Category Archives: France

The French in Canada: a “Distinct” Society

07 Monday Nov 2022

Posted by in Canada, Canadian Confederation, France, Language Laws

≈ Comments Off on The French in Canada: a “Distinct” Society

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Return from the Harvest Field by Marc-Aurèle de Foy Susor-Coté, 1903 (National Art Gallery of Canada)

—ooo—

The Treaty of Paris, signed on 10 February 1763, was a tragic event for the citizens of New France, the Canadiens. Jacques Cartier discovered Canada in 1534, and Port-Royal (Acadie) was settled in 1605, three years before the city of Quebec was settled. Therefore, in 1763, Nouvelle-France had been a French colony for 229 years. In fact, France possessed a large territory in North America, where it barely settled. Canadiens lived on the shores of the St Lawrence River, where they were censitaires, seigneurs, members of the clergy, habitants, and voyageurs. Censitaires paid “cens et rentes” to their seigneur as well as la dîme (tithe) to their curé, Parish priest. They had tilled their “thirty acres” since the early 1620s. Habitants were a new social type. They owned their house, farmed, and some engaged in the fur trade. They were “Americans.” (See Habitant, The Canadian Encyclopedia.)

Le régime seigneurial a engendré un nouveau type social dont il consolide les intérêts: l'habitant indépendant, exempt d'impôt personnel, propriétaire de sa terre, très mobile à cause de la traite et de l'abandonnance des terres, libérés des corvées seigneuriales et sur le même pied que le seigneur vis-à-vis les pratiques communautaires.[1][2]

Many were the legendary voyageurs who travelled to the countries above, “les pays d’en Haut” (1610-1763), in canoes Amerindians built. By and large, the people of New France had a good relationship with future Canada’s Amerindians. Given Nouvelle-France’s cold climate, the French needed Amerindians to settle and earn their living. They never colonised the Indigenous people of North America, but sins were committed. Canadiens gave trinkets and alcohol to Amerindians in return for precious pelts. Amerindians guided explorers and voyageurs and opened up the North American continent. In fact, voyageurs married Amerindians. When the beaver neared extinction, the French still went to the countries above, “les pays d’en Haut.” They were bûcherons, lumberjacks, and draveurs, river drivers.

New France exemplifies Montesquieu “théorie des climats,” and, to a large extent, Nouvelle-France is also one of the birthplaces of the Noble Savage. Le bon sauvage is le baron de Lahontan‘s Adario, a Huron.

Le Bon Sauvage also inhabits Philippe-Joseph Aubert de Gaspé‘s Les Anciens Canadiens, a novel belonging to La Patrie littéraire, a homeland of literary and historical works, but also other achievements. Le bon Sauvage illustrates that virtue need not stem from religious convictions, a dilemma for missionaries. 

Adario le Sauvage discute avec Lahontan le civilisé; et ce dernier a le mauvais rôle. A l'Évangile Adario oppose triomphalement la religion naturelle. Aux lois européennes, qui ne cherchent à inspirer que la crainte du châtiment, il oppose une morale naturelle.
[Adario the Savage discusses with Lahontan, the civilized; and the latter plays the bad role. To the Gospel, he opposes, triumphant, natural religion. To European laws that seek only to instill fear, he opposes a natural moral.][3]

Besides, not only had France been in North America for two centuries, but the Battle of the Plains of Abraham lasted less than a half-hour, and it was fought between uneven forces. Should such a battle cost so much to a nation? New France was a nation. During the Seven Years’ War, France and its allies were waging war against the British and their allies, each side seeking world hegemony.

In the days of empires and colonies, the loss of New France and France’s vast territory in North America was mostly collateral damage Colonies were forgettable. The Duc de Choiseul hoped France would regain its North American colonies, but France “needed peace.” (See Treaty of Paris 1763, Wikipedia.) So, the Thirteen Colonies would soon declare their independence while a foreigner entered New France. The first rule had been to assimilate the French in Canada, and the first résistance would be a struggle to preserve the French language manifested in Quebec’s current language laws. Bill 22, 1974; Bill 101 (the Charter of the French Language, 1977); and Bill 96 (2021). Moreover, the “foreigner” inhabits the mind of members of the Patrie littéraire and Félix-Antoine Savard’s Menaud maîre-draveur (1937), the literary schools created after Lord Durham stated that Canadiens lacked history and literature. Works associated with the Patrie littéraire, the literary homeland listed on Canadiana.2 page.

