listed someone in their grandmother’s paternal line.

I find this easiest to deal with if I organize the research in a chart for each match.

Match # Earliest Known Ancestor EKA Location Tree Comment
#1 No No No
#2 No No No
#3 No No Yes – Private
#4 Yes – only one name “Egan” with brith and death dates Ireland Yes – Egan is surname of their grandmother EKA person listed tracks up wrong line in tree
#5 Yes Hungary No Elizabeth Schmidt Hornung b1888 d 1930
#6 Yes No Yes – matches EKA Ancestor born NC in 1811, no common names or location

Match #5 provided an EKA, but no tree, showed a country of origin as Hungary, and the identity of her EKA as “Elizabeth Schmidt Hornung b.1888 and d.1930.”

Hmmm…three things of interest here:

  • The location of Hungary, even though the oral history in Jim’s family said his great-grandmother was a Smith from the US, maybe New York. Jim’s family, including Sophia’s husband, was Eastern European. Remember, I couldn’t find any early records for Sophia Smith.
  • Smith is the anglicized version of Schmidt.
  • Hornung may be a married name.

I’m a genealogist, and Jim’s match had provided enough information that I was able to identify her ancestor, Elizabeth Schmidt, and find additional information.

Sure enough, Elizabeth Schmidt immigrated as an adult by herself, married Karl Hornung in Richland County, Ohio, the same location where Jim’s family was living. That information led me to another record, identifying a brother whose marriage license application provided their parents. Elizabeth’s parents were Ignatius Schmidt and Catherine Schlowe, and her sister was Sophia Schmidt, Jim’s great-grandmother. Deeper digging suggests that Ignatius and Catherine were from Timisoara in what is now Romania. I have been unable to confirm with birth, death or marriage records, but that part of Romania was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire during that timeframe.

Immigration of siblings, alone, at different times after the 1910 census, without their parents, made this particularly difficult, as did cultural and language barriers – but mitochondrial DNA, and Jim’s Haplotype Cluster in particular, provided the key I needed.

Jim’s common ancestor with his Schmidt match is the birth date of Catherine Schlowe, which was probably about 1850 – NOT 1056 CE, which is the haplogroup formation date.

Don’t get discouraged by misinterpreting haplogroup origin information or missing genealogy information. All you need is that one good match. That gold nugget. Don’t forget that you can email your matches and ask for more information.

The Match Time Tree makes all of this easier.

Match Time Tree

The Match Time Tree shows match, haplogroup, location and Haplotype Cluster information all in one place.

It’s easy to use the Match Time Tree to view how all of your matches are grouped, along with their EKA, displayed together in one place.

Here are all of Jim’s matches. They were all originally haplogroup V, but now his matches have been divided into V216, V216a, V216a1, and V216a2 (Jim’s haplogroup).

I’ve obfuscated the names of his matches, but the EKA, when provided, is there. Each person is grouped into their haplotype cluster of exact matches, and the user-provided country of origin for their ancestor is shown by their profile photo.

Jim’s match with the descendant of Elizabeth Schmidt is indicated in the red boxes, and Jim has updated his own EKA and her country of origin.

Who is waiting for you in your match list?

Will extending and building out trees help?

Have you emailed your matches to see what additional information they can provide?

Female ancestors are sometimes the MOST difficult to find, often due to name changes  – so be sure to mine every possible avenue and don’t become discouraged if you don’t immediately see something “familiar.”

Every generation in a female lineage will probably carry a different surname and the match you need may not have researched as far back as your ancestor, or vice versa.

Don’t forget that autosomal matching can play an important role in confirming relationships.

But wait – there’s STILL more about Jim’s ancestors…

There’s Even More to Discover

There’s more to discover about Jim’s ancestors.

Jim’s Discover Ancient Connections tells me that 5200 years ago, Jim shared a common mitochondrial DNA ancestor with two Hungarian and a Slovakian Yamnaya cultural burial whose remains date to about 2800 BCE, or about 4800 years ago.

To be clear, the common haplogroup between Jim and all three burials dates to 5200 years ago, when their common haplogroup was formed, but the remains themselves are from about 4800 years ago – so only about 400 years difference between the haplogroup birth date and when those people lived, died and were buried.

How close are the remains to the location of Jim’s ancestor in Timisoara?

Using Google Maps, I placed the three Yamnaya burial locations (blue pins), plus Timisoara.

The two most distant points, Timisoara to Lesne, Slovakia, walking, is 393 km or 245 miles. The closest burial to Timisoara, located in Sárrétudvari, Hungary, is 157 km  or 119 miles.

So Jim’s ancestors remained in the same general area for someplace between 4,800 and 5,200 years. And, his great-grandmother was born not far from those burials. That alone is an INCREDIBLE find!

So, what happened to the people of the Yamnaya culture? I think we might have gained some insight into that question.

So, there’s even more to discover using Discover.

You don’t know what you don’t know about your matrilineal ancestors, so test your mitochondrial DNA at FamilyTreeDNA and break through those brick walls. I’ve already solved multiple long-standing mysteries and added generations to my own tree.

Plus, I really, REALLY want to know where every single ancestor “came from,” what culture they were a part of, and when. History is part of genealogy – and a part of our ancestral journey that we can’t reach any other way.

Fortunately, your matches, Scientific Details, Time Tree, Match Time Tree, and Ancient Connections help you visualize all of these various situations and aspects of your ancestor’s history, and evaluate your results.

Both haplogroups and Haplotype Clusters provide very fine degrees of granularity that were not previously available. MtDNA Discover adds a dozen new reports, and Ancient Connections allow you to time travel.

Let me know what you discover!

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Mitochondrial DNA: What is a Haplotype Cluster and How Do I Find and Use Mine?

A new feature called Haplotype Clusters was released with the new Mitotree and mtDNA Discover.

MtDNA Discover includes a dozen new reports for EVERY haplogroup. You can use the public version of Discover with any haplogroup.

However, there are additional included features for mtFull testers, and other information provided will be much more detailed and robust because the mtFull test is much more specific than any partial haplogroup.

If you have only taken the older partial-coverage HVR1 or HVR1/HVR2 tests at FamilyTreeDNA, you can sign in and upgrade, or if you have received a partial haplogroup from another source, you can take the mtFull test at FamilyTreeDNA.

OK, I’ve Taken the mtFull Test, So How Do I Access My Discover Reports?

Sign in to your FamilyTreeDNA account, then from your mtDNA dashboard, click through to Discover to access your Discover reports.

Discover reports are in addition to the tools in the mtDNA Results and Tools section of your dashboard on FamilyTreeDNA.

Definitions

Let’s start with some basic definitions.

  • Haplotype – Your individual DNA results at specific adjacent locations that are generally inherited together.

Other people may have the same haplotype as you. If they have mutations that you don’t have, or vice versa, then you have different haplotypes. People with the same haplotypes match exactly on whatever type of DNA is being discussed, such as Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA, with no mutations or differences. Multiple people who match exactly are considered a Haplotype Cluster.

  • Haplogroup – A group of specific mutations that identify people who share a common genetic clan. Haplogroups, based on a series of mutations, can be traced forward and backward in time.

A haplogroup is a grouping of haplotypes with the same foundation mutations. You will share those mutations with other people in your haplogroup, but you may have other, different mutations that form your haplotype.

  • Other people will have the same haplogroup as you, because a group implies two or more.
  • You may or may not share a haplotype with other people. If you share the exact same haplotype with at least one other person, the two (or more) of you form a Haplotype Cluster

What is a Haplotype Cluster?

Haplotype Clusters are new and have been added to provide additional granularity to the new Mitotree, making results more genealogically useful.

In addition to your mitochondrial DNA haplogroup, you may also have a Haplotype Cluster if you took a full sequence mitochondrial DNA test, called the mtFull.

A mitochondrial DNA haplogroup, such as J1c2f for example, means that everyone within that haplogroup has the same foundation grouping of mutations. You may have additional mutations, or even some missing mutations, based on the older Phylotree Build 17, which was last updated in 2016.

Click to enlarge any image

To see your Extra and Missing Mutations in the Classic, or Phylotree build, on the FamilyTreeDNA mtDNA dashboard, click on “See More,” then on Mutations.

In the recently released Mitotree, which reconstructs the tree of humanity with more than 35,000 new branches, or haplogroups, many of those “extra” or “missing” mutations have been used in the definition of new haplogroups.

At FamilyTreeDNA, on your matches page, you’ll see your matches, like always. Matching has not changed.

You’ll notice that some are exact matches, and some may be “1 step” or more distant. That means they have one qualifying genetic mutation difference from you.

Some mutations have always been excluded from matching because they are unreliable. In my case, location 315.1C is one of those. You can read more about matching here. Matching has NOT been rerun with the release of the new Mitotree, but may be in the future.

The new Haplotype Clusters designate other people who you literally match exactly, with no differences – and no excluded marker locations.

So, let’s compare how I match people and what it means:

  • Haplogroup match – I match these people at the haplogroup level, which can reach back hundreds or even thousands of years ago. In addition, I may match them on both other relevant, reliable mutations, and/or unreliable mutations. On the current matching page, the mtDNA Haplogroup is the PhyloTree Build 17 haplogroup. Before Mitotree, matches to any other haplogroup were not displayed. Now, new haplogroups of my J1c2f matches, if they received a new haplogroup, are shown in the Mitotree Haplogroup column. My common ancestor with a match can have occurred anytime between when the haplogroup was formed and today.

Some people receive partial haplogroup level matches from other testing companies that also don’t include matching. A haplogroup match alone isn’t particularly useful except when it can eliminate a connection.

That’s why we need matching on the Matches page.

  • FamilyTreeDNA Matches Page Match – On the Matches page, I match these people at the haplogroup level as calculated based on Phylotree Build 17, as shown in the mtDNA Haplogroup Column at the Genetic Distance displayed. This means that I match them on the haplogroup markers PLUS possibly other markers.

My first match with Per, above, is listed as an exact match. Before Haplotype Clusters were introduced, I had no way of knowing if I matched him on all of my mutation locations, or just the ones that are NOT excluded from matching. But now I do.

My Haplotype Cluster number is F1752176. I know this because the little circle is checked and blue – meaning this person and I share both a haplogroup in the new Mitotree, and a Haplotype Cluster.

Ronald, above, is a match with a “1 step” Genetic Difference. I know for sure that I match him on the haplogroup markers. I also know that we don’t match on one non-excluded marker – but I have no idea which one. We may also match, or not, on some of the excluded markers. But we are not members of the same Haplotype Cluster. The blue circle is not checked.

