![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This is a sandbox/working group page for the rewrite of the section of the article covering Étienne de Perier's time as governor.
(work in progress)
In August 1726, after then governor of French Louisiana Pierre Dugué de Boisbriant was recalled to France, [1] Perier was appointed commandant general of the territory, overseeing military matters and relations with the Native Americans. [2] He arrived in New Orleans in October 1726 [3] and established his home at 613 Royal Street. [4]
Despite Perier's lack of experience in colonial administration, the Company of the Indies felt they had a long-time employee who would be a pliant administrator focused on the Company’s goals. [5] To ensure this, the Company granted him an annual salary of 10,000 French livres, [6] [a] 10 acres (4.0 hectares) of riverfront land, and eight enslaved people a year so long as he remained in office. [7] He sold the land, which is in the modern McDonoghville neighborhood, in 1737. [8]
The Company directed Perier to increase the profitability of the colony, enforce discipline and loyalty, and keep the English from entering the territory. [9] He was specifically tasked with completing improvements to secure the health and safety of New Orleans, as well as to visit the Company settlement in Natchez. [10] Perier also sought to diffuse some of the partisan, religious, and familial cliques that had made running the colony difficult for his predecessors. [11] In this he had some initial successes, particularly in managing the dispute between Jesuit and Capuchin missionaries. [12]
Perier launched a large public works effort, overseeing the construction of the first levees on the Mississippi, [13] cleared forests and brush from the land between the city and Lake Pontchartrain, [13] and dug a canal from the Mississippi to connect the river to a rice mill on the king's plantation and Bayou St. John. [14] He also welcomed the Ursuline nuns to the city; his wife, Catherine, laid the cornerstone for the nun's first convent in the city. [15]
Achieving these public works required the labor of enslaved Africans. The Company had a monopoly on the slave trade and oversaw the importation of more captured Africans to Louisiana when it controlled the colony than at any other point in the 18th century. [16] With this steady supply of new captives, Perier tended to put enslaved people to work on public projects until they were auctioned off to local slavehoders. [17] To increase the available workforce, Perier began conscripting enslaved people for 30 days at a time. In most cases, they were conscripted when the Company first brought them to Louisiana, before delivering them to their purchasers, which raised the ire of Louisiana slaveholders. [18] Perier instituted an apprenticeship program where enslaved people were loaned to craftsmen for three years to train them as brickmakers, joiners, masons, carpenters, and other skilled trades necessary to the growth and development of the colony. [19] He also put enslaved Africans to work on Company ships, navigating the coast and rivers. [20]
At the time, both Africans and Native Americans were enslaved by French settlers. Perier was increasingly concerned about alliances among enslaved people, and he encouraged slaveholders to keep enslaved Africans apart from enslaved Native Americans for fear of the two groups forming alliances. He was particularly concerned that Native Americans who escaped from slavery would induce enslaved Africans to also escape and seek the protection of Native tribes. [21] To foster mistrust between the two groups, Perier used armed enslaved Black troops to attack neighboring Native Americans, [22] and he continued the policy of rewarding Native Americans for capturing escapees and disrupting maroon communities. [23]
Perier's taking office marked the end of the indigenous policy established by the former governor Bienville. Despite having been encouraged to learn from what Bienville had written about relations with the Native Americans [24] and recognizing the need to improve relations to forestall British advancement into the territory, [25] Perier instead broke with Bienville's policy of diplomatic engagement with neighboring tribes. [26] [27]
Louisiana's colonial administrators at the time tried to balance the need to maintain good relations with Native Americans with demands from settlers for more and better land; [28] however, Perier did not recognize Native American ownership of their traditional lands. [28] This was in line with French desires to colonize New France, as opposed to earlier efforts to maintain the territory as a resource for trade. [29] [30]
While Perier did work to maintain positive relations with France's Choctaw and Quapaw allies, in other cases, he sought to dominate tribes unwilling to align with France's colonial ambitions. In Illinois, at the border between France's Canada and Louisiana territories, the Meskwaki (Fox) in 1728 again declared war on France. Pereir, his counterpart in Canada the Marquis de Beauharnois, and the local commanders pursued a policy of complete destruction against the Meskwaki, despite the ill will it generated with other Native American tribes in the region. [31] [32] This approach would be seen in Perier's response to the Natchez revolt.
The territory of the Natchez, on bluffs above the Mississippi River, had been noted by the Company of the Indies for its agricultural potential as early as 1717, [29] and Fort Rosalie and several tobacco plantations were established there after the First Natchez War in 1716. [33] The Company specifically told Perier to attend to the development of the Natchez settlement, [10] and Perier saw an opportunity to establish his own plantation in the area, too. [34]
To oversee Fort Rosalie and the Natchez settlement, Perier appointed the Sieur de Chépart. [35] [b] Chépart was described as "rapacious, haughty, and tyrannical," [38] abusing soldiers, settlers, and the Natchez alike, [39] including throwing Dumont de Montigny who had overseen the fort under the previous commandant, into chains. [40] With the help of some Illiniwek traders, Dumont escaped to New Orleans and reported on Chépart's actions; [41] the commandant was called before the Superior Council, which found him guilty of "acts of injustice." [42]
Perier, who according to some sources was already in a partnership with Chépart to establish a large plantation at Natchez, [34] overruled the Superior Council, pardoned Chépart, and sent him back to the Natchez territory. [43] Upon his return, Chépart was working to secure land for himself and Perier's plantation. [42] [44] In spring 1729, Chépart ordered the Natchez to abandon the village of White Apple, an important cultural and religious site for the Natchez, planting a missionary cross on the land to indicate he was acting on Perier's orders. [45] To delay action against them, the Natchez asked Chépart to wait until after the fall harvest so they would be able to remove their ancestor's remains from White Apple. [40] He granted their request, and the Natchez used the delay to plan the attack that marked the beginning of the Natchez revolt. [46]
On November 28, 1729, the Natchez Chief, the Great Sun, led his warriors into Fort Rosalie and captured the settlement, killing Chépart and between 229 and 285 colonists and enslaved people and taking about 450 captives, mostly French women and enslaved people. A about a month later, the Natchez's allies, the Yazoo, made a similar attack on Fort St. Pierre. [47] Ahead of the attack, the Natchez also recruited several enslaved Africans, arguing that driving off the colonists would mean freedom for them too. [48]