Jeffery Amherst could not understand the Canadien‘s grief. He was British, and the British had won the war. He would be returning to Britain, which would soon be a large empire. As for France, it would remain France and survive a regicidal Revolution.

Much land that had been owned by France was now owned by Britain, and the French people of Quebec felt greatly betrayed at the French concession. The commander-in-chief of the British, Jeffery Amherst noted, “Many of the Canadians consider their Colony to be of utmost consequence to France & cannot be convinced … that their Country has been conceded to Great Britain.”

(See Jeffery Amherst quoted in Treaty of Paris, 1763, Wikipedia.)

Under the Treaty of Paris (1763), France chose to cede Nouvelle-France, a colony and a province of France. It also ceded land east of the Mississippi River, part of Louisiana. France kept two small islands off the coast of Newfoundland, Saint-Pierre and Miquelon. These would accommodate French fishermen. France also kept sugar-rich Martinique and Haiti. The British had won the Seven Year’s War. However, France had ceded a small nation to Britain.

Earlier, in 1713, at the Treaties of Utrecht, or Peace of Utrecht, France had ceded Acadia, one of the two provinces of New France, Newfoundland, and territory bordering the Hudson Bay. Between 1755 and 1758, the British expulsed Acadians. Imperialism was ruthless. The Expulsion may have been caused by conflicts between priests from France and New Englanders mainly. Father Le Loutre’s War lasted between 1749 and 1755, the year the Acadians of Grand-Pré were deported. The map below shows the territory lost in 1713 (mauve) and the territory ceded at the Treaty of Paris in 1763 (blue).

Map of the British and French settlements in North America in 1750, before the French and Indian War (1754 to 1763), which was part of the Seven Years’ War (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

—ooo—

The Quebec Act of 1774: a Period of Grace …

It was not altogether a “period of grace,” but James Murray and Sir Guy Carleton were kind to the defeated Canadiens. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 directed James Murray to assimilate the Canadiens. However, after the Treaty of Paris (1763), only a few British Americans moved to the former New France, so few that many Canadiens did not notice they had lost their land. Besides,

As governor of the former New France, Murray opposed repressive measures against French Canadians, and his conciliatory policy led to charges against him of partiality. Although exonerated, he left his post in 1768 and was appointed governor of Minorca in 1774.


(See James Murray, Britannica.)

These British Americans exacerbated Governor James Murray and Sir Guy Carleton, James Murray’s replacement. Britannica describes these “British Americans” as follows:

Their bourgeois mentality and repeated demands for the “rights of Englishmen” tended to alienate the conservative British officers who administered the colony. 


(See Early British Rule, 1763-1791, Britannica.)

Moreover, the Royal Proclamation of 1763 directed James Murray, the Governor of Britain’s new French-speaking subjects, to assimilate the people he governed.

James Murray may have been inclined to spare the Canadiens, who had just fallen. In Philippe Aubert de Gaspé‘s Les Anciens Canadiens, governor Murray is touched when he hears that aristocrats returning to France perished off the coast of Cape Breton island. They were returning to France aboard a frail ship named l’Auguste. (See Chapter XV, Le Naufrage de l’Auguste; Chapter XIV, The Shipwreck of the August.)

No sooner did New France fall to Britain than it attempted to assimilate its new subjects. Governor James Murray failed because the Canadiens were too numerous. Besides,

He [James Murray] was recalled in 1766, but he was exonerated. His replacement was Guy Carleton, (later) 1st Baron Dorchester), who was expected to carry out the policy of the proclamation. However, Carleton soon came to see that the colony was certain to be permanently French. He decided that Britain’s best course was to forge an alliance with the elites of the former French colony—the seigneurs and the Roman Catholic church.