You cannot be a member of more than one Haplotype Cluster, because everyone in a Haplotype Cluster must match exactly.

  • Haplotype Cluster – A Haplotype Cluster, if you have one, is a random F number assigned to people whose mitochondrial DNA matches exactly – and by exactly, I mean without excluding unstable or unreliable mutations.

You can see my Haplotype Cluster number, above, in the Mitotree Haplogroup column, in addition to my new Mitotree haplogroup – which is still J1c2f and did not change from the earlier version. In Mitotree, some people will receive new haplogroups, and some will not – based on your and other people’s mutations.

My match with Ronald is one step difference. Our haplogroup is the same, so that circle is checked, but Ronald belongs to a different Haplotype Cluster, so that circle is not checked, and he has a different F number. I can’t see his mutations that are different from mine, but I know he matches everyone else in his Haplotype Cluster exactly.

Let’s look at another example.

Click on any image to enlarge

Looking at my match list, I can see that beneath my matches’ haplogroup, which is the same as mine, F1752176 is checked and the checked circle is blue, which means that I share that Haplotype Cluster with those people. Everyone in that cluster has all of the same mutations in addition to the haplogroup-defining mutations, which is why both the haplogroup and haplotype circles are checked. I match both.

If I look at my Matches page, or the mtDNA Discover Time Tree, or Matches Time Tree, I can see that I have many exact haplotype matches, which means:

  • We all share haplogroup-defining mutations and
  • We match exactly on all other mutations as well

Before Haplotype Clusters were introduced, I had no way of knowing which of these people I matched exactly if no mutations were excluded.

To summarize, a Haplotype Cluster is a group of people who all match each other exactly within a haplogroup. People in Haplotype Clusters always match exactly, which INCLUDES mutations that are EXCLUDED from haplogroup formation and matching.

If you don’t match someone exactly, you’re not in the same Haplotype Cluster. You can either be in a different cluster, or no cluster at all if no one matches you exactly.

Everyone has a Haplotyupe Cluster number, but you will only be a member of a Haplotype Cluster if you have an exact match to at least one other person.

Don’t Ignore Other Clusters

The F number itself isn’t important. What is important is that Haplotype Clusters serve to focus your genealogy on that cluster first. However, understand that because the Haplotype Cluster does include unreliable or fast-mutating markers, it’s possible for you to share a more recent ancestor with people in a different cluster. It depends on the marker and the mutation, so don’t discount that possibility.

Who Can See Haplotype Cluster Mutations?

The only people who know the exact mutations of the people in a specific Haplotype Cluster are the members of that cluster – because they all match exactly.

If you scroll down your match list, you’ll notice that people, like Anastasia, who have a genetic distance of 1 step or greater have a different F Haplotype Cluster number, which is expected.

You may also notice that someone who is an “exact match” with you on the match list is assigned to a different Haplotype Cluster, such as Rose and Per. Rose is not in my Haplotype Cluster, but Per is, even though they are both “exact matches.”

Remember, “matching exactly” on the match list excludes unreliable mutation locations. Haplotype Clusters always match exactly and include all mutations. So, this tells me that I match Per on all mutation locations, regardless of their stability, and I match Rose on all stable locations, and we mismatch on at least one location that was excluded from matching.

However, the only people who know the exactly mutations of any other person are me and Per, because we both share a Haplotype Cluster. People in other clusters, or without a cluster, don’t know and can’t identify the mutations in clusters not their own.

  • The only thing I can tell about my match with Rose is that we don’t share one of the unreliable markers, because we are an “exact match” on the match list which excludes unstable markers. I have no idea whether I carry that unstable marker, or she does, or which marker it is.
  • The only thing I can tell about my match with Anastasia is that we don’t share at least one stable marker, because we are a “1-step” genetic distance, and we could also not share some of the unstable markers. I have no way of identifying those markers.
  • I know that I match Per exactly on all markers, including unstable or unreliable markers.

Included Versus Excluded Markers

Sometimes people who are listed as exact matches on your Matches page are assigned to different Haplotype Clusters. This is because mutations such as 309 and several others are included in Haplotype Clusters, but excluded from matching and haplogroup formation. The reason they are excluded is because they are sometimes unreliable – but they may be useful to your research. They aren’t always unreliable, but it varies on a case-by-case basis, including when the mutation occurred.

Location Haplogroup Formation Matching on Matches Page Haplotype Cluster
309 Excluded Excluded Included

Here’s an example using location 309. While some locations are excluded from matching, their inclusion in the formation of Haplotype Clusters may be very genealogically relevant to you – or perhaps not. That’s where genealogy research becomes important.

Haplotype Clusters give you the ability to focus your research on a specific group of people that you know do, in fact, match you exactly. Just keep in mind that some people in a different Haplotype Cluster, that don’t have a mutation at 309, for example, could have a closer common ancestor. That’s the nature of 309, 315 and other unstable SNPs, especially heteroplasmies, which tend to “come and go,” which I wrote about here. In other words, don’t ignore other Haplotype Clusters that appear on your match list – just begin with your own and evaluate using genealogy..

The Haplotype Cluster number itself isn’t important. What is important is that they serve to focus your genealogy efforts.

Where Else Can I Find My Haplotype Cluster

You can identify your Haplotype Cluster number by looking at your match list, as we have discussed, or by navigating to the Variants tab on the Scientific Details page.

On the variants tab, your haplogroup is marked with the solid red square, along with other information which I have truncated here.

Immediately above your haplogroup, you’ll see your Haplotype Cluster number, if you have one, along with any remaining private variants, aka mutations, that are haplogroup seeds and qualify to potentially become part of a haplogroup in the future.

In my case, this tells me that either all of my mutations are now included in a haplogroup definition, or they are excluded due to their instability or unreliability. Everyone else in this Haplotype Cluster is in exactly the same situation.

The only person who can see your Haplotype Cluster in Discover is you, if you are signed in to FamilyTreeDNA and you toggle “Show Private Variants” to “on.”

Haplotype Clusters as a Subset of Haplogroups

Haplogroups can and do have mutations “beneath” them, meaning haplogroup members may have different mutations or variants, in addition to the mutations used to form the haplogroup. Think of them as twigs or leaves on the tree.

Using the Classic Mitotree view in mtDNA Discover, you’ll notice that haplogroup J1c2f contains six Haplotype Clusters.

Please note that one of these clusters could be people who match the haplogroup definition exactly, and have no additional mutations of any type. They would form their own cluster.

Additionally, above the clusters, there are individual branches listed that don’t (yet) form clusters. You don’t know from looking at the individuals listed by country, such as Sweden, Germany, Norway, and so forth, if these people have only the exact mutations in haplogroup J1c2f, or if they have additional mutations that are unique and no one else has those exact mutations. What you do know is that so far, no one else matches them exactly, but as other people test, they may develop into a HaploType Cluster.

You may not match all of the people in your haplogroup on your matches page, because they may be over the match threshold and have too many mutations difference from you.

Some testers with unique, stable mutations may form new haplogroups as additional people test.

Using the Time Tree, you can see that there are currently 33 people who are in haplogroup J1c2f but do not match anyone else exactly.

The Discover Time Tree

Now that we’ve looked at examples individually, I took a screenshot of my entire haplogroup on the mtDNA Discover Time Tree to get the big picture.

The Time Tree offers a nice visual summary of all of J1c2f, including my full sequence matches, all in one place, along with Haplotype Clusters.

My haplogroup is shown in the black circle, and downstream haplogroups are shown in red circles.

You can see my Haplotype Cluster, which I can identify by the F#. You can see other Haplotype Clusters within my haplogroup, along with some individuals who don’t have any exact matches, who are shown alone on their line.

The Match Time Tree

When you click on Discover Haplogroup Reports from your dashboard, then on the Match Time Tree, you’ll see your matches’ names on your personal Time Tree, along with their self-reported earliest known matrilineal ancestors, in addition to their ancestor’s country of origin.

Here’s an example of a portion of my Match Time Tree with my matches’ names redacted.

With these new Discover and Mitotree tools, you know where to focus your research most closely. Which matches’ trees to view or build out to identify common ancestors, and who to prioritize for communications.

If you have a new haplogroup – that’s wonderful, but you don’t need one to make headway. The clue you need may well be found in your Haplotype Cluster.

There’s so much new information available for you. What can you discover?

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

Marie Levron (c1686-1727), Tragedy from Cradle to Grave – 52 Ancestors #443

Marie Levron was born about 1686 in or near Port Royal, Nova Scotia, to Francois “dit Nantois” Levron and Catherine Savoie. Levron is sometimes spelled Leveron, Leuron and other ways as well.

In 1686, we first find Marie Levron listed as age 1 in the census, along with her parents and three older siblings: Jacques age 9, Magdelaine, age 5, and Anne, age 2.

This probably means that Marie was actually born in 1686, given that her sibling is age 2, and children were generally born 18 months to two years apart. Later censuses also suggest that her birth was in 1686 as well.

In 1690, New England militia brutally attacked Port Royal, overtook the fort, plundered and burned the town, desecrated the church, and killed their livestock. Marie would have been too young to fully realize what was going on, but might have been terrorized by the attack itself. Assuredly, she would have been affected by the magnitude of the destruction. Given the level of trauma involved, this attack might have formed Marie’s earliest memories. Their home was probably burned, given their proximity to the fort.

Not only would her family have been immediately and directly affected, but this event was a turning point in English and Acadian relations. Any trust and goodwill between the two had been permanently destroyed.

In the 1693 census, Marie Levron was age 7 and was living at home with the same family members plus three new siblings: Elizabeth, age 3, Joseph, age 2, and Jean Baptiste, age 1. The gap between Marie and Elizabeth suggests she had an additional sibling born about 1688 who died between birth and the 1693 census.

This sibling may have died at birth when Marie was too young to realize what was taking place. Or, the child may have died just before the census when Marie was 7 and she had known them for years. It’s certainly possible that the child perished in the 1690 depredations when the English burned so many homes.

In 1698, Marie Leveron was age 12, living with her family, who had grown with the addition of two siblings – Jeanne, age 4, and Pierre, age 2. Her sister, Magdeleine, age 16, had recently married Clement Vincent and was living next door.

In 1700, Marie Leuron (Levron) was 14 and living with her family, but two of her siblings are missing. Jeanne and Pierre are not listed. Normally, this would mean that they had died, but that’s not true in this case.

Jeanne would have been 6 in 1700. She married in 1714, so she clearly had not died.

Pierre would have been 4. He is not found again until his death in 1725, when he died in the home of Pierre Godet as a domestic.

