January 28, 2018

Mothers of the nation

In 1666, after three generations of French colonial presence, Louis XIV’s minister for the colonies, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, complained that Frenchmen who wanted to trade—mostly for furs—still had to communicate in the natives’ language.

Part of the solution to this was to send out well-brought-up French girls, filles à marier, to marry the settlers and create French-speaking homes. Among them were the famous filles du Roy, ‘king’s daughters’, mostly orphans from bourgeois families, whose travel and subsistence costs—and in some cases dowries—were borne by the Treasury. 

Some nine hundred of them were sent out between 1665 and 1673, to boost the population (3,215 according to the census of 1665), and improve the sex ratio (2:1 male to female). 


Fortescu-Brickdale, Arrival of the Brides

Although the intendant of the colony, Jean Talon, told Colbert that he would have preferred village girls, ready to work like men, rather than these delicate young ladies, they seem to have been a good investment. The population of Nouvelle-France reached 20,000 in 1713 and 55,000 in 1755. The fertility rate averaged a whopping 7.8 children per woman.

- Ostler, Empires of the Word


The Wikipedia article on the founder effect makes special note of Quebec:
While the French Canadians of Quebec today may be partly of other ancestries, the genetic contribution of the original [8,500 or so] French founders is predominant, explaining about 90% of regional gene pools, while Acadians (descended from other French settlers in eastern Canada) explain 4%, British 2% and Native American and other groups contributed less.
(link)

4 Comments:

Blogger VMM said...

Maybe I should check out this book.

January 28, 2018 at 5:08 PM  
Blogger The Other Front said...

It is trench warfare, but worth it. I am about halfway through.

January 28, 2018 at 7:13 PM  
Blogger VMM said...

Jeez, it'll probably take me years to get through, then

January 29, 2018 at 5:07 PM  
Blogger The Other Front said...

I've been at it for at least three months. Here is a random page - I've boldface all the things I would probably want to look up:

Moscow had a good central position within Rus, and its triumph over the other city-states was partly due to the fact that it stayed unified, having the luck to produce a single male heir in each generation in the fourteenth century. The Grand Prince of Moscow, Dmitriy Donskoy, defeated the Mongols in 1380 [someone defeated the Mongols?!], and in 1480 Ivan III finally repudiated their suzerainty. The Moscow princes (knyazi) were going up in the world: about the same time, Ivan married Sophía Palaiológou, the niece of the last Byzantine emperor (deposed in 1453), and claimed to have inherited imperial status through a special donation of insignia from Constantinos Monómakhos (Byzantine emperor) to Vladimir Monomakh (Prince of Kiev) in the eleventh century. Moscow began to be represented as the Third Rome, and the monk Filofey of Pskov wrote to Ivan III at the end of the fifteenth century: ‘Thou art the sole Emperor of all the Christians in the whole universe… For two Romes have fallen, the third stands, and there shall be no fourth.'

It is slow going, on the other hand, this is the closes thing I have ever read to a true and complete single volume history of the world, so there's that.

January 29, 2018 at 7:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home