(See James Murray, Britannica.)

Sir Guy Carleton’s Quebec Act, 1774 (Britannica)

—ooo—

Seigneurial System: New France’s River Lots (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

James Murray’s replacement, Sir Guy Carleton, negotiated the Quebec Act of 1774 with Seigneurs and the clergy. It restored the Seigneurial System and excluded the Test Acts. One did not have to renounce Catholicism to enter the civil service or hold public office. It pleased seigneurs and the Clergy, whose income it guaranteed, but censitaires begrudged the Quebec Act. They would have to pay cens, rente and la dîme (tithe), an obligation not rigidly observed during l’Ancien Régime in New France. Except for the conditions of his tenure, there were times when the censitaire showed complete independence in his relationship with the master of the mansion. He did not recognize his authority, and seigneurs exerted no influence on his opinions:

[H]ors des conditions de sa tenure, le censitaire possédait en fait et manifestait à l'occasion une pleine indépendance à l'égard de son maître du manoir. Il ne lui reconnaissait ni autorité sociale, ni emprise sur ses opinions.[4]

Yet, flawed as it was, the Quebec Act of 1774 can be seen as the Bill of Rights granted Canadiens. It placed the censitaires under the rule of seigneurs and the clergy, an unfortunate precedent. But it also put French-speaking and English-speaking citizens of an enlarged Province of Quebec on an equal footing, or almost. In earlier posts, I have compared the Quebec Act of 1774 to the Royal Proclamation of 1763. In both cases, these are letters patent for both Amerindians and the defeated French.

Matters would change. After the American Revolution, United Empire Loyalists, the citizens of Britain’s former Thirteen Colonies who had remained loyal to Great Britain, sought refuge in British North America and elsewhere. United Empire Loyalists wanted to live in Quebec the way they had lived in the former Thirteen Colonies, where their Rights as Englishmen had been recognized. Besides, Quebec’s Civil law (Code civil) differed from the Common law. The Quebec Act was as intolerable to them as it had been to the British Americans who wanted to secede from England.

Although France was defeated at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham and Nouvelle-France ceded to England at the Treaty of Paris of 1763, Guy Carleton, later 1st Baron Dorchester, passed the Quebec Act of 1774. The Quebec Act restored Nouvelle France’s Seigneurial System. Censitaires were disgruntled, but the Quebec Act empowered seigneurs and the Clergy. However, it had been conciliatory with the French, a defeated nation. United Empire Loyalists insisted on redress, which was a legitimate request. United Empire Loyalists had been loyal to Britain and had left their home to remain British subjects. (See Constitutional Act of 1791, Wikipedia.)

As governor in chief of British North America (1786–96), Guy Carleton promoted the Constitutional Act of 1791, which helped develop representative institutions in Canada at a time when the French Revolution was threatening governments elsewhere.

(See Guy Carleton, 1st Baron Dorchester, Britannica.)

The British parliament passed the Constitutional Act of 1791. The Constitutional Act separated a down-sized Province of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada. Most English-speaking citizens would live in Upper Canada under the Common law. Lower Canada would be home to Canadiens and would keep its Civil law. However, Lower Canada’s Eastern Townships would belong to United Empire Loyalists who, initially, did not allow Canadiens to settle in the Townships, a policy that changed when factories opened in the Townships, creating a need for employees. These were French Canadians and the Irish who had been driven away from their homeland by the Great Famine, a potato famine.

Until 1791 the region was organized under the seigneurial system of New France. In 1791 the region was resurveyed under English law. It was divided into counties, which were in turn subdivided into townships. (Eastern Townships, Wikipedia)

(See Eastern Townships, Wikipedia.)

Britannica’s entry on the Constitutional Act of 1791 suggests a “fear of egalitarian principles.” Despite the distance and limited literacy, the citizens of New France were familiar with the French Enlightenment. Louis-Joseph Papineau, who replaced Pierre-Stanislas Bédard as the leader of le Parti canadien, Canada’s first political party, renamed le Parti patriote, had read Voltaire. Louis-Joseph Papineau led Lower Canada’s patriotes during the Rebellions of 1837-1838.