Where were these two children in 1700, and why was Pierre later working as a domestic?

Additionally, Marie’s sister, Magdeleine, also recorded as Madelaine, who was married in the 1698 census, is recorded as once again living with her parents. Her husband is not found. This leads me to question the accuracy of the census, because her husband, Clement Vincent, didn’t die, and they went on to have a dozen children. The eldest was born about 1701. Perhaps Magdeleine was visiting her parents when the census-taker recorded the family members.

In 1701, Marie Levrin, age 15, was listed as a servant in the home of Emanuel Hebert and his wife Andree Brun. Marie was younger than four of their five children at home, and one year older than their son, Alexandre, so she wasn’t living there to help with young children.

In 1698, Emanual Hebert was listed as the neighbor of Francois Levron, Clement Vincent and Rene Forest.

Servants were very unusual in Acadia, with only five listed individually. The total shows 17 servants in Port Royal, but we are left in the dark about the identity of the rest of those servants.

Marie’s parents and family are missing from the census.

It’s possible that they had departed for either Les Mines or Beaubassin and been missed in the census, or they were literally in transit. The family would have known the Emanual Hebert family well, so perhaps, for some unknown reason, Marie stayed behind, living with the Hebert’s as a servant.

If they went someplace, they were back by 1703.

In 1703, Marie was probably counted with her family in the census in Port Royal, although her parents had six daughters and four sons at the time, and the census only reflects four girls and two boys.

On November 20, 1703, Marie married Jean Garceau, a soldier at Fort Anne, and he was not listed in the census, so the census was likely taken before the wedding.

On the 20th of November in the year one thousand seven hundred and three, I, a parish priest performing the curial functions in this parish, after the publication of the three banns on three consecutive Sundays, without any impediment having been found, united in matrimony, by words in the presence of our Holy Mother Church, Jean Garsseault, called Tranchemontagne, soldier of this garrison in the company of Duvernay, son of Pierre Garsseaux and Jaquette Soulard of the parish of St. René in the diocese of Poitiers, and Marie Levron, daughter of François Levron and Catherine Savoye, of this parish. And they declared that they could not sign, but made their mark, along with those witnesses whose names I have signed below on the same day and year as above.

Marie was married by the Priest, Felix Pain, with the commander of Fort Anne serving as a witness.

The nuptials would have been performed either in the chapel at the Fort if it had been rebuilt by that time, in the rectory, or the commander’s residence in either the fort or on Hogg Island. The fort layout a few years later, in 1710, above, is from the Fort Anne Museum, at Fort Anne in Annapolis Royal.

As newlyweds, Jean and Marie would have wanted to establish a homestead, a place to live and raise their children for the rest of their lives. A little farm they could cultivate. They might well have built a small home on her father’s land.

Marie’s first baby, Pierre Garceau, was born on October 22, 1704, 11 months after they were married. His parents are listed as Jean Garssau dit Tranche Montagne and Marie Levron. Pierre Consolin, bombardier, and Anne Levron (mistranscribed as Curone), Marie’s older sister, were Godparents.

Since the 1690 attack, Fort Anne had fallen into disrepair to the point of being unable to defend itself, or anything else, for that matter. In 1702, a new, highly qualified engineer, Pierre-Paul de Labat had arrived, and by 1704, the dilapidated fort was under construction.

Concurrently, the English were chronically breathing down the neck of Acadia, so they desperately needed the protection of the new fort.

Financial and political issues with France delayed the rehabilitation of the fort which meant that Port Royal and the homesteads along the Riviere Dauphin, including where Marie and her small family lived, were exposed.

Both the soldiers and townspeople were struggling to complete the fort – but the soil and stone for the new earthworks and many ramparts all had to be hand-carried.

France, however, had essentially disappeared from the equation. No supplies arrived, and neither did money nor reinforcements.

(c) National Maritime Museum; Supplied by The Public Catalogue Foundation

Needing protection, Port Royal had little choice but to partner with privateers, a nicer name for pirates – well, at least the pirates that were on your side. Not only did they protect Port Royal, they sought and took English ships as prizes, and deposited captured English sailors at Port Royal where they could be used in future negotiations.

1707 – A Baby and a War

It’s puzzling that Marie Levron and Jean Garceau are not found in the 1707 census, but then again, neither are Marie’s parents. Jean was still a soldier, so they would have had to live near the fort.

Marie welcomed her second child, Daniel Garceau, on April 8, 1707. Interestingly, Monsieur de Subercase, Governor of the Province, and Dame Marie Mius, wife of Monsieur Duvivier, a French officer under Subercase, were Godparents. Jean Garceau was a soldier under Subercases’s command.

The two and a half year gap between Pierre and Daniel suggests that a child died in 1706, but there is no church record of such. Of course, the records may not be complete, or the child may have been born prematurely and never baptized.

A month after Daniel’s birth, the English launched an attack on Port Royal. Marie must have been utterly terrified.

To the best of our knowledge, Marie and Jean were living directly across the river from Port Royal.

All men were on a hair-trigger notice. Based on the reports provided by the English hostages, Port Royal was anticipating an attack. It was only a matter of when. Sure enough, in May of 1707, it arrived.

Messengers were sent to notify and gather the male residents living nearby in order to oppose the advance of the enemy on both sides of the river.

The British had landed near Goat Island, and more than 320 men were advancing through the woods on both banks. Port Royal was under attack.

The battle was brutal. Thankfully, Governor Subercase, who was quite competent, was in charge and led both the soldiers and Acadian men in battle.

The Acadian forces met the English face to face and engaged in hand-to-hand combat.

The English could not take the fort as they had anticipated, so they resorted to guerrilla warfare in the woods and along the river. They burned buildings and homes, laying waste to all of Port Royal.

Placard photos taken in the Museum at Fort Anne.

The English retreated, then returned again in August, but were once again repelled 11 days later.

However, the worst was yet to come – and everyone was on pins and needles.

The English Return

Subercase knew that time was limited, so he scrounged for as many additional hands as could be found to assist with the fort completion.

The privateers captured 35 more English ships and brought 470 additional English captives to Port Royal. The fort was not prepared for this many captives, and Spotted Fever, now called typhus, ravaged the hostages and the community. Typhus is caused by poor sanitation in extremely crowded conditions and is spread by fleas and body lice. More than 50 died.

Word came that a “great force” was being gathered at Boston. In preparation, Subercase added 150 Indians and 75 militia from Grand Pre. They expected an attack in 1708, and when that didn’t happen, in 1709.

The only thing that saved Port Royal in 1709 was that the English fleet had been redirected for service in the Spanish War. However, Port Royal didn’t know that.

Marie must have been a nervous wreck. She had two very small children. I think she lost a child in the spring of 1709, but we’ll never know.

1710 – Another Baby and the English Arrive

Around June 1709, Marie became pregnant for their third child.

Joseph Garceau, was born on March 20, 1710 and baptized three days later. Joseph Levron, his uncle, and Marie de Breuil stood as Godparents.

Fortunately, the fort had been mostly completed, and while Port Royal certainly could have used reinforcements from France, at least they weren’t entirely helpless now. The fort was ready – or at least as ready as it could be.

There were new barracks and a new powder magazine.

Additionally, trees and brush had been cleared from the waterfront so that the English couldn’t use it for cover.

When Marie’s baby was just six months old, and a month before her oldest child’s 6th birthday, the first few ships of the English fleet sailed up the river and into view. Not a few English ships like had happened in 1707, but the entire English fleet consisting of more than 35 ships and 3400 soldiers would arrive within a few days – almost three times the entire population of all of Acadia. Port Royal only had about 450 residents and of that, only 100 or so were men.

The English came prepared this time, with a full siege battle plan.

Complete with a labeled map.

To make matters worse for the Acadians, the abandonment of Port Royal and the rest of Acadia by France had created morale issues among the soldiers, which, in turn, led to a high desertion rate. Many of the deserters had joined the English forces and provided them with valuable intelligence.

No pay and reduced rations will do that to you. A few soldiers, like Jean, had married local women, but most had not and wanted nothing more than to escape – one way or another.

Marie’s husband, Jean, had to leave his wife and their children, wherever they lived, or wherever he secreted them to keep them safe. He donned his uniform as a soldier, facing incredible and unwinnable odds as the English attacked.

He had to know he was facing death. Marie knew that too, no matter what he said. I can only imagine their tearful goodbye as he departed their home to defend Port Royal from within Fort Anne in the face of legions of English soldiers. He must have felt like a sitting duck!

What is it like to stare death in the face?

What is it like to leave your wife and small children to their fate at the hands of enemy soldiers?

We don’t know exactly what happened. If Jean wasn’t in the fort as the English warships sailed up the river, he would have hurriedly taken his assigned defensive station within the fort before the gates were closed.

Maybe he hurried his wife and children into the fort with him.

Fortunately, the fort’s master engineer,  Pierre-Paul DeLabat drew a 1710 map.

He labeled the Nantois, or Levron, homestead, on the river across from Hogg Island.

This location of the Levron home might explain why Marie fell in love with a soldier who was stationed right across the river.

On the 1707/1708 map drawn by Delabat, the Nantois home is shown directly across the river from Hogg Island, just slightly upriver from the fort.

If Jean was in the fort, he didn’t have the opportunity to tell his wife goodbye. I don’t know exactly where Marie’s family was, although Labat was quite specific. The Levron family may have already moved elsewhere, anticipating the onslaught. That home had assuredly been burned out in 1707 and had to rebuild.

I hope Marie was able to make her way home to her parents who lived on the north side of the River, and perhaps to her mother’s parents several miles further east.

On September 24th, at about 2:15 in the afternoon, the first ships were sighted by sentries near Goat Island.

As more and more ships arrived from the west, a warning would have rapidly traveled along the river valley to alert the residents.

At least 35 ships anchored in front of the fort, blocking the harbour. A sea of sails swayed back and forth, striking terror in the Acadian residents and the few French soldiers, alike.

How could 300 men, which included a few visitors, possibly fend off 3400 English soldiers?

More and more ships sailed into the harbour – none of them French.

Acadia would not surrender without a fight.

By October 5th, all of the English fleet had arrived, but the Acadians had no way to know there weren’t more.

If Marie was at her parent’s home, the river in front of their homestead would have been full of English ships. Marie and others probably continued to anxiously watch the horizon to the west for yet more English warships to appear.

I’m sure they appeared endless.

Acadian women and children had been gathered in the fort and secreted in the dank, dark, subterranean “black hole” for safety.

We don’t know if Marie was among them.