In response to the Natchez revolt, according to historian Lyle Saxon, Perier "made the grave mistake of trying to inspire the Indians with fear," [49] seeking the complete destruction of the Natchez and their allies to ensure the safety of the colony. [50] He began by authorizing an attack on the unaligned Chaouacha tribe south of New Orleans by enslaved Blacks in December 1729, [48] rewarding the men by freeing them from slavery. [51] He also proposed attacks against other tribes along the Mississippi, regardless of their involvement in the revolt, earning a rebuke from Controller-General of Finances Philibert Orry, who described the plan as "acting against all the rules of good government and against those of humanity." [52]
In January 1730, French and allied Choctaw soldiers caught the Natchez by surprise and recovered 54 women and children and 100 enslaved people. [48] Throughout 1730, Perier sought to make examples of captured Natchez men and women, including torturing them and burning them alive in public executions. [49] [53] Lacking enough troops to handle the revolt, and unwilling to rely too heavily on France's Choctaw allies, Perier sought reinforcements from France. [54]
The Natchez continued to resist the French until January 1731 when Perier and colonial soldiers, along with two battalions of marines commanded by his brother, Antoine-Alexis, successfully captured the Natchez's Grand Village. The Great Sun and nearly 500 more Natchez men, women, and children were captured and shipped to Saint-Domingue where they were sold into slavery. [55] However an undetermined number of other Natchez escaped to seek refuge with (and eventual assimilation) into other tribes, including the English-allied Chickasaw and Cherokee, [56] further straining the French's already poor relationship with the Chickasaw. [57]
In his reports on the Natchez revolt and his response, Perier suggested a conspiracy among the tribes, perhaps with British encouragement, was responsible for the revolt, to divert attention from the role Chépart and his orders played in igniting the conflict. [58] However, this story did not gain credence back in France, [57] nor in Louisiana. [59] Instead, Perier was criticized by the Company for letting his personal plans for a Natchez plantation distract him from his public responsibilities. [47] This fits the analysis of historian Michael James Forêt, who finds that the roots of the Natchez revolt "lay in a larger pattern of Franco–Natchez conflict and the greed of Perier and the commandant of Fort Rosalie." [60]
In there aftermath of the revot, Perier attempted to punish the Chickasaw for taking in Natchez refugees and continued his harsh approach toward even allied Native Americans, which raised the concern of other military and civil officails in the colony. [61] At the same time though, he sought to reward some Native allies, such as the Quapaw, by expanding trading posts. [62]
In June 1731, Perier faced an attempted slave uprising, the Samba rebellion, involving enslaved Bambara peoples inspired by the Natchez revolt. As he had done with Natchez prisoners, Perier ordered torture and public executions via breaking wheel for the men and women who planned the attempted uprising. [63]
In the end, Perier was criticized for his support of Chépart and his policies towards Native Americans, which failed to provide security and stability for the colony. [64] Ultimately, the result of the revolt was a further weakening of the Company, which was still suffering from the bursting of the Mississippi Bubble in 1720. Due to its ongoing financial losses in the territory in 1731 the Company abandoned its charter and returned Louisiana to the king. [65] [66] [67] Despite questions about his management of the Natchez revolt, Perier remained in place as governor of the colony, although the king's advisors, particularly the Count of Maupaus, sought to replace Perier. [68]
In 1733, Perier was recalled to France to answer for his handling of the Natchez revolt, and former Louisiana governor Bienville was appointed to replace him. [68]
Hi Carter, You made an serious work of research and this proposal is a very good start. Some remarks:
asks the Natchez to leave their landi of White Apple to make a plantation for him and Perier) s cited by several authors as the reason that led to the revolt of Natches. Even the Company blamed Perier for that. Thanks.
Regard, -- Belyny ( talk) 15:12, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
The Company was working to increase tobacco farming in the colony, and Chépart and Perier eyed the Natchez territory along the Mississippi as a ripe opportunity for a new plantation. Chépart issued an order for the Natchez to begin planning for their complete removal from White Apple Village and other Natchez territory. These actions sparked the Natchez revolt.
Hi Carter, I thought I was clear:
-- Belyny ( talk) 17:40, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Carter, I took time to read again your proposal and my proposal.
I do not agree with your point of view : the Carter Godwin Woodson quote at the end of the "Slavery policies" section is not WP:UNDUE and is quite relevant in this subparagraph : Godwin Woodson is referring to some enslaved Africans joining in the Natchez Revolt but to Perier's decision to arme a band of slaves in 1729 and sent them to the Chouchas with instructions to exterminate the tribe. Godwin Woodson writes : Just above New Orleans lived a small tribe of Indians, the Chouchas, who, not particularly harmful in themselves, had succeeded in inspiring the nervous inhabitants of the city with abject fear. Perier armed a band of slaves in 1729 and sent them to the Chouchas with instructions to exterminate the tribe. They did their work with an ease and dispatch that should have been a warning to their white masters. In reporting the success of his plan Perier said: “The Negroes executed their mission with as much promptitude as secrecy. This lesson taught them by our Negroes, kept in check all the nations higher up the river.” Thus, by one stroke the wily Governor had intimidated the tribes of Indians, allayed the nervous fears of New Orleans, and effected a state of hostility between the Indians and the Africans, who were beginning to be entirely too friendly with each other. .. Perier's cruel logic was reactionary. Since he had used blacks to murder Indians in order to make bad blood between the races, the Indians retaliated by using blacks to murder white men." The quote supports Perier's general policy of discouraging interaction between enslaved Africans and Native Americans. This fact is reminded by many sources [2]. -- Belyny ( talk) 18:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Carter,
I’m counting on your understanding so that we can find consensus on these sections in order to move on the last sections. Regards, -- Belyny ( talk) 18:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Regard, -- Belyny ( talk) 18:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Carter,
"To foster mistrust between the two groups, Perier used armed enslaved Black troops to attack neighboring Native Americans, and he continued the policy of rewarding Native Americans for capturing escapees and disrupting maroon communities."That states simply and plainly Perier's policy of working to keep Native Americans and enslaved Africans at odds with each other. The first half of it may be overstating the case because it too is primarily post-Natchez Revolt and centers on the Chaouacha attack. However, it is not WP:OR or incomplete in any way.