The Act of Union

  • Robert Baldwin and Louis-Hippolyte LaFontaine
  • Lord Elgin (James Bruce, 8th Earl of Elgin)

French Canadians had feared the union of Upper and Lower Canada. In his Report on the Rebellions of 1837-1838, Lord Durham recommended the union of Upper and Lower Canada. The Act of Union was voted into law in 1840. However, Robert Baldwin and  Louis-Hippolyte LaFontaine succeeded in creating a bilingual Province of Canada. (See Editorial: Baldwin, LaFontaine, The Canadian Encyclopedia.) Much was accomplished during the “great ministry.”

In 1848, Lord Elgin (James Bruce, 8th Earl of Elgin) established a responsible government in the Province of Canada. Moreover, Baldwin and LaFontaine passed the Rebellion Losses Bill. It was given royal assent by Lord Elgin. An “English-speaking mob” (See Lord Elgin, Wikipedia) set Montreal’s Parliament Buildings afire. (See Burning of the Parliament Buildings in Montreal, Wikipedia.) The Baldwin-LaFontaine great ministry had created a bilingual Canada.

Confederation (1867)

  • John A. Macdonald
  • Residential schools
  • “Uniform” schools
  • French Canadians are minoritised

When Canadian provinces federated, Manitoba had as many English-speaking citizens as it had francophones. However, John A. Macdonald, the father of Confederation, acted as though Canada had just begun. He did not negotiate the entry of Manitoba into the Canadian Confederation. Land surveyors arrived at the Red River unannounced and prepared to transform long, narrow lots abutting a river into square lots. The river was a highway: a canoe in summer, a sleigh in winter, not to mention skating blades. Louis Riel embodies a flawed Confederation. The Canadian government simply arrived. Moreover, in 1867, Manitoba had separate schools, French and Catholic (the French were Catholics) and English. John A. Macdonald also began applying Macaulayism.

In the infamous Residential Schools, Indigenous children were punished if they spoke a native language. So harsh a fate did not befall French Canadians. Still, as Canada unfolded westward, the children of immigrants had to attend “uniform” schools or schools where the language of instruction was English. John A. Macdonald minoritised the French in Canada. Moreover, French Canadians could not leave the province of Quebec if they wanted their children to be educated in French. He, therefore, created the “schools” question and the “Quebec” question. He made the “Canada” question.

In the eyes of Europeans, the defeat of France on the North American continent may have been, as I have named it: “collateral damage.” Although the French and their allies lost the Seven Years’ War. France remained as it was. As for New France, it was a colony in the eyes of European belligerents in the Seven Years’ War, the European theatre of the French and Indian War. Besides, at the beginning of the French and Indian Wars, New France was home to 60,000 settlers. (See French and Indian War, Wikipedia.)

Americans view the French and Indian War as more than the American theater of this conflict; however, in the United States the French and Indian War is viewed as a singular conflict which was not associated with any European war. French Canadians call it the guerre de la Conquête (‘War of the Conquest’).

(See French and Indian War, Wikipedia.)

Comments

Confederation hurt Canada. Minoritising French-speaking Canadians jeopardised their survival. As immigrants arrived in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and elsewhere, their children were educated in “uniform” schools, schools where the language of instruction was English. If Québécois wanted their children to be educated in their mother tongue, they remained in Quebec. It is difficult to ascertain whether John A. Macdonald was aware that he was introducing Macaulayism in Canada, thereby creating the “Quebec question.” He was an Orangeman from Ontario.

Louis Riel was a Métis and a Catholic, educated in Montreal. He is a controversial and tragic figure. He embodies a flawed Confederation and the “schools” question. In 1867, Manitoba had “separate” schools. Moreover, Riel did not expect surveyors to arrive at the Red River ready to cut long and narrow lots abutting a river into square lots. These river lots were used as a highway. During the summer, a boat sat on the river. In winter, a sleigh replaced the ship. These were New France’s river lots.

