Picking up from my last article in the July 2016 Nims Family Newsletter I’m pleased to have this opportunity to update you on my research on “finding Godfrey”.  My updates include some historical context which I feel important for surmising why and how Godfrey might have left Europe for America, plus updates on contact I’ve had with several Archives in France.

First a Recap

My working hypothesis is that “Godefroy (de) Nismes”, a French Huguenot born circa 1650 was one of Henry Brunet’s “…36 young men sent to America” in 1661. Henry Brunet was merchant operating from La Rochelle which at the time was an important Huguenot centre and gateway to the New World.

There are some key leads here: Henry Brunet was charged in 1662 with the crime of sending young Frenchmen to “…America with the English...the previous year”.  The first conviction was in the criminal court of La Rochelle on 30 August 1662.  Brunet appealed his conviction to a higher court in Paris but the conviction was upheld by the Conseil d’État (Privy Council) on 16 October 1662. The penalties were stiff but Brunet appears in history through to the 1680’s as an important New World trader and explorer, and so must have survived that ordeal. Nonetheless, court documents and hopefully key details for the case must exist somewhere.

Let’s look at the historical context, specifically to explore why Godfrey was seemingly alone in the New World and why he might have come across to America at a young age. A key clue was provided by Jeff Nims who noted that on the list of Godfrey’s possessions at death was a “simmiter” – a unique kind of sword that probably had a history all its own. Why on earth would a New England cordwainer/farmer own a scimitar - a weapon popular with mounted soldiers – unless it had special meaning?

We know that 17th century Europe was full of conflict and social unrest. Let’s look at what was going on in France around the time of Godfrey’s birth. It turns out three significant conflicts were taking place in and around 1650:

1. The Thirty Years’ War (1635-1648);

2. The Franco-Spanish War (1635-1658); and

3. The “La Fronde” Uprisings (1648-1653).

I won’t pretend to explain each of these conflicts: the important point is that these conflicts were related but different, involved different adversaries, overlapped in time and all coincided with the 1648-1652 timeframe, the probable window for Godfrey’s birth. The Franco - Spanish war in particular involved the south of France – important for reasons that will soon become apparent. All of them provided ample opportunity for males of fighting age to find a calling and a possible demise. In other words, it’s quite possible that the “simmiter” was Godfrey’s only remaining link to his father - a father who may well have died in one of those wars.

Trying to fathom why a “mere lad” would be in the New World by himself (as there are no other known Nims in America at the time) the obvious conclusion is that Godfrey may well have been an orphan. Researching the demographics of 17th century society and New World immigrants, I found the following interesting data points:

1. at least 30% of children under 15 years of age in 17th century France were orphaned of their father (Orphaned in France in the 17th Century, Monique Pontault, 2013); and

2. “In 1620, London decreed that its “street children” could be sent by force to Virginia to be indentured servants. While most New Englanders came as families, more than half of those who emigrated to the Southern colonies were indentured servants – the average age of them being between 14 and 16 years old (and as young as six).”  (From Father's Property to Children's Rights: A History of Child Custody, Mary Ann Mason, 1994).

Combining these two thoughts and assuming the social conditions in England and France were similar, one could conclude (with very rough statistics) that there is a better than 50/50 chance that Godfrey was an orphan or an indentured servant, or both. These could explain why he was in America alone and at such a young age. Remember, he would have been around 11 years old on Brunet’s 1661 trip and the charges against Henry Brunet specifically said that the “young men” he sent to America ended up as “…servants and the like” (Décisions Catholiques, 1668, Décision CXXXVI).

As an aside, I’ve found a “King’s Ordinance” in the French records from 1699 prohibiting the shipment of youngsters under 18 years old to colonies around the world. The implication is clear: before 1699 the practice was probably common, and possibly widespread. Maybe, in their own way, treating children like this was a socially acceptable way to give them a chance at life.

All this to say that since the fall of 2016 I’ve been in contact with several French Archives trying to find the 1662 court records that might shed some light on who Brunet’s 36 young men were.  The good news is that the French kept excellent records. The bad news is that these records could be in any one of a series of municipal, departmental/regional or national archives all trying to catalogue and manage five or more centuries of records. The ones I’ve contacted include: 

• National Archives:

• Archives nationales (Paris)

• Archives nationales d’outre-mer (Aix-en-Provence)

• Departmental (Regional) Archives

• Archives départementales de la Charente-Maritime (La Rochelle)

• Archives départementales de Gard (Nimes)

• Archives départementales de la Gironde (Bordeaux)

• Archives départementales de Lot-et-Garonne (Agen)

• Municipal Archives

• Archives municipales (Nimes)

• Archives municipales (La Rochelle)

 Luckily both Carole and I are fluent in written and spoken French. That’s been super handy.

At the time of writing (March 2017) I can report that the National archives (d’outre mer) have nothing. The Archives nationales have found a summary of Brunet’s arrest and upheld conviction but nothing else. I’m still waiting to hear back from the Archives in Bordeaux and the Archives de la Charente-Maritime: both are still looking, and both offer the best chance of being the repository of the Brunet court records, if they still exist.

In parallel I’ve been exploring whether we are looking for a person who’s last name was Nismes, or whether he was from the town of Nismes. It now appears to me more likely that his name was Nismes - given his probable social status - as I suspect nobles and peers, not regular folks would have their town of record appended to their name, as “de Nismes”. Just a guess.

After delving into “Nismes” as a family name in France, I discovered that a line of Nismes lived in a town called Xaintrailles in Lot-et-Garonne. Xaintrailles is located in the Aquitaine about 120 kms from Bordeaux and 300 kms from La Rochelle: in essence about half way between La Rochelle and Spain.  A few e-mails back and forth with the Mayor of Xaintrailles reveals that the Nismes family is well known in Xaintrailles “… even though no one by that name lives here anymore”. After sending me a few “Nismes” members going back only as far as 1843, Mayor Autipout has referred me to the parish records now in the departmental Archives of Lot-et-Garonne, many of which have been scanned and are available on-line.

My eyes are slowly becoming accustomed to reading 17th century French script, but I regret to say I have yet to find a ‘smoking gun’. I have only searched the baptismal records of the Reformed Church so far. I’ll now search the Catholic records in case Godfrey was actually baptised Catholic, while I wait for the Archives in La Rochelle and Bordeaux to report back on the Brunet court case. I hope to have something more definitive to report in the near future.

Final Word

My working theories about Godfrey’s origins and involvement with Henry Brunet are only supposition: the data seems to fit but without demonstrable facts they remain conjecture. There is valuable parallel research underway and I applaud and encourage those efforts, noting that researchers collaborating with each other can move the markers faster.  I have benefitted from such collaboration and I would be pleased to share my findings with anyone interested.