Once the only door to the Black Hole is shut, there is no light and no circulation. I’d truly have to fear imminently for my life to willingly be locked in here.

Marie may have sheltered in the black hole.

Or perhaps she had made her way upstream and was hiding there with family members, or in the mountains that line the river valley on the north side of the River, behind the Levron homestead.

On October 6th, the English came ashore, landing troops both north and south of the Fort, and Port Royal.

The Acadians tried to fire upon the English ships, but their cannons couldn’t reach that distance across the river. The Acadians were both outnumbered and outgunned.

Aside from her own safety, Marie would have been worried sick about her husband. Was he safe? Was he injured? Was he dead? Where was he?

Could she see anything?

Fort Anne and Port Royal, including the area across the river, were completely surrounded. The Acadians resorted to guerrilla-style warfare, dressing not in military uniforms, but in skins and clothing like the Mi’kmaq, shooting at the English red-coats from the woods and what few structures remained.

The English burned everything they could. Homes, farms, fields, barn. Burned it all! Again!

After four days of resistance, Governor Subercase knew they were all about to be slaughtered. If you live, you can fight another day. From within the fort, which may have been where Marie was sheltering, Subercase sent a French officer with a white parley flag to the English camp.

Negotiations ensued for two days as the English continued to advance upon the fort. When they reached a distance of 300 feet, people within the fort could hear the voices of the English soldiers. Now within very close range, the English opened fire upon the fort and lobbed grenades inside the walls.

A hellish firestorm of a battle ensued. History speaks to the thunderous discharge of cannons and artillery raining down on the brave men holding the fort against insurmountable odds.

The women and families secreted in the pitch black Black Hole would have huddled together and prayed without cease. They would have felt every single explosion – not knowing if it was the literal end.

The English prisoners, also held in the fort, were probably equally as terrified, given that they might well be killed by either side – either intentionally or accidentally. They were probably praying too.

Then, silence.

Deafening silence.

The English fire ceased. The Acadians stood in the eerie silence, confused and wondering what was happening.

Had their prayers been answered?

Had, by some miracle, the French fleet arrived in the harbour?

Had they, by the Grace of God, been saved?

Time stood still as the Acadians waited. Anticipation had never seemed so long.

What were the people in the black hole thinking?

Were they anticipating the best, or the worst?

Maybe both?

Were they whispering, or silent?

What was happening?

And why?

By the end of the day on October 12th, negotiations were complete.

The Acadians would not be massacred. Their families would not be harmed.

The English prisoners would be released, and British boats were sent upriver to retrieve Acadian women and children who were hidden there – and to spread the word.

The entire episode lasted for 19 excruciatingly long days. On October 16th, the key to the fort was handed from the French officers to the English, and the French soldiers and Acadian men marched out of the fort through the gate with their dignity and little else.

Surrender terms included provisions to protect the Acadians. “Inhabitants within the gun range of the fort,” which was three miles, could remain in undisturbed possession of their land for up to two years if they wished, provided they were willing to swear an oath to the British Crown. Then they were required to leave.

Those at a greater distance than three miles were tolerated or allowed to remain on sufferance.

French soldiers were returned to France on British warships.

The local priest only recorded one death during the battle, a child who died on October 14th during the siege. I have a hard time believing only one person died. Two soldier-age men died not long thereafter, so they could have been injured during the battle.

Jean Garceau was a soldier. He had married an Acadian woman. Where was he?

Where Was Marie’s Husband?

When the fort fell, the priest, Father Durand, tried to reunite the Acadian settlers upriver, beyond the three-mile demarcation line. He attempted to protect the residents from the terms of capitulation that required that despised oath of allegiance to the English crown, an agreement that clearly would only have been made under duress.

The English were quite unhappy with Father Durand and considered him seditious. They took him prisoner in January of 1711 and sent him, as a captive, to Boston, with a few other unnamed Acadians.

Father Durand was ultimately released and returned to Acadia later in the year.

The last date before his capture that Father Durand performed any of his clerical duties was January 17, 1711. Father Durand once again appears in the parish registers on December 20th where he begins catching up on baptisms and other official duties that had been neglected in his absence, given that he was the only priest in Port Royal.

After recording more pressing items, Father Durand made a blanket entry for several people who had died while he was in Boston – including Jean Garceau, although he is erroneously recorded as Joseph. There was no Joseph Garceau, except for Jean and Marie’s young son, who we know did not die, and there was also no date on the group entry. What it does say is that these people died during Father Durand’s absence while he was in Boston.

Now, Marie, at age 24, was a widow with three small children. How was she going to survive?

Marie Remarries

The day after Christmas, December 26th, Father Durand married Marie Levron, widow of Jean Garceau, with Alexander Richard.

On the twenty-sixth day of December in the year 1711, I, the undersigned, acting in the role of parish priest, after three banns were published during parish masses, did join in marriage by mutual consent Alexandre Richard, son of the late Michel Richard and Jeanne Babin, and Marie Levron, daughter of François Levron and Catherine Savoye, widow of Jean Garceau, all of this parish. They declared that they did not know how to sign. In witness of which, I have signed on the above-mentioned day and year.

While that may not be her name and signature, it is Marie’s X, so she made that actual mark. The second mark is Alexandre’s.

The witnesses are Rene de Forest, and Rene Babinaut (sp?) along with Father Justinian Durand, officiating priest.

Rene may be an important clue, because he is a neighbor of Emanuel Hebert with whom Marie had lived as a servant. She would have known the family well. It’s also worth noting that Alexander Richard’s family lived in the area too.

Unfortunately, the Nova Scotia Archives doesn’t translate or index witnesses.

While we don’t know exactly when Jean died, Marie’s marriage just six days after the priest returned strongly suggests that Jean had been deceased for some time.

If Jean Garceau died shortly after Father Durand was captured in January of 1711, Marie would have been a widow for nearly a year.

When Marie remarried, she had three Garceau children. Pierre had just turned 7, Daniel, who was four-and-a- half, and Joseph, the baby, who was 21 months old. The baby would not have remembered Jean Garceau, and Daniel probably didn’t either.

Life With Alexander Richard

Marie’s second husband, Alexander Richard dit Boutin is somewhat confusing. His father had a son by the same name with both of his wives. While that sounds odd, especially if the first son lived, this is not the first time I’ve seen this phenomenon in Acadian families.

The Alexander Richard that Marie Levron married is the younger man, born around 1686 to Michel Richard and Jeanne Babin.

Alexander’s mother, a widow, had married Laurent Doucet, who lived at BelleIsle near the Savoie family.

The older Alexander Richard had died in 1709, so even without the detail in the parish record, we know unquestionably that Marie married the younger man.

Marie’s fourth child, and first child with Alexandre, Pierre Toussaint Richard, arrived on October 1, 1712, and was baptized the following day with Pierre Laure and Jeanne Doucet as Godparents.

Marie’s parents were getting older, and her father, Francois Levron, noted as ”about seventy years old,” was buried on June 23, 1714, according to the parish registers.

Marie, her mother, siblings and their families would have gathered that summer day to lay him to rest in the cemetery inside Fort Anne, probably where her husband, Jean Garceau rested as well. At peace, but with the protective barracks in the background.

The Acadian graves remain, but all are now unmarked. Whatever markers remained in 1755 were subsequently destroyed by the English.

Marie’s mother was noted in the 1714 census as “Widow Nantois, 2 sons and 1 daughter, living in the midst of the Girouard clan – so it’s entirely possible that they had moved upriver after they were burned out in 1707 and 1710. She actually had three unmarried sons, so one of them was missing from the census.

In the 1714 census, Alexander Richard is living with his wife and four sons beside Mathiew Doucet, very near the Julien Lore dit LaMontagne – not far east of Granville Ferry on the north side of the river – near the Leveron land. Of course, three of Alexander Richard’s four sons were his step-sons, but he raised the Garceau boys as his own. In fact, Marie’s youngest Garceau son, Joseph, often used the surname Richard, and sometimes Pierre used Alexandre’s dit name, Boutin.

Another two-and-a-half-year gap between children causes me to wonder if Marie lost a child in 1714.

Claude Richard was born on June 27, 1715, with Pierre Blanchard and Anne Robichaux, daughter of Alexandre Robichaux, as Godparents.

Three years between children nearly assures that a child was born and perished.

Marie Josephe Richard was born on June 17, 1718, and baptized the following day with Yves Maucaire and Marie LeBlanc as Godparents.

Marguerite Richard was born on May 1, 1720, and baptized two days later, with Alexandre Brossard and Marguerite Bourg, wife of Pierre Brossard, as Godparents.

Another three years between children. If Marie was actually losing every other child, she must have been filled with dread and anxiety with every pregnancy, especially every other pregnancy.

Isabelle Richard was born on May 14, 1723, and baptized two days later with René Doucet and Isabelle Levron as Godparents.

Isabelle Levron is Marie’s sister, who is also recorded in some records as Elizabeth.

On January 20, 1725, Marie’s 30-year-old brother, Pierre Levron died. Their father is noted as deceased, but their mother appears to still be living.

With nearly four years between Isabelle and Joseph, I’d wager at least one child was buried during this time. Sadly, without modern medical care, families anticipated losing half of their children. What a sad state of “normal.”

Marie’s youngest child, Joseph Richard was born on February 19, 1727, and baptized the following day with ”Pierre Garceau, son of the late Jean Garceau, and Marie Lor, daughter of the late Julien Lore,” standing as Godparents. Pierre was Joseph Richard’s half-brother.

If you’re scratching your head, thinking to yourself that Marie had a child named Joseph in 1710 with Jean Garceau, and now another Joseph in 1727 with Alexandre Richard – you’d be right. And yes, they were both alive in 1727.

Apparently Alexander having a same-name half-sibling didn’t deter him from doing the same with his own offspring.

Not Peaceful

Just for the record, in case we’re inclined to think that life was peaceful in Acadia after 1710 – it wasn’t.

Conflict with the English continued. First, the Acadians were required to leave in two years. Then, when they planned to depart, the English forbid it because they had come to realize that they had no prayer of feeding their own soldiers without the Acadians raising food for them.

Yet, the English continued to require a loyalty oath, and the Acadians just as adamantly continued to refuse for a variety of reasons. In 1720, some slight of hand resolved the oath issue for for the next 35 years. The Oath the Acadians signed was two pages – but only the first page was sent back to England. So, in essence, both parties got the conditions they required.

It wasn’t until 1720 that Acadians didn’t constantly live under threat of one kind or another. Until 1755, of course.

Marie’s Premature Death

Sadly, there is no happy ending to Marie’s story. No rocking great-grandchildren by the hearth or summers playing in the warm sunshine.