So, Riel formed a provisional government and allowed the execution of Thomas Scott, which would cost him his life. It is difficult to ascertain whether John A. Macdonald was aware of Macaulayism. In Residential Schools, Indigenous children were punished if they were caught speaking a native language. As Canada unfolded westward, the children of immigrants had to attend “uniform” schools. The “schools” question begins in Manitoba, where language and religion cloud the issue. The French were Catholics. In Ontario, the debate is about language.

The Ontario schools question was the first major schools issue to focus on language rather than religion. In Ontario, French or French-language education remained a contentious issue for nearly a century, from 1890 to 1980, with English-speaking Catholics and Protestants aligned against French-speaking Catholics.

(See Ontario Schools Question, The Canadian Encyclopedia.)

Quebec was the victim of John A. Macdonald’s “uniform” schools or schools where the language of instruction was English. Quebec was the only province where children could be educated in French. So, the children of immigrants to Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and elsewhere entered English-language or “uniform” schools. The “schools” question was fought in Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick and elsewhere. “Uniform” schools created an imbalance. Most Canadians spoke English only.

After Confederation, French Canadians could not leave Quebec if they wanted their children to be educated in French. Consequently, Québécois view Quebec as their province. Moreover, historically, Quebec is the older Canada. Therefore, Quebec passes language laws to build a workplace in Quebec.

A “DISTINCT” SOCIETY

There has been no formal separation of Quebec from Canada, but John A. Macdonald separated Quebec from other provinces of Canada. The “schools” question justifies unilingualism. Besides, Quebec is a “distinct society,” despite hesitancy. (See Quebec as a Distinct Society, The Canadian Encyclopedia.) I doubt that Québécois see Québec as a province. A unilingual province within a bilingual country is a province. However, the view that Quebec is a “distinct” society has often been expressed. But this view has opponents. 

In fact, the Supreme Court Act provides that three of the nine judges on the Supreme Court of Canada must come from Quebec, in order to represent the civil law tradition in the Court. 
(See Quebec as a Distinct Society, The Canadian Encyclopedia.)

RELATED ARTICLES

Sources and Ressources

https://educaloi.qc.ca/en/ ←
Language Laws and Doing Business in Québec
(Canada, Early British Rule, 1763-1791, Britannica.)

Les Anciens Canadiens (ebooksgratuits.com). FR
Cameron of Lochiel (Archive.org ), Sir Charles G. D. Roberts, translator. EN
Cameron of Lochiel is Gutenberg [EBook#53154], Sir Charles G. D. Roberts, translator. EN

_________________________

[1] Denis Monière, Le Développement des idéologies au Québec des origines à nos jours, Éditions Québec/Amérique, 1977.
[2] Jean-Pierre Wallot, « Le Régime seigneurial et son abolition au Canada » (Canadian Historical Review, l, 4, décembre 1969, p. 375.) (Quoted by Denis Monière, p. 61.)
[3] Paul Hazard, La Crise de la conscience européenne, (Paris: Fayard, 1961), p. 12.
[4] Gustave Lanctôt, Le Canada et la révolution américaine (Montréal: Beauchemin, 1965), p. 82. (Quoted by Denis Monière, p. 103.)

—ooo—

Love to everyone 💕

© Micheline Walker
7 November 2022
WordPress

The Old Smoker, by
M.-A. de Foy Susor-Coté, 1926
National Gallery of Canada (NGC)

The Battle of Jumonville Glen and …

18 Monday Jul 2022

Posted by in France, The French and Indian War

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Madeleine Jarret de Verchères, The Canadian Encyclopedia

—ooo—

Descendants du Régiment de Carignan-Salières
Louis Coulon de Villiers (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Some filles du roi/roy married disbanded soldiers of the Régiment de Carignan-Salières. These soldiers were offered a seigneurie and could defend their seigneurie and the colony. Madeleine de Verchères was born to a soldier of the Régiment de Carignan-Salières.