"Perier's cruel logic was reactionary. Since he had used blacks to murder Indians in order to make bad blood between the races, the Indians retaliated by using blacks to murder white men."adds nothing to the text. I'll admit I read the Dunbar Nelson article more closely this time trying to see your point. You said above
The quote supports Perier's general policy of discouraging interaction between enslaved Africans and Native Americans.The quote you put in my comment above makes it clear Dunbar Nelson is talking about the attack on the Chaouacha and not a broader policy. I've tried to read the quote as supporting a broader policy, but it's not what the text says. Breaking the quote down, Dunbar Nelson is saying that Perier's attempt to intimidate the Natchez and other tribes with his attack on Chaouacha failed to cower the Natchez and instead led them to encourage slave revolts. Look at the construction of the sentence; she places the Native reaction after Perier's attack ("because he used blacks ... the Indians retaliated"). Look at the paragraph it is used in; she flows from that quote into discussion of the Samba Rebellion. The first bit
"Perier's cruel logic was reactionary."adds confusion in that it seems to imply Perier was reacting to Natchez provocation, but instead is meaning that it sparked a reaction. (Looking at the etymology of the word and how the root word réactionnaire is used in French, perhaps that is causing some confusion here; the implications of the word in modern English, I'm not sure about in 1916 when the line was published, are a bit different.)
Hi Carter,
Hi Carter, we do not have a consensus on this section and I totally disagree with your arguments to refute the relevance of Alice Moore Dunbar Nelson quote in this section, but as I am tired of arguing for nothing, I stop this pointless discussion on this point. Regards -- Belyny ( talk) 15:42, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
MY (Belyny) NEW PROPOSAL :
In August 1726, after then governor of French Louisiana Pierre Dugué de Boisbriant was recalled to France, [2] Perier was appointed commandant general of the territory, overseeing military matters and relations with the Native Americans. [3] He arrived in New Orleans in October 1726 [4] and established his home at 613 Royal Street. [5]
Despite Perier's lack of experience in colonial administration, the Company of the Indies felt they had a long-time employee who would be a pliant administrator focused on the Company’s goals. [6] To ensure this, the Company granted him an annual salary of 10,000 French livres, [7] [a] 10 acres (4.0 hectares) of riverfront land, and eight enslaved people a year so long as he remained in office. [8] He sold the land, which is in the modern McDonoghville neighborhood, in 1737. [9]
The Company directed Perier to increase the profitability of the colony, enforce discipline and loyalty, and keep the English from entering the territory. [10] He was specifically tasked with completing improvements to secure the health and safety of New Orleans, as well as to visit the Company settlement in Natchez. [11] Perier also sought to diffuse some of the partisan, religious, and familial cliques that had made running the colony difficult for his predecessors. [12] In this he had some initial successes, particularly in managing the dispute between Jesuit and Capuchin missionaries. [13]
Perier's taking office marked the end of the indigenous policy pursued by Governor Bienville. [14]
Perier launched a large public works effort, overseeing the construction of the first levees on the Mississippi, [15] cleared forests and brush from the land between the city and Lake Pontchartrain, [15] and dug a canal from the Mississippi to connect the river to a rice mill on the king's plantation and Bayou St. John. [16] He also welcomed the Ursuline nuns to the city; his wife, Catherine, laid the cornerstone for the nun's first convent in the city. [17]
Achieving these public works required the labor of enslaved Africans. The Company had a monopoly on the slave trade and oversaw the importation of more captured Africans to Louisiana when it controlled the colony than at any other point in the 18th century. [18] With this steady supply of new captives, Perier tended to put enslaved people to work on public projects until they were auctioned off to local slavehoders. [19] To increase the available workforce, Perier began conscripting enslaved people for 30 days at a time. In most cases, they were conscripted when the Company first brought them to Louisiana, before delivering them to their purchasers, which raised the ire of Louisiana slaveholders. [20] Perier instituted an apprenticeship program where enslaved people were loaned to craftsmen for three years to train them as brickmakers, joiners, masons, carpenters, and other skilled trades necessary to the growth and development of the colony. [21] He also put enslaved Africans to work on Company ships, navigating the coast and rivers. [22]
At the time, both Africans and Native Americans were enslaved by French settlers. Perier was increasingly concerned about alliances among enslaved people, and he encouraged slaveholders to keep enslaved Africans apart from enslaved Native Americans for fear of the two groups forming alliances. He was particularly concerned that Native Americans who escaped from slavery would induce enslaved Africans to also escape and seek the protection of Native tribes. [23] To foster mistrust between the two groups, Perier used armed enslaved Black troops to attack neighboring Native Americans, [24] and he continued the policy of rewarding Native Americans for capturing escapees and disrupting maroon communities. [25] Carter Godwin in The Journal of Negro History writes : "Perier's logic was reactionary. Since he had used blacks to murder Indians in order to make bad blood between the races, the Indians retaliated by using blacks to murder white men" [26]
Despite having been encouraged to learn from what former Bienville had written about relations with the Native Americans [27] and recognizing the need to improve relations to forestall British advancement into the territory, [28] Perier instead broke with Bienville's policy of diplomatic engagement with neighboring tribes. [29] [30] and according to Lyle Saxon "made the grave mistake of trying to inspire the Indians with fear". [31]
Louisiana's colonial administrators at the time tried to balance the need to maintain good relations with Native Americans with demands from settlers for more and better land; [32] however, Perier did not recognize Native American ownership of their traditional lands. [32] This was in line with French desires to colonize New France, as opposed to earlier efforts to maintain the territory as a resource for trade. [33] [34]
While Perier did work to maintain positive relations with France's Choctaw and Quapaw allies, in other cases, he sought to dominate tribes unwilling to align with France's colonial ambitions. In Illinois, at the border between France's Canada and Louisiana territories, the Meskwaki (Fox tribe) in 1728 again declared war on France. Pereir, his counterpart in Canada the Marquis de Beauharnois, and the local commanders pursued a policy of complete destruction against the Meskwaki, despite the ill will it generated with other Native American tribes in the region. [35] [36] This approach would be seen in Perier's response to the Natchez revolt.