On August 1, 1727, Marie died just four and a half months after she gave birth to Joseph. The parish register tells us that Marie, the wife of Alexandre Richard, died on August 1st and was buried the following day. Her husband and Louis Tibault, her nephew, were witnesses.

Unfortunately, Marie’s parents were not listed, which would have given us a clue about whether her mother was still living. We know her father died in 1714.

The family was most probably associated with the St. Laurent Church at BelleIsle, because Marie’s sister, Madelaine/Magdelaine Levron was married there in 1722, and it was much closer than Port Royal.

Marie was either buried beside the church there, or in the cemetery at Port Royal.

On that hot summer day, Marie’s nine children would have said goodbye to their mother in the little chapel and buried her in the churchyard outside, now lost to time in the woods on the right side of the river.

When Marie died, none of her children had yet married, and many were young.

  • Pierre was 23
  • Daniel was 20
  • Joseph was 17
  • Pierre Toussaint was almost 15
  • Claude was almost 12, assuming he was alive
  • Marie Josephe had just turned 9
  • Marguerite was 7
  • Isabelle was 4
  • Joseph was only four and a half months old

What was baby Joseph to do without a mother? Someone had to feed him. Perhaps one of Marie’s sisters stepped in. Elizabeth/Isabelle had a baby in September of 1726, and Madeleine had a baby in October of 1726, which meant that both women would have been nursing babies when Joseph was in need. And, after all, they were her sisters and Joseph’s aunts.

Marie had probably already buried 4 or 5 children, mostly babies, along with her father and her first husband. Hopefully, she was buried near her children, all of whom passed too soon.

I can’t help but wonder if Marie’s death was an after-effect of or connected to Joseph’s birth.

Marie was only 40.

Who Raised Marie’s Children?

Who raised Marie’s children? Did her mother or perhaps a sister step in? If Marie knew how ill she was, or suspected that she was dying, that would have been the question foremost on her mind.

The purpose of Godparents is to raise the child in the event that the parents perish and cannot raise the child. In this case, only one parent died. Normally, what happens in cases like this is that the living parent quickly remarries to another individual who has lost their spouse. Clearly, in a small community, everyone already knew everyone else.

There’s absolutely no evidence that Alexandre ever remarried, and his occurred after the 1755 deportation – so he was single for a very long time.

Perhaps the marriages and other records of Marie’s children provide some clues.

  • Pierre Garceau, also sometimes known as Pierre Boutin, married Agnes Doucet in 1728 and lived in Port Royal. Alexander Richard did not sign for him. They had eight children. Pierre disappears from records after he witnesses his daughter’s marriage in Annapolis Royal in 1750. His wife, Agnes Doucet, died in Connecticut in 1789, so if Pierre lived long enough to be deported, that’s likely where he ended up. He would have been 51 years old in 1755.
  • Daniel Garceau married Anne Doucet about 1730 and lived near Annapolis Royal. No parish marriage record. They had 11 children. After the 1755 deportation, Daniel ended up in New York before making his way to Quebec.
  • Joseph Garceau married Marie Philippe Lambert about 1732 and lived in Beaubassin. No parish marriage record found. They had seven children. During the Grand Derangement, aka, forced expulsion of the Acadians, Joseph was reportedly separated from his family and deported to Georgia, while his wife, Marie Lambert, and children sought refuge at Isle St. Jean before making their way to Quebec where the family was reunited.
  • Pierre Touissant Richard married Marie Josephe Boudreau about 1732 and lived in Pisiguit. No marriage parish record found. They had six children. Pierre died at Port-la-Joye and was buried in 1751 on Isle St. John, today’s Prince Edward Island. His wife and children were deported to France in 1758 aboard the Duke William, landing in St. Malo, where one son died two days later, his wife died three days later and another son, 4 weeks later. Two additional children recovered, one living the rest of their life in France, and one eventually making it to Louisiana. One son’s wife and child made it to France, but his fate is unknown. The fate of the sixth child is unknown.
  • Claude Richard’s fate is unknown, but he could have died young – perhaps before Marie’s untimely passing.
  • Marie Josephe Richard married Paul Doiron in Annapolis Royal in 1738, with her father, Alexandre Richard, signing the parish register for her, so we know they were both still in or near Annapolis Royal in 1738. They had 11 children. Marie Josephe gave birth to a child in Pisiquit by 1747 and was on Ile St. Jean by 1752. By 1760, she was living in Saint-Etienne-de-Beaumont, just across the river from Quebec City in Canada, where she died in 1796. Five of her children succumbed to the smallpox epidemic that ravaged Quebec, and Quebec City in particular, in the winter of 1757-1758. Those children died on November 8, 1757, December 20th, January 7th , 8th and 14th, 1758, and were buried in the same cemetery as her sister, Marguerite’s children.
  • Marguerite Richard married in 1745 in Port Royal to Jean Breau “of the Canard River,” which empties into the Minas Basin across from Grand Pre. Alexandre Richard did sign as a witness. We don’t know exactly where Marguerite’s six children were born, but given that there are no Annapolis Royal baptism records for them, we have to assume it was near where her husband was farming. They were in Notre-Dame-de-Quebec by mid-1757, which means they were not deported from Annapolis Royal. Given their early settlement in Quebec, they would have been deported from further north in Nova Scotia, sought refuge in one of the encampments, and had possibly escaped their English guards at Mirimichi. Tragically, all but one of Marguerite’s family members succumbed to the smallpox epidemic of 1757-1758. Her husband, Jean Breau (Brault), died on July 4, 1757, the same day as Francoise, her six-month-old baby. Marguerite assuredly was horribly grief-stricken. She soon became ill herself, with a houseful of sick children. Marguerite died on December 7th, her 12-year-old son Jean died the following day, three-year-old Marie Josephe died on December 13th, four-year-old Francois died on December 18th, and 10-year-old Alexis died on January 12, 1758. They were buried in the cemetery at Notre-Dame-de-Quebec in Quebec City. Only one of Marguerite’s children, Elizabeth, survived to adulthood and died in 1792 at about age 41 in Quebec, after burying two husbands. What a horrific tragedy.
  • Isabelle Richard married Francois Raimon in 1753 in Port Royal. Alexandre Richard did not sign for her. We know nothing more about Isabelle other than she reportedly was listed on the 1760 Essex County, Massachusetts Acadian census, and was noted as having been deported to Connecticut in 1755. No children are listed. The next person on the census list is her father, Alexandre Richard dit Boutin.
  • Joseph Richard died in 1747 in Annapolis Royal. Alexandre was not a witness.

This tells us that Alexandre Richard did not move someplace else and remarry – and he stayed very involved with his children. He was obviously expelled with Isabelle and her husband and may have been living in the same household.

Marie’s husband, Alexandre Richard, three children and 18 grandchildren living in Annapolis Royal, formerly Port Royal until the English took it, were ensnared in the horrific expulsion of the Acadians. Additionally, four other children were forcibly expelled from elsewhere in Nova Scotia, and many died.

In 1755, by the time Marie’s husband and children who remained in Annapolis Royal were forced to march down the snow-covered Queen’s Wharf, board overcrowded death ships, leaving everything behind, Marie had been in her grave for 28 years.

If Marie’s final resting place was in the Garrison Graveyard, Alexandre and her children would have paused one last time to say goodbye, even if it was from the distance of the wharf.

We can only imagine the hell that followed.

On the 1760 list of Acadians in Essex County, Massachusetts, Alexandre Richard is listed, as is his daughter Isabelle Richard, who was married to Francois Raymond. Alexandre is listed as 70, infirm, and sent to Bradford.

So, it would appear that Alexandre Richard did not remarry, and one way or another, managed to find a way to raise his six children, and three step-children. Perhaps the older children raised the younger children, and everyone worked the farm together.

Alexandre was a good father to all 9 of Marie’s children, and apparently, loved Marie beyond the grave, given that he never remarried, remaining single for the next 33+ years.

Tragedy

Tragically, Marie’s life was cut short, as was that of many family members. Maybe it was a blessing that she did not have to endure 1755 and what followed, with her family separated in as many directions as there were living children.

Marie never got to attend her children’s weddings or cherish the smiles and giggles of grandchildren. She never received the honor of serving as a Godmother to her grandchildren, or seeing them baptized.

Marie buried her first husband, Jean Garceau, who may have died as a result of the 1710 fall of Acadia to the British.

Marie was fortunate enough to marry Alexandre Richard, who raised her three Garceau children in addition to their own. Marie’s youngest Garceau child was a baby and was close enough to Alexandre to take his surname as an adult. So did her eldest from time to time.

Some of Marie’s children remained in Port Royal after marriage, but several others struck out for points North where more land on the Bay of Fundy was available for salt-marsh reclamation and farming.

Child Acadia Location Deportation Location Children
Pierre Garceau 1704-after 1750 Port Royal Possibly Connecticut 8
Daniel Garceau 1707-1772 Port Royal New York 10
Joseph Garceau aka Richard 1710-1789 Beaubassin Georgia, then Quebec 7
Pierre Toussant Richard 1712-1751 Pisiquit, Prince Edward Island by 1751 He died in 1751 on Ile St. John. Wife and children deported to France 6
Claude Richard 1715 – ? Nothing known, probably died young.
Marie Joseph Richard 1718 – 1796 Pisiquit Quebec 11 – 5 succumbed to Smallpox in 1757-1758
Marguerite Richard 1720-1757 Canard River Quebec 6 – 5 plus both parents succumbed to Smallpox in 1757-1758
Isabelle Richard 1723 – after 1760 Port Royal Massachusetts None known
Joseph Richard 1727 – 1747 Port Royal Not deported Never married

Marie had at least 48 grandchildren, and probably several more. Records are spotty, and in the colonies, nonexistent.

Of those known grandchildren, 18 lived in Port Royal, so, had Marie lived, she would have known them and been able to see them regularly, probably on a daily basis. She would have been a seamless part of thier lives. I can see her playing hide-and-seek in the sunlight and shadows with them – except she never got to. Perhaps she visited them in other ways.

Marie’s mother, Catherine Savoie, born about 1659, may have outlived her daughter. Unfortunately, there is no existing death record for Catherine, so we don’t know when she died. Based on her son Pierre’s death record in 1725, where his father is noted as deceased, but Catherine is not, she may well have lived several years beyond Marie. She would have been about 68 when Marie died.

While Marie’s grandchildren didn’t have the opportunity to interact with her, they may have known and been close to Catherine – at least for a few years.