Madeleine de Verchères

Madeleine Jarret de Verchères was the daughter of François Jarret de Verchères, who remained in Canada after his tour of duty was over. He was given a seigneurie and married 12-year-old Marie Perrot. They lived in a fort. On October 22, 1692, when François and Marie were away getting supplies for the winter, 14-year-old Madeleine Jarret de Verchères, the couple’s fourth daughter, defended the fort. She was working outside the fort when an Iroquois grabbed her by her scarf, which she untied. Madeleine fled to safety and held the fort for eight days. She is a Canadian heroïne. At the foot of this post, you will find an article on Madeleine Jarret de Verchères.

Life in Canada was complicated. For instance, when the soldiers first arrived, they had no snowshoes (des raquettes). Many died frozen, and scurvy remained a plight. Yet, among the soldiers who survived, several accepted the King’s offer. They stayed behind, and most married. The King sent hundreds of women to New France. These women have been described as “filles de Joie,” which they were not. They were women who did not have a dowry and lived in convents and orphanages. The future looked grim, so they crossed the Atlantic, often packed like sardines. None were coerced into leaving for Canada, but some had little choice. There were deaths, but the survivors did not spend a long time learning to be housekeepers. Orders were to marry as soon as possible. They quickly found a husband and turned to one another for help managing a home.

Joseph Coulon de Villers de Jumonville 

Interestingly, French captain, Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville[1] (Joseph Coulon de Jumonville) was born in the Verchères seigneurie. He was the son of Nicolas-Antoine Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville[2] and married Angélique de Jarret de Verchères, Madeleine de Verchères‘s sister. (See Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville , Dictionary of Canadian Biography.) Two families had blended: the Jarret de Verchères and the Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville.

We have met Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville. He and his half-brother, Louis, were born at the Verchères seigneurie. Both were soldiers. The two were sent to Ohio country to chase the British away. Joseph was killed at the Battle of Jumonville Glen, a suspicious death.

The Battle of Jumonville Glen took place on May 28, 1754, in Ohio country. Jumonville Glen wasn’t a battle but an ambush. Yet, it is considered by many as the first battle in the Seven Years’ War, a global conflict. The North American theatre of the Seven Year’s War was called the French and Indian War, and hostilities lasted nine years. It is believed that Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville was killed at Jumonville Glen by Tanacharison, the Half King. Still, Tanacharison was with George Washington, a young officer, and the two were alone.

We may never know whether the Half King, Tanacharison, was ordered to kill Jumonville or acted singly. Suspicion was cast on George Washington, who was with Tanacharison when Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville died. The incident is known as the “Jumonville Affair,” which may be the event that started the Seven Years’ War.

Louis Coulon de Villiers,[3] Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville’s half-brother, was convinced Joseph had been murdered. Louis avenged Joseph’s death by defeating Washington at the Battle of Fort Necessity on July 3, 1754. George Washington, who could not read French, surrendered to Louis Coulon de Villiers, signing a document according to which Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville’s death was an assassination. 

The terms of Washington's surrender included a statement (written in French, a language Washington did not read) admitting that Jumonville was "assassinated."(See Battle of Jumonville Glen, Battle of Fort Necessity and George Washington, Wikipedia) 
"It was in the Ohio Country where George Washington lost the Battle of Fort Necessity to Louis Coulon de Villiers in 1754, and the subsequent Battle of the Monongahela to Charles Michel de Langlade and Jean-Daniel Dumas to retake the country [in] 1755. The Treaty of Paris ceded the country to Great Britain in 1763." (History of Ohio)

Conclusion

We will never know whether Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville was assassinated. No one witnessed his death, and it seems that George Washington could not read French.

The fact remains that the “Jumonville affair” was described by Horace Walpole as:

a volley fired by a young Virginian in the backwoods of America [that] set the world on fire.” It proved to be the opening shot in the Seven Years’ War.

(See Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville, Dictionary of Canadian Biography.)

We also know that Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville was the son of Nicolas-Antoine Coulon de Villiers who married Angélique Jarret de Verchères, Madeleine Jarret de Verchères‘s sister. Both are daughters of François Jarret de Verchères who was a member of the Régiment de Carignan-Salières.