The territory of the Natchez, on bluffs above the Mississippi River, had been noted by the Company of the Indies for its agricultural potential as early as 1717, [33] and Fort Rosalie and several tobacco plantations were established there after the First Natchez War in 1716. [37] After arriving in Louisiana, and with an eye on establishing his own plantation in the area, [38]
Perier wished to establish for himself a large plantation near the Natchez village. He entered into a partnership with a sieur Chepart (or d'Etcheparre), known as a drunkard and brash person and promised him an interest in the futur plantation if he could secure the Natchez land. [39]Together they planed to operate this plantation on the rich lands held by the Natchez [40]
Perier appointed Chepart to command Fort Rosalie and oversee trade with the Natchez. [41] Immediately, Chepart tyrannized the people and abused his power buy his presence had to be tolerated because of his friendship with governor Périer and his protection. [42] Finally Chepart was summoned before the Superior Council which found him guilty, but Perier pardoned Chepart and restored him to his command. Chepart could return to Natchez to pursue his plans to establish concessions for both himself and governor Perier on Indian Territory [43]
Chepart told the Natchez that he wished to seize land for a plantation in the center of White Apple, where the Natchez had a temple of their people's graves. [44] [45] [46] Governor Périer sided with Chépart and planted a cross on the land he sought. [47] [46]
Perier and Chepart parternship to expel the Indians in order to establish a plantation on their land triggered the Natchez revolt in october 1729. Alan Gallay wrote that the Natchez revolt "lay in a larger pattern of Franco-Natchez conflict and the greed of Perier and the commandant of Fort Rosalie". [48]
Accusations at this time the time go in the same direction : "His tyranny and his exactions goaded the Natchez to fury. This Dechepare was a creature of Perier ... his attempt to seize the land of the Natchez and to drive the Indians out of their village precipitated the crisis. But he Commandant, though reviled by everybody, was following instructions. In an unsigned memoir, date January, 1731, we read : "Moreover, it is secretly maintained, that the cause of the Natchez massacre should not be imputed to the late Chepart alone... and that he was following written orders which some people are said to have read". Elsewhere the accusation is more clearly formulated : "The reason which led the Natchez to perpetrate such a deed, is that M. Perier having the intention of beginning a plantation in their country in partnership with Dechepare...had asked him to drive out the Natchez... in order to take the land occupied by the Indians for their plantations". [49]
On November 28, 1729, the Natchez Chief, the Great Sun, led his warriors into Fort Rosalie and captured the settlement, killing between 229 and 285 colonists and enslaved people and taking about 450 captives, mostly French women and enslaved people. A about a month later, the Natchez's allies, the Yazoo, made a similar attack on Fort St. Pierre. [50] Ahead of the attack, the Natchez also recruited several enslaved Africans, arguing that driving off the colonists would mean freedom for them too. [51]
In response to the Natchez revolt, Perier sought the complete destruction of the Natchez and their allies to ensure the safety of the colony. [52] He began by authorizing an attack on the unaligned Chaouacha tribe south of New Orleans by enslaved Black volunteers in December 1729, [51] rewarding the men by freeing them from slavery. [53] He also proposed attacks against other tribes along the Mississippi, regardless of their involvement in the revolt, earning a rebuke from Controller-General of Finances Philibert Orry, who described the plan as "acting against all the rules of good government and against those of humanity." [54]
In January 1730, French and allied Choctaw soldiers caught the Natchez by surprise and recovered 54 women and children and 100 enslaved people. [51] Throughout 1730, Perier sought to make examples of captured Natchez men and women, including torturing them and burning them alive in public executions. [55] [56] Lacking enough troops to handle the revolt, and unwilling to rely too heavily on France's Choctaw allies, Perier sought reinforcements from France. [57]
The Natchez continued to resist the French until January 1731 when Perier and colonial soldiers, along with two battalions of marines commanded by his brother, Antoine-Alexis, successfully captured the Natchez's Grand Village. Great Sun and nearly 500 more Natchez men, women, and children were captured and shipped to Saint-Domingue where they were sold into slavery. [58] However an undetermined number of other Natchez escaped to seek refuge with (and eventual assimilation) into other tribes, including the English-allied Chickasaw and Cherokee, [59] further straining the French's already poor relationship with the Chickasaw. [60]
In his reports on the Natchez revolt and his response, Perier suggested a conspiracy among the tribes, perhaps with British encouragement, was responsible for the revolt, to divert attention from the role Chépart and his orders played in igniting the conflict. [61] However, this story did not gain credence back in France, [60] nor in Louisiana. [62] Instead, Perier was criticized by the Company for letting his personal plans for a Natchez plantation distract him from his public responsibilities. [50] There were also concerns about his continued harsh approach towards even allied Native Americans and attempts to punish the Chickasaw for taking in Natchez refugees. [63] Although at the same time, he sought to reward some Native allies, such as the Quapaw, by expanding trading posts. [64]
In June 1731, Perier faced an attempted slave uprising, the Samba rebellion, involving enslaved Bambara peoples inspired by the Natchez revolt. As he had done with Natchez prisoners, Perier ordered torture and public executions via breaking wheel for the men and women who planned the attempted uprising. [65]
In the end, Perier was criticized for his support of Chépart and his policies towards Native Americans, which failed to provide security and stability for the colony. [66] Ultimately, the result of the revolt was a further weakening of the Company, which was still suffering from the bursting of the Mississippi Bubble in 1720. Due to its ongoing financial losses in the territory in 1731 the Company abandoned its charter and returned Louisiana to the king. [67] [68] [69] Despite questions about his management of the Natchez revolt, Perier remained in place as governor of the colony, although the king's advisors, particularly the Count of Maupaus, sought to replace Perier. [70]
In 1733, Perier was recalled to France to answer for his handling of the Natchez revolt, and former Louisiana governor Bienville was appointed to replace him. [70]
{{
cite book}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
Fabulous
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha>
tags or {{efn}}
templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}}
template or {{notelist}}
template (see the
help page).