As difficult and tragic as Marie’s life was, she raised children who were survivors. Had it not been for those who persevered, with a dash of luck, of course, and probably several rounds of prayers, especially in the Black Hole – I would not be here today.

Our ancestors may have been scattered to the wind, but the Acadians were seeds and took root the world over. Today, WikiTree reports that Marie has (at least) 1984 descendants, and I’m sure there are more whose identities remain unknown.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

DNA for Native American Genealogy Webinar & Companion Book

For those who couldn’t attend RootsTech 2025, you’re in luck, because my session, DNA for Native American Genealogy, was recorded as a webinar.

RootsTech tried something new this year, and some webinars were recorded live on the actual show floor. Seating for approximately 50 people was available, but unfortunately, these sessions weren’t included in the session schedule, so no one was aware that they could attend them live.

I’m very grateful to RootsTech for making the recording widely available – and for free.

The webinar includes 10 different techniques and tools available for testers to find and confirm (or sometimes refute) Native American ancestors.

I discuss ethnicity and why it may or may not be helpful, and how to morph your ethnicity results into a tool to identify which ancestors were Native. You may have Native ancestry, even if your ethnicity results don’t reveal that. Learn how to guage that possibility and what to do next.

Y-DNA and mitochondrial DNA, yours and other peoples, can confirm or refute Native heritage in each individual ancestral line.

After we discuss each of these techniques and how to use them, we talk about creating a DNA testing plan, and various ways to find autosomal, Y-DNA, and mitochondrial DNA test candidates – or identify people who have already tested.

You can watch this webinar for free on YouTube, here.

Companion Book

I’ve also written a companion book, DNA for Native American Genealogy, which is available here for buyers inside the US, and purchasers outside the US can order at Amazon, here.

Enjoy both the webinar and the book!

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

The Chauvet Cave: Trip Back in Time With Prehistoric European Humans – Are We Related?

One of the reasons I love both mitochondrial and Y-DNA testing is because it doesn’t mix with the DNA of the other parent like autosomal DNA does. This means that in additional to being useful genealogically, it provides a direct laser-line back in time – even thousands of years – to your earlier ancestors.

You’ll never know their names, of course, but you can track where they lived and where they migrated – through their mutations – breadcrumbs that function as signposts pointing the way to your ancestors. Using Discover, you can discover (pardon the pun):

  • Their migration path
  • When haplogroup defining mutations occurred
  • Other countries where ancestors of people with that haplogroup lived in a genealogical timeframe
  • Where that haplogroup is found further back in time through Ancient Connections

Your haplogroup and DNA matching is a gift from and a ticket to our ancestors that every genealogist should unwrap.

My mitochondrial DNA haplogroup is J1c2f, but the earliest tests that I took two decades ago when this industry was young positioned my haplogroup first as J, then as J1, then as J1c.

It wasn’t until a dozen years later than my full haplogroup, J1c2f was identified when the mitochondrial haplotree was initially published, then developed as more testers tested, both academically and personally at FamilyTreeDNA. Today, of course, we have the new Mitotree with even more refinement.

The earliest tests only covered the HVR1 or HVR1 plus HVR2 regions of mitochondrial DNA, while the current mtFull test covers all 16,569 locations.

Nevertheless, knowing that I was a member of haplogroup J told me something about my early ancestry, as well as provided matching to other testers. That “something” was information I could obtain no other way

In 2003, we knew that early humans had been in Europe by 50,000 years ago, Hunter-gatherers who spent their lives seeking shelter and food. We knew little else about their lives or cultures.

In 1994, stunning rock art had been discovered in Chauvet Cave in France. Thanks to a landslide blocking the entrance some 21,000 years ago, this cave and its art had been protected from humans, wildlife and the elements.

After its accidental discovery, the French government guarded and protected this astounding record of humanity with fervor, not repeating earlier mistakes in other locations, such as the Lascaux Cave, by allowing tourism which essentially destroyed those caves and their art.

By JYB Devot – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=64503410

Chauvet cave is sealed behind a steel door with very limited access

Research at Chauvet remains closely controlled. Scientists have revealed that the stunning cave art created by early humans was older than initially thought, having been created beginning about 35,000 years ago and extending over thousands of years.

This charcoal drawing of an Irish elk was tested at location GifA 96063 (green dot) and was dated to 36,000 years ago (14C AMS). Furthermore, it’s drawn over what may be the earliest potential known depiction of an erupting volcano.

Just imagine what our predecessors must have thought when volcanos erupted.

Were the Chauvet artists Neanderthal or modern humans, or a mixture of both? We don’t know, but we do know that the earliest DNA recovered from Germany and Czechia, who surprisingly, were distantly related groups, dated from 42,000 and 49,000 years ago. They carried mitochondrial haplogroups N and R and those people were admixed and had Neanderthal ancestors. Then again, so do contemporary Europeans and their descendants.

Later papers expanded on haplogroup migration to and through Europe. We are still learning today – in many cases due to paleoanthropology or archaeogenetics by genetic anthropologists. Excavation and testing of ancient remains continues to reveal fragments and details of our human migration story.

However, back in 2003, when my first results arrived, all we knew was that haplogroup J was a European haplogroup, probably having initially formed in the Levant or Fertile Crescent – and making its way to Europe over thousands of years.

By Communication Grotte Chauvet 2 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=137822676

We also knew that Chauvet Cave was the earliest evidence of humankind in a specific European location – so it made sense to wonder if my ancestors were among the cave-painters.

I voraciously read everything I could find about Chauvet Cave, looking at each image and wondering if my ancestor, someplace between 1200 and 1700 generations ago, stood holding red ochre, painted those amazing spiritual images and signed their work with a handprint signature by spitting red pigment over their hand, leaving an outline on the rock wall. Was this a shamanistic ritual, connecting the shaman with the rocks with the animals they painted?

Did the practitioners perhaps hold handfuls of red ochre paint, then splat them against the wall, creating large red polka-dots that remain some 30,000 years later? Was this something fun, adding a little levity to cave painting, or maybe it depicted a wound?

Scientists tell us today that two individuals created those dots. A male that stood about 5’9” and either a female or younger male who pressed their ochre-reddened hands into the cave walls. Did they laugh as they were making art, or was this a spiritual ritual and deadly serious? Did they have a concept of “art” as we do today, or was this their form of religion? Were they praying for a good hunt, or perhaps begging for protection – or maybe both. Maybe looking to appease the Gods if the volcano was threatening to erupt.

Was a trip to the Chauvet Cave a vision quest? Perhaps a rite of passage? Were the animals either signatures of a sort, or visions?

What did they call this cave? Did it have a name? Did they have names?

I could close my eyes and see them. Were these artists specially trained in these techniques – the best of the best in their cultural group? Was it talent or training, or both? Rites of passage? There seems to be a pattern of quality among the paintings that suggest that cave painting wasn’t just left to anyone.

Was this skill or trade passed down through the generations? Was it a right of the leaders or powerful – or maybe followed specific lines? Perhaps direct maternal or direct paternal, or some other inheritance pattern?

Did the painters ritually prepare the wood, making it into charcoal used to draw the lions?

Lions? In Europe?

And rhinoceroses? In present-day France?

How things have changed!

Perhaps they used early handmade tools to engrave and scratch images into the walls for us to marvel at today. They used horsehair brushes with pigments found in their environment to paint and shape the images.

Were the horses domesticated in any way, or were they wild horses?

Did they hunt the animals portrayed – animals long extinct before modern history? Horses, aurochs, deer and mammoths? Was this their way of blessing the hunt, as such?

Many paintings depicted predatory animals such as lions, panthers, leopards, bears, buffaloes, hyenas and even rhinoceroses and are not found in any other European caves.

This hyena and leopard, which is much smaller, both have red ochre spots.

Was this art meant to absorb the power of these powerful awe-inspiring animals, or perhaps they were drawm for protection?

Or, was the act of drawing itself a rite of passage?

Why are no smaller animals portrayed? Was this a cave of special power, or powers?

The cave was inhabited during two historical periods, the first some 30,000-40,000 years ago, and the second roughly 25,000-27,000 years ago. The artwork is from the first habitation.

What happened to those people? Did they move on and cease to inhabit this region?

The remnants of hearths are found in the cave’s soft clay floor, along with a child’s footprints. So are pawprints of cave bears who hibernated there, along with their skulls and the skull of a horned ibex.

Pawprints from about 26,000 years ago are either those of a dog or wolf. Was there a difference then? Had wolves yet been domesticated into dogs as we know them?

Were the paintings meant to protect the painters and their clan? Were they shamanic portals to a spiritual world?

Did they pray to these animals as deities? Why are no humans depicted?

Who were these people?

By JYB Devot – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=64503433

Why did they select the Chauvet Cave, high on this limestone wall, in a cliff over hung by the massive rock column known as the Pillar of Abraham, as opposed to another location? Is there a special significance? Is the location above the natural bridge relevant? Was it a meeting place or a journey destination? Did the landscape look, from a particular angle, like a prehistoric animal or deity? Some suggest the bridge bears some resemblance to a mammoth from the cave entrance.

There’s only one problem with that theory. The river elevation at that time was much higher than it is today, and the bridge wasn’t carved by the river when the caves were being painted. Many caves in the area are archaeologically significant – but nothing like the Chauvet Cave.

Why this cave?

And why did they choose the deepest recesses of the cave, nearly impossible to reach, in which to paint the best of their stunningly realistic artworks? Was the difficult journey to the cave part of the ritual itself? Did they work in a trance, perhaps? Trances and shamanic practitioners, functioning in the realm of the supernatural, are as old as humanity itself.

Did the artists join their ancestors there? Carbon dioxide levels in the cave reach levels considered unsafe in the winter months.

Were my ancestors among the hundreds of generations of those artists? Were they buried there? Did they become one with the art, the spirits, and ascend to the spirit world from Chauvet Cave?

Or, were some perhaps born in the safety of the deep recesses of the cave where the most spectacular art is found in the Gallery of Lions? Future shamans, perhaps, under the watchful eyes of the spirit animals and those shamans who had come and gone on before?

Could their power or presence be summoned?

So, so many questions.

Yes, I allowed myself to be drawn into the mesmerizing, elusive and unknowable history of Chauvet Cave.

There’s a very real possibility that my ancestors had been there.

Stood there.

Maybe participated in rituals there.

Placed red ochre on the walls.

This slide from a very early DNA presentation pretty much says it all.

I never forgot Chauvet Cave.

I also never thought I would accidentally visit.

Perhaps they summoned me.

But first, let’s go back to 1994 in the Ardèche Valley, high above the Ardèche Gorge and the natural bridge carved into the limestone by the Ardèche River millennia ago.