A few years later, when New France fell to Britain, the Thirteen Colonies‘ citizens rushed into Ohio, hoping they would occupy new land. Chief Pontiac fought back as Amerindians had lived undisturbed in this part of North America. New York governor Jeffery Amherst attempted to poison North American Indians, giving them smallpox-infected blankets. Landrushes were not rare in what became the United States. Settlers wanted a better life. George III’s Royal Proclamation of 1763 created a reserve protecting Amerindians, but restraining immigrants was difficult.

OUR CHARACTERS

François Jarret de Verchères, Régiment de Carignan-Salières, and Marie Perrot are Madeleine de Verchère’s parents. Angélique Jarret de Verchères is Madeleine Jarret de Verchères‘s sister.
Nicolas-Antoine Coulon de Villiers married Angélique Jarret de Verchères. They are the parents of
Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville and Louis Coulon de Villiers.

RELATED ARTICLES

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ohio#:~:text=It%20was%20in%20the%20Ohio%20Country%20where%20George,ceded%20the%20country%20to%20Great%20Britain%20in%201763.

Battle of Jumonville Glen (May 28, 1754)
Battle of Fort Necessity (July 3, 1754)

Love to everyone 💕

_________________________

[1] W. J. Eccles, “COULON DE VILLIERS DE JUMONVILLE, JOSEPH,” in Dictionary of Canadian Biography, vol. 3, University of Toronto/Université Laval, 2003–, accessed July 18, 2022, http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/coulon_de_villiers_de_jumonville_joseph_3E.htm

[2] Jean-Guy Pelletier, “COULON DE VILLIERS, NICOLAS-ANTOINE (1683-1733),” in Dictionary of Canadian Biography, vol. 2, University of Toronto/Université Laval, 2003–, accessed July 18, 2022, http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/coulon_de_villiers_nicolas_antoine_1683_1733_2E.html.

[3] W. J. Eccles, « COULON DE VILLIERS, LOUIS », dans Dictionnaire biographique du Canada, vol. 3, Université Laval/University of Toronto, 2003– , consulté le 18 juill. 2022, http://www.biographi.ca/fr/bio/coulon_de_villiers_louis_3F.html.

George Washington in the French & Indian War on Vimeo

George Washington, by Charles Willson Peale, 1772

© Micheline Walker
July 18, 2022
WordPress

Vive la République …

14 Thursday Jul 2022

Posted by in France, Hymne national

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

La Liberté guidant le peuple, Eugène Delacroix, 1830

—ooo—

Mes meilleurs vœux à mes amis et lecteurs de France.

La plupart des ancêtres des Canadiens francophones ont quitté la France pendant le XVIIe siècle, bien avant la Révolution. Toutefois, nous n’avons rien oublié. Ma sœur me dit que la famille de notre grand-mère maternelle remonte à Alix de France, fille du roi Louis VII et d’Aliénor d’Aquitaine. Je n’ai rien vérifié, mais c’est possible. Plusieurs filles du roi ont été recrutées dans des couvents. L’argent de la famille ayant servi à doter une fille aînée ou plus jolie, l’autre, ou les autres, risquai[en]t de passer une vie entière dans un couvent. Mieux valait la Nouvelle-France qu’un “cul de couvent.” Parmi les filles du roi, se trouvaient également des veuves dont on peut soupçonner qu’elles étaient désargentées. Louis XIV les a dotées.

À leur arrivée à Montréal, entre 1663 et 1673, des religieuses de la communauté fondée par Marguerite Bourgeoys ont enseigné aux filles du roi à gérer un ménage. Celles-ci ont ensuite trouvé mari. Certaines ont épousé des soldats démobilisés. Au début de son règne, Louis XIV avait songé non seulement à peupler sa colonie de Nouvelle-France, mais aussi à la protéger. Les soldats du régiment de Carignan-Salières avaient pour mission la défense de colons assaillis par les Iroquois, tribu alliée à l’Angleterre. Il y a lieu de croire que c’est ainsi que les seigneurs ont commencé à assurer la défense de l’actuel Québec, l’une des deux provinces constituant la Nouvelle-France. L’autre, c’était l’Acadie.