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This is a sandbox/working group page for the rewrite of the section of the article covering Étienne de Perier's time as governor.
(work in progress)
In August 1726, after then governor of French Louisiana Pierre Dugué de Boisbriant was recalled to France, [1] Perier was appointed commandant general of the territory, overseeing military matters and relations with the Native Americans. [2] He arrived in New Orleans in October 1726 [3] and established his home at 613 Royal Street. [4]
Despite Perier's lack of experience in colonial administration, the Company of the Indies felt they had a long-time employee who would be a pliant administrator focused on the Company’s goals. [5] To ensure this, the Company granted him an annual salary of 10,000 French livres, [6] [a] 10 acres (4.0 hectares) of riverfront land, and eight enslaved people a year so long as he remained in office. [7] He sold the land, which is in the modern McDonoghville neighborhood, in 1737. [8]
The Company directed Perier to increase the profitability of the colony, enforce discipline and loyalty, and keep the English from entering the territory. [9] He was specifically tasked with completing improvements to secure the health and safety of New Orleans, as well as to visit the Company settlement in Natchez. [10] Perier also sought to diffuse some of the partisan, religious, and familial cliques that had made running the colony difficult for his predecessors. [11] In this he had some initial successes, particularly in managing the dispute between Jesuit and Capuchin missionaries. [12]
Perier launched a large public works effort, overseeing the construction of the first levees on the Mississippi, [13] cleared forests and brush from the land between the city and Lake Pontchartrain, [13] and dug a canal from the Mississippi to connect the river to a rice mill on the king's plantation and Bayou St. John. [14] He also welcomed the Ursuline nuns to the city; his wife, Catherine, laid the cornerstone for the nun's first convent in the city. [15]
Achieving these public works required the labor of enslaved Africans. The Company had a monopoly on the slave trade and oversaw the importation of more captured Africans to Louisiana when it controlled the colony than at any other point in the 18th century. [16] With this steady supply of new captives, Perier tended to put enslaved people to work on public projects until they were auctioned off to local slavehoders. [17] To increase the available workforce, Perier began conscripting enslaved people for 30 days at a time. In most cases, they were conscripted when the Company first brought them to Louisiana, before delivering them to their purchasers, which raised the ire of Louisiana slaveholders. [18] Perier instituted an apprenticeship program where enslaved people were loaned to craftsmen for three years to train them as brickmakers, joiners, masons, carpenters, and other skilled trades necessary to the growth and development of the colony. [19] He also put enslaved Africans to work on Company ships, navigating the coast and rivers. [20]
At the time, both Africans and Native Americans were enslaved by French settlers. Perier was increasingly concerned about alliances among enslaved people, and he encouraged slaveholders to keep enslaved Africans apart from enslaved Native Americans for fear of the two groups forming alliances. He was particularly concerned that Native Americans who escaped from slavery would induce enslaved Africans to also escape and seek the protection of Native tribes. [21] To foster mistrust between the two groups, Perier used armed enslaved Black troops to attack neighboring Native Americans, [22] and he continued the policy of rewarding Native Americans for capturing escapees and disrupting maroon communities. [23]
Perier's taking office marked the end of the indigenous policy established by the former governor Bienville. Despite having been encouraged to learn from what Bienville had written about relations with the Native Americans [24] and recognizing the need to improve relations to forestall British advancement into the territory, [25] Perier instead broke with Bienville's policy of diplomatic engagement with neighboring tribes. [26] [27]
Louisiana's colonial administrators at the time tried to balance the need to maintain good relations with Native Americans with demands from settlers for more and better land; [28] however, Perier did not recognize Native American ownership of their traditional lands. [28] This was in line with French desires to colonize New France, as opposed to earlier efforts to maintain the territory as a resource for trade. [29] [30]
While Perier did work to maintain positive relations with France's Choctaw and Quapaw allies, in other cases, he sought to dominate tribes unwilling to align with France's colonial ambitions. In Illinois, at the border between France's Canada and Louisiana territories, the Meskwaki (Fox) in 1728 again declared war on France. Pereir, his counterpart in Canada the Marquis de Beauharnois, and the local commanders pursued a policy of complete destruction against the Meskwaki, despite the ill will it generated with other Native American tribes in the region. [31] [32] This approach would be seen in Perier's response to the Natchez revolt.
The territory of the Natchez, on bluffs above the Mississippi River, had been noted by the Company of the Indies for its agricultural potential as early as 1717, [29] and Fort Rosalie and several tobacco plantations were established there after the First Natchez War in 1716. [33] The Company specifically told Perier to attend to the development of the Natchez settlement, [10] and Perier saw an opportunity to establish his own plantation in the area, too. [34]
To oversee Fort Rosalie and the Natchez settlement, Perier appointed the Sieur de Chépart. [35] [b] Chépart was described as "rapacious, haughty, and tyrannical," [38] abusing soldiers, settlers, and the Natchez alike, [39] including throwing Dumont de Montigny who had overseen the fort under the previous commandant, into chains. [40] With the help of some Illiniwek traders, Dumont escaped to New Orleans and reported on Chépart's actions; [41] the commandant was called before the Superior Council, which found him guilty of "acts of injustice." [42]
Perier, who according to some sources was already in a partnership with Chépart to establish a large plantation at Natchez, [34] overruled the Superior Council, pardoned Chépart, and sent him back to the Natchez territory. [43] Upon his return, Chépart was working to secure land for himself and Perier's plantation. [42] [44] In spring 1729, Chépart ordered the Natchez to abandon the village of White Apple, an important cultural and religious site for the Natchez, planting a missionary cross on the land to indicate he was acting on Perier's orders. [45] To delay action against them, the Natchez asked Chépart to wait until after the fall harvest so they would be able to remove their ancestor's remains from White Apple. [40] He granted their request, and the Natchez used the delay to plan the attack that marked the beginning of the Natchez revolt. [46]
On November 28, 1729, the Natchez Chief, the Great Sun, led his warriors into Fort Rosalie and captured the settlement, killing Chépart and between 229 and 285 colonists and enslaved people and taking about 450 captives, mostly French women and enslaved people. A about a month later, the Natchez's allies, the Yazoo, made a similar attack on Fort St. Pierre. [47] Ahead of the attack, the Natchez also recruited several enslaved Africans, arguing that driving off the colonists would mean freedom for them too. [48]