1994

It was a cold afternoon on a day that would live forever, shaping and changing our understanding of human prehistory. On December 18, 1994, three friends, amateur cavers, officially discovered the cave. Another person, Michel Rosa, nicknamed Baba, had discovered a hole the previous summer, which he deemed an airhole or vent into a cave, but was blocked by a stalactite that he could not get past. He was not among the group of three who would make their way into the cave that winter.

By Thilo Parg – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=97312442

The entrance, marked above, was steep and difficult. The cave was long, and the depths, where the most remarkable art awaited, would not be reached for another several months.

Credit for discovery of the cave, and how much credit is deserved by whom is hotly disputed yet today.

Regardless, Eliette Brunel was the first to wedge her way into the hole, dropping into a world that time had frozen. After her eyes had adjusted and she looked past the crystalline deposits that had formed since the last humans visited more than 20,000 years earlier, she spotted fuzzy red lines on the wall, and exclaimed, “They have been here!”

The cave consists of six chambers, filled with prehistoric animals, plus two vulva-type figures, and perhaps one minotaur, depending on your interpretation.

These early artists achieved a realism not before known, nor discovered since, by incorporating the natural fissured and curves of the cave wall into the paintings, giving them motion, movement and life. That speaks of talent, not just copying and repeating a pattern.

Another of the three explorers, Jean-Marie Chauvet, for whom the cave was named the Chauvet-Pont d’Arc, remarked at the “remarkable realism” and “aesthetic mastery” of the early artists and their drawings.

The sophistication of these paintings exceeded that of any early works, and most later ones as well. In one word, they are unique, and we may never fully understand their genesis, purpose or impact.

Less than a decade later, when my haplogroup J DNA results arrived, the thrill of the Chauvet Cave discovery was still fresh – as was my palpable excitement about understanding the path of haplogroup J, then nicknamed Jasmine, as she trekked across Europe.

Was Jasmine in the Chauvet Cave? I don’t know.

Were my other ancestors in the Chauvet Cave? Probably, if the people of Chauvet survived? When Europe was first populated, animals and hazards far outnumbered small bands of people. A tiny village or family group of, say, maybe 20 people could easily be wiped out. Their genetic line forever extinguished.

Let’s hope that we continue to find ancient remains in Europe, and perhaps in the limestone caves along the Ardèche River. If people returned to this same location for around 20,000 years, one might surmise that the legend or custom of cave painting was passed from generation to generation, or maybe group to group. However, the truly masterful paintings seemed to only occur when the first group of people lived there.

Of course, they couldn’t return to this cave after the rockslide sealed the entrance. I can only imagine how the people, who may have been returning for time immemorial, 700-900 generations, felt to return and see their sacred cave permanently sealed.

Did they feel it was divine intervention? How did they interpret that? It seems like they would have done more than just shrug.

Did they have any concept of the number of future generations that might succeed them, as they had succeeded their ancestors for those 800 or so generations?

Probably not, but yet there I was, at Chauvet, in the summer of 2023, quite my accident.

The Surprise Visit

I journeyed to France in the summer of 2023 to travel to various ancestral locations via riverboat along the Rhone River, and to bask in the land of countless ancestors.

The tour operators offered day trips that guests could select from, and I chose one that included a walk in the beautiful village of Viviers, a visit to a lavender distillery, and the Ardèche Gorge. Truthfully, it was the lavender distillery, Maison de la Lavande, and the medieval village that hooked me. The Gorge was an added benefit.

Little did I realize…

We set out to visit the Massif Central and the Ardèche region. Ironically, I almost didn’t go, because I was concerned about the twisty curvy roads, and I didn’t want to feel ill. I sat near the front of the tour bus, just behind the driver, which afforded a wonderful view. Albeit, sometimes, a frightening view as the magnitude of the driving challenge was evident.

What I didn’t anticipate was a day trip that would include the Chauvet Cave.

The bus route through the Massif Central followed the Ardèche Gorge and winding Ardèche River, hundreds of feet below.

The river carves its way through the limestone cliffs, sculpting the land beneath and beside it’s wandering path.

It’s truly a long way down. Kayakers enjoy the slow-moving waters.

Kayak rentals abound along the lower reaches of the river.

The road runs high in the mountains, parallel to the river gorge, with overlooks at a few locations along the way. Few places have enough space for an extra lane, so overlooks are quite limited.

It was difficult for me to fend off motion sickness, but I managed, and it turned out to be well worth the effort.

It was an exceptionally hot day, so excuse my appearance.

If I look happy here, I didn’t yet know that the Chauvet Cave would present itself, literally, in front of me.

I hadn’t thought about the Chauvet Cave in some time and hadn’t put two and two together.

A few hours into our journey, we needed to stop for a bathroom break, to give the poor bus and driver a break, and to eat lunch.

When you are driving along the road beneath Chauvet Cave, at the base of the cliffs, you can’t see much of anything except foliage.

You can see the little walk in the field that begins a very steep hike and climb onto the cliffs. I took pictures here with absolutely no idea what I was photographing, although this one is from Google Maps later. What were the chances of taking a photo of that exact place and discovering it only later after the cave’s location had been pointed out to me?

The cave is unmarked, so you’d never know it was there if you didn’t know. We drove right past this incredible site, and no one was aware. It hadn’t clicked yet for me, either.

This unremarkable, humble little fence is the only clue. If you’re worried about me revealing the location, don’t be. The site is impenetrable.

You can see the loop, the location of the cave, the “person” on the road beside the stone building where we ate, and the camera icon is the natural bridge.

Our lunch stop, the stone building above, is essentially the only place in the area that has amenities with parking that could accommodate the bus. There were no other choices, but it was lovely and we didn’t care. I’ve marked the cave to the right, but we still had no idea.

When I say amenities, I mean remote French country, with a very cute, rather rustic but very clean building surrounded by flowers.

We piled out, stood in line for the restroom facilities which had been built onto a historic stone building without restroom facilities. There are very few new buildings in France. You can tell this is the only facility for many miles because this sign expressed exactly how we all felt.

We had a good laugh.

We were invited to find a seat at the few tables at what I think was actually a campground. There were maybe three tables inside and several more outside on the patio.

I’m an outside person, hot weather or not, so I found my way to the most distant table, beneath a tree, across from the vineyard, beside a flower box. Yes indeed, this is my idea of a wonderful, peaceful respite.

I could stay here forever.

This choice would turn out to be an incredible “happy accident.”

One of the two servers brought us a pitcher of ice water and glasses. And wine. Every meal has wine, but I’m not a wine connoisseur so my husband always gets mine too. I’m happy and he’s very happy:)

When traveling as a group, you often don’t get a lunch choice, or if you do, it’s either item 1 or item 2. I don’t recall what I selected. The menu was in French and I got the gist of it, but it really didn’t matter – I’m flexible and like to try new things. Often Jim and I order something different so we can both try two new things. We call it “adventure eating.”

Keep in mind that France is a much more laid back place than the US. Lunch may take an hour. Maybe two. Maybe all afternoon. It’s more about the event and the camaraderie and enjoying the food that getting full.

As we relaxed, waited for our lunch, enjoyed the wine, and chatted among ourselves, for some reason, it struck me that I thought I recalled that the Chauvet Cave was someplace in this region.

I had no cell reception, so I found our lovely French tour guide who was sitting inside with our bus driver, and asked.

I struggle with French, and she struggled with English, so I thought sure she had misunderstood my question when her answer was “Oui, Juste ici,” meaning “Yes, right here.”

No, I didn’t mean generally – I mean where, exactly? Will be pass anyplace close?

Yes, she replied, “it’s right here.”

Wait? What?

Me: Chauvet Cave?

Her: Oui, Grotte Chauvet?

Me: Where?

Her, pointing: “Juste là-bas.“ – Right over there.

Me: Vraiment? (Really?)

Her: “Oui, vraiment.”

My incredulity must have been written all over my face.

She came outside and sat down beside me. I showed her my phone with a picture of a map from earlier. She put the phone on the table and started pointing.

I was very confused.

She stood up and motioned for me to come with her.

We walked across the gravel road to the vineyard and she began to point.

“Right there,” she said, “on the cliff.”

“Where on the cliff?”

“Under the bushes?”

“Which bushes?”

I took this picture, and she pointed to the bushes beneath the rocky portion of the mountain, to the right of the large bushy glob, for lack of another word.

I was utterly and completely dumbstruck.

Speechless.

I stood mute in disbelief.

I finally found my words again and asked how she knew the exact location of the cave? She told me she lived in the little nearby village, and her friend actually discovered the cave. Everyone, she said, who lives there knows exactly where it is.

How is this even remotely possible?

July 8, 2023 – Facebook posting

OMG, I’ve died and gone to Heaven. I’m literally at the Chauvet Cave, the oldest evidence of human art in Europe. And it’s beyond stunning.

I’m pinching myself.

I had no idea we’d be here. This is not a bucket list item for most people, but it assuredly is for me. I’ve worked with and studied human migration for 25 years now, and this cave is sacred.

Very few people inhabited what would be Europe 35K years ago. Those that did painted this cave, recording animals we had no idea lived here. They were probably the ancestors, one way or the other, of most Europeans and their descendants today.

As luck would have it, a friend of our guide that lives in her tiny village discovered the cave, so she knew exactly where it is – and showed me.

Better yet, I’m having lunch looking directly at the cave. I feel like I’m living a dream. First this stunning location and then to discover I sat myself in front of the cave.

I truly could not believe the incredible odds that I would accidentally manage, by happenstance, to wind up having lunch is a remote region of mountainous France, literally looking at Chauvet Cave immediately in front of me.

And, by luck of the draw, have a women from this area who knew exactly where the cave is as my tour guide – for a tour that originated maybe three hours away on the Rhone River.

Tell me my ancestors weren’t calling to me.

I sat spellbound, eating the artistic, beautiful food, in the best seat in all of the Ardèche Department in France.

I cannot take my eyes off of the limestone cliff wall – connecting with those people who walked there, perhaps my most distant ancestors in Europe, across 40,000 years. I wonder how those humans originally found the cave. Were they seeking shelter?

We had some free time, and I left the group and walked alone in the vineyard that stands as a silent sentry today. Did the people who painted the cave also cultivate any agriculture, or was that still too early in human history.

I was spellbound to this place and that time. Utterly transfixed.

I saw a path, and I had to explore. Isn’t that the story of my life. Is that what they did, too?

I walked towards the cave, which seems to beckon me. Perhaps the cave that sheltered humanity, allowing us to survive.

