This factoid is ambiguous and quite dubious. No date, not even a decade or century, no names of principals, or how they got there, or what became of them. The citation devolves to citations that support the Encyclopedia of Louisville entry as whole, and two of those three do not mention La Belle. One guy can't be the only historical figure who knows about a French settlement at the Falls of the Ohio. This is a place where we need an indisputable citation like Clark or Harrison, or Parkman. Or better yet, a French colonial document that records this. To call an event history, we need a date to anchor it. This is somewhat like Fort Industry, but in that case the only thing we do not know is the location. Here the only thing we DO know is the putative location. The event was most likely a landing or brief encampment. I don't see an account of any French settlement at the Falls in colonial documents. It is overwhelmingly likely that it post dated the establishment of Duquesne in 1754, because that'd provide a staging place for emigrants from coastal New England. It couldn't have existed past 1763. We have pretty good records for the French and Indian War. Thomas Bullitt does not record any evidence of prior settlements during his 1773 survey and platting of Louisville. So how/where does this fit in? Sbalfour (talk) 18:56, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