In response to the Natchez revolt, according to historian Lyle Saxon, Perier "made the grave mistake of trying to inspire the Indians with fear," [49] seeking the complete destruction of the Natchez and their allies to ensure the safety of the colony. [50] He began by authorizing an attack on the unaligned Chaouacha tribe south of New Orleans by enslaved Blacks in December 1729, [48] rewarding the men by freeing them from slavery. [51] He also proposed attacks against other tribes along the Mississippi, regardless of their involvement in the revolt, earning a rebuke from Controller-General of Finances Philibert Orry, who described the plan as "acting against all the rules of good government and against those of humanity." [52]
In January 1730, French and allied Choctaw soldiers caught the Natchez by surprise and recovered 54 women and children and 100 enslaved people. [48] Throughout 1730, Perier sought to make examples of captured Natchez men and women, including torturing them and burning them alive in public executions. [49] [53] Lacking enough troops to handle the revolt, and unwilling to rely too heavily on France's Choctaw allies, Perier sought reinforcements from France. [54]
The Natchez continued to resist the French until January 1731 when Perier and colonial soldiers, along with two battalions of marines commanded by his brother, Antoine-Alexis, successfully captured the Natchez's Grand Village. The Great Sun and nearly 500 more Natchez men, women, and children were captured and shipped to Saint-Domingue where they were sold into slavery. [55] However an undetermined number of other Natchez escaped to seek refuge with (and eventual assimilation) into other tribes, including the English-allied Chickasaw and Cherokee, [56] further straining the French's already poor relationship with the Chickasaw. [57]
In his reports on the Natchez revolt and his response, Perier suggested a conspiracy among the tribes, perhaps with British encouragement, was responsible for the revolt, to divert attention from the role Chépart and his orders played in igniting the conflict. [58] However, this story did not gain credence back in France, [57] nor in Louisiana. [59] Instead, Perier was criticized by the Company for letting his personal plans for a Natchez plantation distract him from his public responsibilities. [47] This fits the analysis of historian Michael James Forêt, who finds that the roots of the Natchez revolt "lay in a larger pattern of Franco–Natchez conflict and the greed of Perier and the commandant of Fort Rosalie." [60]
In there aftermath of the revot, Perier attempted to punish the Chickasaw for taking in Natchez refugees and continued his harsh approach toward even allied Native Americans, which raised the concern of other military and civil officails in the colony. [61] At the same time though, he sought to reward some Native allies, such as the Quapaw, by expanding trading posts. [62]
In June 1731, Perier faced an attempted slave uprising, the Samba rebellion, involving enslaved Bambara peoples inspired by the Natchez revolt. As he had done with Natchez prisoners, Perier ordered torture and public executions via breaking wheel for the men and women who planned the attempted uprising. [63]
In the end, Perier was criticized for his support of Chépart and his policies towards Native Americans, which failed to provide security and stability for the colony. [64] Ultimately, the result of the revolt was a further weakening of the Company, which was still suffering from the bursting of the Mississippi Bubble in 1720. Due to its ongoing financial losses in the territory in 1731 the Company abandoned its charter and returned Louisiana to the king. [65] [66] [67] Despite questions about his management of the Natchez revolt, Perier remained in place as governor of the colony, although the king's advisors, particularly the Count of Maupaus, sought to replace Perier. [68]
In 1733, Perier was recalled to France to answer for his handling of the Natchez revolt, and former Louisiana governor Bienville was appointed to replace him. [68]
Hi Carter, You made an serious work of research and this proposal is a very good start. Some remarks:
asks the Natchez to leave their landi of White Apple to make a plantation for him and Perier) s cited by several authors as the reason that led to the revolt of Natches. Even the Company blamed Perier for that. Thanks.
Regard, -- Belyny ( talk) 15:12, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
The Company was working to increase tobacco farming in the colony, and Chépart and Perier eyed the Natchez territory along the Mississippi as a ripe opportunity for a new plantation. Chépart issued an order for the Natchez to begin planning for their complete removal from White Apple Village and other Natchez territory. These actions sparked the Natchez revolt.
Hi Carter, I thought I was clear:
-- Belyny ( talk) 17:40, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Carter, I took time to read again your proposal and my proposal.
I do not agree with your point of view : the Carter Godwin Woodson quote at the end of the "Slavery policies" section is not WP:UNDUE and is quite relevant in this subparagraph : Godwin Woodson is referring to some enslaved Africans joining in the Natchez Revolt but to Perier's decision to arme a band of slaves in 1729 and sent them to the Chouchas with instructions to exterminate the tribe. Godwin Woodson writes : Just above New Orleans lived a small tribe of Indians, the Chouchas, who, not particularly harmful in themselves, had succeeded in inspiring the nervous inhabitants of the city with abject fear. Perier armed a band of slaves in 1729 and sent them to the Chouchas with instructions to exterminate the tribe. They did their work with an ease and dispatch that should have been a warning to their white masters. In reporting the success of his plan Perier said: “The Negroes executed their mission with as much promptitude as secrecy. This lesson taught them by our Negroes, kept in check all the nations higher up the river.” Thus, by one stroke the wily Governor had intimidated the tribes of Indians, allayed the nervous fears of New Orleans, and effected a state of hostility between the Indians and the Africans, who were beginning to be entirely too friendly with each other. .. Perier's cruel logic was reactionary. Since he had used blacks to murder Indians in order to make bad blood between the races, the Indians retaliated by using blacks to murder white men." The quote supports Perier's general policy of discouraging interaction between enslaved Africans and Native Americans. This fact is reminded by many sources [2]. -- Belyny ( talk) 18:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Carter,
I’m counting on your understanding so that we can find consensus on these sections in order to move on the last sections. Regards, -- Belyny ( talk) 18:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Regard, -- Belyny ( talk) 18:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Carter,
"To foster mistrust between the two groups, Perier used armed enslaved Black troops to attack neighboring Native Americans, and he continued the policy of rewarding Native Americans for capturing escapees and disrupting maroon communities."That states simply and plainly Perier's policy of working to keep Native Americans and enslaved Africans at odds with each other. The first half of it may be overstating the case because it too is primarily post-Natchez Revolt and centers on the Chaouacha attack. However, it is not WP:OR or incomplete in any way.