I feel like I’ve been drawn home to the cradle of European humanity – the wellspring of our shared human story. Hooked like an unwitting fish in the water and reeled right in by some powerful ancestral force.

I don’t know how to describe this surreal moment other than perhaps some combination of an out-of-body experience and transcendent state of flow. Time paused, or perhaps collapsed in on itself. The boundaries between then and now, and them and me, dissolved. It felt both ancient and present – beyond time as we understand it – an umbilical cord somehow inexplicably tethering us.

Words are entirely inadequate.

In this picture, you can see the steep access path, beneath the rocky ledge, and other caves as well.

You’ll notice other limestone caves all along the cliffs throughout the region, but none of those caves even hold a candle to Chauvet – and none were treated in the same way. Why was Chauvet special?

Caves aren’t easy to access. Either they are high on the cliff walls, requiring either rappelling down or climbing up through narrow paths, then fissured rocks.

Here’s a nearby limestone cave. And no, I did not go splunking. Being with a tour group does not afford that amount of flexibility – especially since the cave wasn’t even on the agenda at all. Plus, by this time, I was alone, and you NEVER embark on a risky adventure alone. I’ve been there, done that, and broke my ankle in the process. Plus, there was more to see.

I turned around and hiked down to the river to see what awaited there.

This area is extremely popular with kayakers who walk their kayaks down this path and launch just before the beautiful natural arch bridge which you can see, at left, above.

By Jan Hager – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=51738871

After reaching the water, I decided to hike on the path above and along the river, which afforded me a stunning view of the river, bridge and the mountains on both sides.

I suddenly realized that the river level 35,000 years ago was MUCH higher than it is today. It didn’t run beneath the arch, which hadn’t yet been hollowed out, but over the top, which meant the valley floor was also elevated.

OH!

The river is to my immediate right, and path in front of me continues straight to the mountains, or turns left to Chauvet. Isn’t that the perfect metaphor for life.

Standing at the intersection of the walk to the river, and the path alongside the river, you can see the bridge in the center, just to the right of the fence, the mountains on both sides, and Chauvet to the far left.

On this photo, I’ve marked both the top of the arch of the bridge, and the Chauvet cave, with red arrows. Based on the elevation, you can see that before the river carved the bridge, the landscape of the valley would not have been worn away, and human access to the cave would have been much different. In other words, the valley floor would have been much closer to the cave.

This makes so much sense.

As much as I wanted to stay, it was time for me to go.

I found it ironic that on the way back to join the group at the bus, I found this sign which, translated by ChatGPT, says:

The Invisible History of the Pont d’Arc

The arch of the Pont d’Arc is a unique natural monument in the world.
It has probably fascinated humanity for millennia.

Like a totem, it evokes a gateway between two worlds: the visible and the invisible, the familiar and the wild, mystery and knowledge.

Hidden within this setting is the decorated Chauvet-Pont d’Arc Cave,
classified as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

It has revealed to our amazed eyes drawings over 36,000 years old.

But did you know that this site holds other hidden stories?

By exploring the Combe d’Arc, discover the invisible stories sheltered by this majestic landscape:

    • how water sculpted, drop by drop, this mineral arch
    • how, over the ages, humans found their place in this extraordinary location

Introspective Journey

While the rest of our tour group had lunch, sandwiched between two other stops, plus some time to walk along the river and view the natural bridge, I had taken an amazing journey back in time and visited ancient humanity. The people who painted those incredible images in the Chauvet Cave are probably the ancestors of every European, assuming even one of them survived to reproduce, or the ancestors of no one today, if their lines perished.

One way or another, humanity did survive, and standing on this sacred site allows us, today, to glimpse a time far in the past – just as our mitochondrial and Y-DNA do as well.

Our own ancestors speak to us from long ago, and the mutations we carry from them light the way back in time, through the Ardeche and the mountainous regions of France, expanding into the rest of Europe.

A priceless window in time.

Indeed, as Eliette exclaimed, “They have been here,” and perhaps they still are, in us.

Resources

If you’re interested, I found three YouTube videos that expand upon the Chauvet Cave.

My one regret is that I didn’t know about the Cavern du Pont-d’Arc, a vast to-scale reproduction of the Chauvet Cave. I would have found a way to visit, even if I had to hire a private driver for a day.

___________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research

New “Share” Features at FamilyTreeDNA Blur Match Information and Make Sharing Easy

Have you ever wished you didn’t have to blur or otherwise redact each name and other sensitive information in order to share your DNA match results? Or maybe you’d like to share fun Discover pages? Well, you got your wish!

FamilyTreeDNA has introduced a new “Share” feature in two locations. The first Share feature is available in your personal account after signing in, and two additional features can be found in Discover.

  1. “Share Mode” on your personal page obfuscates the names and photos of your matches.
  2. “Share Mode” in Discover obfuscates the names and photos of your matches on your Match Time Tree.
  3. “Share Page” in Discover shares publicly available pages to social media or provides a sharing link for you.

These are extremely easy to use and help immensely, allowing you to share screenshots on social media and with family without revealing the names of your matches.

I’ll show you, step-by-step, how to use all three.

“Share Mode” in Your Personal Account

When you want to enable Share Mode, you just toggle it on.

Sign in to your account at FamilyTreeDNA.

Select Account Settings beneath your name in the upper right-hand corner.

Under Privacy and Sharing, toggle Share Mode to “ON.” Default is “OFF.”

Sharing turns itself back off each time you sign out, so you’ll need to do this each time you sign on and want to share.

To see the results, let’s take a look at my match page. Sharing works the same way for Y-DNA matching, mitochondrial or Family Finder.

Not only does Share obfuscate your matches’ names, it also blurs their picture, and your information as well, at upper right.

This is wonderful for presenters!

Using “Share Mode” in Discover

On your dashboard, for either Y-DNA or mitochondrial DNA, select “Discover Haplogroup Reports” in the appropriate section.

Discover has two ways to share.

You can share your Match Time Tree, or other pages – using different tools.

Only one Discover page, the Match Time Tree, contains potentially sensitive match information. There’s a “Share Mode” for the Match Time Tree that blurs private information.

However, you may want to share your other Discover reports on social media. “Share Page” provides a quick and easy way to share any publicly available page.

Let’s look at both of those options.

Discover “Share Page”

Every page in Discover, except for the Match Time Tree and Globetrekker, has a “Share Page” icon at the top.

You can share any Discover page on social media (except as noted below), whether you’ve clicked through to Discover from your dashboard, or you’re using the public version of Discover.

In this case, I clicked on “Share Page” to share my Haplogroup Story page to Facebook. On your social media platform of choice, or by sharing the link, your friends can click through to see the page you’ve shared – minus your name and photo.

Please note that there are four Discover pages that either do not share or will display reduced information when using “Share Page,” as follows:

  • Globetrekker is an amazing animated video of your ancestors’ trek across the planet which is reserved for FamilyTreeDNA clients who purchase the Big-Y test or the mtFull, full sequence mitochondrial DNA test. Globetrekker does not use the “Share Page” feature, and is not yet released for mtDNA Discover.
  • Ancient Connections uses the “Share Page” feature, but only publicly displays a few ancient DNA haplogroup matches. Several more are reserved for testers who have taken either the Big-Y or mitochondrial DNA full sequence test, and click through from their dashboard. In a kit I just checked, two or three displayed when shared publicly, but the tester had more than 20 when clicking through his dashboard.
  • Notable Connections uses the “Share Page” feature and functions like Ancient Connections.
  • The Match Time Tree does not use the “Share Page” feature, which populates to social media, but there is a “Share Mode” option which blurs your matches’ sensitive information, similar to your personal page. After blurring, you can take screen shots to share.

Discover Share Mode for the Match Time Tree

The Match Time Tree on Discover is an extension of matching – meaning that your matches are placed on the Time Tree with names of tester-provided Earliest Known Ancestors (EKA) and their country of origin listed.

To view your Match Time Tree, click through to Discover from your FamilyTreeDNA dashboard, then select “Match Time Tree.”

You need to enable “Share Mode” within Discover, even if you had it enabled on your personal page. Toggle “Share Mode” to ON at the top of your Match Time Tree page.

Enabling “Share Mode” obfuscates the names and photos of people on your match list, who now appear on your Discover Time Tree in their proper place. You’re there too!

To share this page publicly, you’ll need to take a screenshot – so please don’t forget to enable “Share Mode” within Discover before doing this.

Benefits of Sharing

The best thing we can do for DNA testing, speaking broadly, is to encourage additional testers who are excited about what they can discover.

Sharing our pages and discoveries on social media is a great way to generate excitement.

Who do you know that might be excited to discover that they share an ancestor with Leo Tolstoy or maybe “Wild Bill” Hickock, even if it’s hundreds of years ago?

How about discovering that an Ancient Connection is a Viking man who was buried in Shestovista, Ukraine about a thousand years ago, and you two shared an ancestor about 1900 years ago? Might that provide a clue about your genealogy? What was the life of your ancestor like?

Or, maybe your friends and relatives would be excited to view the path their ancestors took, marching across the map, until their ancestor arrives on the globe where their haplogroup is most recently anchored?

Trying to get Uncle John or Aunt Mary to test? What kind of information would they think is cool?

A scientist I know especially loves the Ancient Connections that extend far beyond the reach of surnames.

One of my ancestral lines has an ancient DNA match just 9 kilometers from the town where they are rumored to have originated in France. Along the ancient Roman road. How else would I have EVER made this discovery?

The more people that test, the larger the matching pool – and the better for all genealogists.

Thank you to FamilyTreeDNA for introducing “Share Mode,” which makes sharing matches with other researchers effortless, and for “Share Page” within Discover, which makes sharing publicly a breeze!

Who can you share and collaborate with?

______________________________________________________________

Sign Up Now – It’s Free!

If you appreciate this article, subscribe to DNAeXplain for free, to automatically receive new articles by e-mail each week.

Here’s the link. Just look for the black “follow” button on the right-hand side on your computer screen below the black title bar, enter your e-mail address, and you’re good to go!

In case you were wondering, I never have nor ever will share or use your e-mail outside of the intended purpose.

_____________________________________________________________

Share the Love!

You’re always welcome to forward articles or links to friends and share on social media.

If you haven’t already subscribed (it’s free,) you can receive an e-mail whenever I publish by clicking the “follow” button on the main blog page, here.

You Can Help Keep This Blog Free

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase your price but helps me keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

Thank you so much.

DNA Purchases and Free Uploads

Genealogy Products and Services

My Books

Genealogy Books

Genealogy Research