Additional Commentary on the 6 August 1665 Date
by Suzanne Boivin Sommervile

Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 17:45:19 -0500
From: Suzanne B Sommerville 110435.1567@compuserve.com
Subject: 6 August 1665
To: Norm Leveillee normlev@normlev.net

Re: Tanguay's A travers les registres, the following entry for the year 1665 on page 49:

AOÛT
Le 6.--- Sépulture de Couc dit Lafleur, agé de 41 ans, soldat de M. de Froment, marié en 1657, aux Trois- Rivières, à Marie Mite8amig8k8e. Il avait été, par accident, frappé d'une balle par ses compagnons. "Occisus glande catapultae fortuito a socio."
                  (Reg.des Trois-Rivières.)
(Tr:August 6.---Burial of Couc aka Lafleur, 41 years old, soldier of M. de Froment, married in 1657, in Trois-Rivières, to Marie Mite8amig8k8e. He was killed, accidently, having been hit by a bullet shot by his companions...")

Benjamin Sulte in his Hisoire de Saint-François-du-Lac,(1886), says "Ce n'est pas ce Pierre Couc ... qui fut tué par un canon, aux Trois-Rivières, en 1665, mais un soldat du même nom appartenant au régiment de Carignan." p. 35.
(Tr: "It is not this Pierre Couc ... who was killed by a canon, in Trois-Rivières, in 1665, but a solider of the same name belonging to the Carignan regiment."

By the way, this history and MANY others are available on Early Canadiana. www.canadiana.org/   Early Canadiana online - Notre Mémoire en ligne.

(Ed.A search for Pierre Couc in Early Canadiana online.)

I checked the microfilm of the register at Trois-Rivières and printed out the page this time. The entry is in miniscule handwriting in Latin (the smallest on the page, barely a line and a half and unsigned by any priest).
I see no sign of any age given (in the other entries on the page ages are in numerals) and there is a blank where the first name of the man should be. I agree with PRDH that the transcription as "Lafleur" could be problematical, although I do recognize what appears to be a reference to the regiment of Froment. Prior to the quotation above, all it appears to say is that this man was _buried_ in the church cemetery and that he was a military of what could be transcribed as Froment (definitely a Carignan regiment).

This is how the excerpt appears on PRDH

PRDH Acte 89376

What a lot of energy has been spent on Tanguay's "guess" and expansion of this entry! When in doubt, go to the source.

Suzanne