"Perier's cruel logic was reactionary. Since he had used blacks to murder Indians in order to make bad blood between the races, the Indians retaliated by using blacks to murder white men."adds nothing to the text. I'll admit I read the Dunbar Nelson article more closely this time trying to see your point. You said above
The quote supports Perier's general policy of discouraging interaction between enslaved Africans and Native Americans.The quote you put in my comment above makes it clear Dunbar Nelson is talking about the attack on the Chaouacha and not a broader policy. I've tried to read the quote as supporting a broader policy, but it's not what the text says. Breaking the quote down, Dunbar Nelson is saying that Perier's attempt to intimidate the Natchez and other tribes with his attack on Chaouacha failed to cower the Natchez and instead led them to encourage slave revolts. Look at the construction of the sentence; she places the Native reaction after Perier's attack ("because he used blacks ... the Indians retaliated"). Look at the paragraph it is used in; she flows from that quote into discussion of the Samba Rebellion. The first bit
"Perier's cruel logic was reactionary."adds confusion in that it seems to imply Perier was reacting to Natchez provocation, but instead is meaning that it sparked a reaction. (Looking at the etymology of the word and how the root word réactionnaire is used in French, perhaps that is causing some confusion here; the implications of the word in modern English, I'm not sure about in 1916 when the line was published, are a bit different.)
Hi Carter,
Hi Carter, we do not have a consensus on this section and I totally disagree with your arguments to refute the relevance of Alice Moore Dunbar Nelson quote in this section, but as I am tired of arguing for nothing, I stop this pointless discussion on this point. Regards -- Belyny ( talk) 15:42, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
MY (Belyny) NEW PROPOSAL :
In August 1726, after then governor of French Louisiana Pierre Dugué de Boisbriant was recalled to France, [2] Perier was appointed commandant general of the territory, overseeing military matters and relations with the Native Americans. [3] He arrived in New Orleans in October 1726 [4] and established his home at 613 Royal Street. [5]
Despite Perier's lack of experience in colonial administration, the Company of the Indies felt they had a long-time employee who would be a pliant administrator focused on the Company’s goals. [6] To ensure this, the Company granted him an annual salary of 10,000 French livres, [7] [a] 10 acres (4.0 hectares) of riverfront land, and eight enslaved people a year so long as he remained in office. [8] He sold the land, which is in the modern McDonoghville neighborhood, in 1737. [9]
The Company directed Perier to increase the profitability of the colony, enforce discipline and loyalty, and keep the English from entering the territory. [10] He was specifically tasked with completing improvements to secure the health and safety of New Orleans, as well as to visit the Company settlement in Natchez. [11] Perier also sought to diffuse some of the partisan, religious, and familial cliques that had made running the colony difficult for his predecessors. [12] In this he had some initial successes, particularly in managing the dispute between Jesuit and Capuchin missionaries. [13]
Perier's taking office marked the end of the indigenous policy pursued by Governor Bienville. [14]
Perier launched a large public works effort, overseeing the construction of the first levees on the Mississippi, [15] cleared forests and brush from the land between the city and Lake Pontchartrain, [15] and dug a canal from the Mississippi to connect the river to a rice mill on the king's plantation and Bayou St. John. [16] He also welcomed the Ursuline nuns to the city; his wife, Catherine, laid the cornerstone for the nun's first convent in the city. [17]
Achieving these public works required the labor of enslaved Africans. The Company had a monopoly on the slave trade and oversaw the importation of more captured Africans to Louisiana when it controlled the colony than at any other point in the 18th century. [18] With this steady supply of new captives, Perier tended to put enslaved people to work on public projects until they were auctioned off to local slavehoders. [19] To increase the available workforce, Perier began conscripting enslaved people for 30 days at a time. In most cases, they were conscripted when the Company first brought them to Louisiana, before delivering them to their purchasers, which raised the ire of Louisiana slaveholders. [20] Perier instituted an apprenticeship program where enslaved people were loaned to craftsmen for three years to train them as brickmakers, joiners, masons, carpenters, and other skilled trades necessary to the growth and development of the colony. [21] He also put enslaved Africans to work on Company ships, navigating the coast and rivers. [22]
At the time, both Africans and Native Americans were enslaved by French settlers. Perier was increasingly concerned about alliances among enslaved people, and he encouraged slaveholders to keep enslaved Africans apart from enslaved Native Americans for fear of the two groups forming alliances. He was particularly concerned that Native Americans who escaped from slavery would induce enslaved Africans to also escape and seek the protection of Native tribes. [23] To foster mistrust between the two groups, Perier used armed enslaved Black troops to attack neighboring Native Americans, [24] and he continued the policy of rewarding Native Americans for capturing escapees and disrupting maroon communities. [25] Carter Godwin in The Journal of Negro History writes : "Perier's logic was reactionary. Since he had used blacks to murder Indians in order to make bad blood between the races, the Indians retaliated by using blacks to murder white men" [26]
Despite having been encouraged to learn from what former Bienville had written about relations with the Native Americans [27] and recognizing the need to improve relations to forestall British advancement into the territory, [28] Perier instead broke with Bienville's policy of diplomatic engagement with neighboring tribes. [29] [30] and according to Lyle Saxon "made the grave mistake of trying to inspire the Indians with fear". [31]
Louisiana's colonial administrators at the time tried to balance the need to maintain good relations with Native Americans with demands from settlers for more and better land; [32] however, Perier did not recognize Native American ownership of their traditional lands. [32] This was in line with French desires to colonize New France, as opposed to earlier efforts to maintain the territory as a resource for trade. [33] [34]
While Perier did work to maintain positive relations with France's Choctaw and Quapaw allies, in other cases, he sought to dominate tribes unwilling to align with France's colonial ambitions. In Illinois, at the border between France's Canada and Louisiana territories, the Meskwaki (Fox tribe) in 1728 again declared war on France. Pereir, his counterpart in Canada the Marquis de Beauharnois, and the local commanders pursued a policy of complete destruction against the Meskwaki, despite the ill will it generated with other Native American tribes in the region. [35] [36] This approach would be seen in Perier's response to the Natchez revolt.
The territory of the Natchez, on bluffs above the Mississippi River, had been noted by the Company of the Indies for its agricultural potential as early as 1717, [33] and Fort Rosalie and several tobacco plantations were established there after the First Natchez War in 1716. [37] After arriving in Louisiana, and with an eye on establishing his own plantation in the area, [38]
Perier wished to establish for himself a large plantation near the Natchez village. He entered into a partnership with a sieur Chepart (or d'Etcheparre), known as a drunkard and brash person and promised him an interest in the futur plantation if he could secure the Natchez land. [39]Together they planed to operate this plantation on the rich lands held by the Natchez [40]
Perier appointed Chepart to command Fort Rosalie and oversee trade with the Natchez. [41] Immediately, Chepart tyrannized the people and abused his power buy his presence had to be tolerated because of his friendship with governor Périer and his protection. [42] Finally Chepart was summoned before the Superior Council which found him guilty, but Perier pardoned Chepart and restored him to his command. Chepart could return to Natchez to pursue his plans to establish concessions for both himself and governor Perier on Indian Territory [43]
Chepart told the Natchez that he wished to seize land for a plantation in the center of White Apple, where the Natchez had a temple of their people's graves. [44] [45] [46] Governor Périer sided with Chépart and planted a cross on the land he sought. [47] [46]
Perier and Chepart parternship to expel the Indians in order to establish a plantation on their land triggered the Natchez revolt in october 1729. Alan Gallay wrote that the Natchez revolt "lay in a larger pattern of Franco-Natchez conflict and the greed of Perier and the commandant of Fort Rosalie". [48]
Accusations at this time the time go in the same direction : "His tyranny and his exactions goaded the Natchez to fury. This Dechepare was a creature of Perier ... his attempt to seize the land of the Natchez and to drive the Indians out of their village precipitated the crisis. But he Commandant, though reviled by everybody, was following instructions. In an unsigned memoir, date January, 1731, we read : "Moreover, it is secretly maintained, that the cause of the Natchez massacre should not be imputed to the late Chepart alone... and that he was following written orders which some people are said to have read". Elsewhere the accusation is more clearly formulated : "The reason which led the Natchez to perpetrate such a deed, is that M. Perier having the intention of beginning a plantation in their country in partnership with Dechepare...had asked him to drive out the Natchez... in order to take the land occupied by the Indians for their plantations". [49]
On November 28, 1729, the Natchez Chief, the Great Sun, led his warriors into Fort Rosalie and captured the settlement, killing between 229 and 285 colonists and enslaved people and taking about 450 captives, mostly French women and enslaved people. A about a month later, the Natchez's allies, the Yazoo, made a similar attack on Fort St. Pierre. [50] Ahead of the attack, the Natchez also recruited several enslaved Africans, arguing that driving off the colonists would mean freedom for them too. [51]
In response to the Natchez revolt, Perier sought the complete destruction of the Natchez and their allies to ensure the safety of the colony. [52] He began by authorizing an attack on the unaligned Chaouacha tribe south of New Orleans by enslaved Black volunteers in December 1729, [51] rewarding the men by freeing them from slavery. [53] He also proposed attacks against other tribes along the Mississippi, regardless of their involvement in the revolt, earning a rebuke from Controller-General of Finances Philibert Orry, who described the plan as "acting against all the rules of good government and against those of humanity." [54]
In January 1730, French and allied Choctaw soldiers caught the Natchez by surprise and recovered 54 women and children and 100 enslaved people. [51] Throughout 1730, Perier sought to make examples of captured Natchez men and women, including torturing them and burning them alive in public executions. [55] [56] Lacking enough troops to handle the revolt, and unwilling to rely too heavily on France's Choctaw allies, Perier sought reinforcements from France. [57]
The Natchez continued to resist the French until January 1731 when Perier and colonial soldiers, along with two battalions of marines commanded by his brother, Antoine-Alexis, successfully captured the Natchez's Grand Village. Great Sun and nearly 500 more Natchez men, women, and children were captured and shipped to Saint-Domingue where they were sold into slavery. [58] However an undetermined number of other Natchez escaped to seek refuge with (and eventual assimilation) into other tribes, including the English-allied Chickasaw and Cherokee, [59] further straining the French's already poor relationship with the Chickasaw. [60]
In his reports on the Natchez revolt and his response, Perier suggested a conspiracy among the tribes, perhaps with British encouragement, was responsible for the revolt, to divert attention from the role Chépart and his orders played in igniting the conflict. [61] However, this story did not gain credence back in France, [60] nor in Louisiana. [62] Instead, Perier was criticized by the Company for letting his personal plans for a Natchez plantation distract him from his public responsibilities. [50] There were also concerns about his continued harsh approach towards even allied Native Americans and attempts to punish the Chickasaw for taking in Natchez refugees. [63] Although at the same time, he sought to reward some Native allies, such as the Quapaw, by expanding trading posts. [64]
In June 1731, Perier faced an attempted slave uprising, the Samba rebellion, involving enslaved Bambara peoples inspired by the Natchez revolt. As he had done with Natchez prisoners, Perier ordered torture and public executions via breaking wheel for the men and women who planned the attempted uprising. [65]
In the end, Perier was criticized for his support of Chépart and his policies towards Native Americans, which failed to provide security and stability for the colony. [66] Ultimately, the result of the revolt was a further weakening of the Company, which was still suffering from the bursting of the Mississippi Bubble in 1720. Due to its ongoing financial losses in the territory in 1731 the Company abandoned its charter and returned Louisiana to the king. [67] [68] [69] Despite questions about his management of the Natchez revolt, Perier remained in place as governor of the colony, although the king's advisors, particularly the Count of Maupaus, sought to replace Perier. [70]
In 1733, Perier was recalled to France to answer for his handling of the Natchez revolt, and former Louisiana governor Bienville was appointed to replace him. [70]
{{
cite book}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
Fabulous
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha>
tags or {{efn}}
templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}}
template or {{notelist}}
template (see the
help page).