VIVE LA RÉPUBLIQUE

Compagnies Franches de la Marine

—ooo —

My kindest regards to all of you. 💕

La Marseillaise, Rouget de l’Isle et Hector Berlioz
Le Tricolore, drapeau de France

© Micheline Bourbeau-Walker
14 July 2022
WordPress

Language Laws in Quebec: Bill 96

21 Tuesday Jun 2022

Posted by in Bilingualism, Britain, Canada's Great Ministry, Canadian Confederation, France, Quebec history

≈ Comments Off on Language Laws in Quebec: Bill 96

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

—ooo—

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/bill-96-explained-1.6460764

Less than two weeks from now, Canadians will celebrate what is viewed as their birthday. In 1867, the Province of Canada, future Quebec and Ontario, and two maritime provinces, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, confederated. This year, Canada’s birthday follows the passage of language laws in Quebec. Bill 96 was voted into law on 24 May 2022 and took effect on 1st June. It has generated controversy, so details cannot be revealed accurately. English-speaking Quebecers will lose “rights.”

In earlier posts, I noted that Canadian Confederation eliminated instruction in the French language in Canadian provinces outside Quebec. One often reads that Confederation ended Catholic public schools, but the French were Catholics. They were the product of French absolutism, a form of centralisation demanding that the French speak one language, practice one religion, and be governed by one king: Louis XIV. After the fall of Nouvelle-France, the French language and devotion had waned in a province that would later be described as “priest-ridden,” but remedies were at hand.

First, the Quebec Act of 1774 restored former Seigneuries, and Catholics had to pay tithe (la dîme) to the clergy, which “habitants” protested. However, the Quebec Act allowed French-speaking Canadians to enter the civil service and run for office without renouncing their faith. Second, England asked the bishopric of Québec to welcome émigrés priests. Fifty-one (51) priests travelled to the former New France (See French immigration in Canada, The Canadian Encyclopedia). I have mentioned l’abbé Sigogne in an earlier post. L’abbé Sigogne was an émigré priest who worked in Acadie, the current Nova Scotia. He was rather harsh on Acadians, his flock, but very loyal to Britain, the country that spared him the guillotine. He spoke English and befriended Thomas Chandler Haliburton. After the French Revolution, Lower Canada also welcomed a few émigrés families and Count Joseph-Geneviève de Puisaye attracted forty people to York, north of the current Toronto, Upper Canada. (See French immigration in Canada, The Canadian Encyclopedia.)[1]

Arrival of the Brides (Filles du roi) A view of women coming to Quebec in 1667, in order to be married to the French-Canadian farmers. Talon and Laval are waiting for the arrival of the women (Watercolour by Eleanor Fortescue Brickdale, 1871-1945.) (Photo credit: The Canadian Encyclopedia)
Séminaire de Nicolet (The Canadian Encyclopedia)

Émigrés priests revitalised waning Catholicism in the former New France and they founded colleges (Séminaires). Many graduates of these colleges became priests. Others usually entered a profession. They were lawyers, notaries, medical doctors, and teachers. The majority of graduates were conservative, but higher learning often leads to liberalism. (See L’Institut Canadien, Britannica.) Liberal-minded graduates of colleges opposed Ultramontanism, but ultramontanism remained the dominant ideology in the province of Quebec until the late 1940s. It ended with the publication of Refus global (1948), a manifesto written by artists, and the Asbestos strike (1949). Refus global and the Asbestos strike were the turning point.

Throughout the 19th century, as industries developed, the Church in Quebec recommended compliance on the part of workers. So, factory workers, including the Irish, lived on a small salary and were not promoted. In the eyes of the clergy, living in poverty could guarantee salvation. Jansenism exerted considerable influence in Quebec. The more one suffered, the better.[2] However, during the Asbestos strike, the archbishop of Montreal, Joseph Charbonneau, sided with the strikers, some of whom were severely beaten. This had not happened before. Monseigneur Charbonneau was “exiled” to Victoria (B. C.), by Quebec Premier Maurice Duplessis. Monseigneur Charbonneau died a year before the beginning of Quebec’s Quiet Revolution, la Révolution tranquille.

Sir Wilfrid Laurier (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

According to Raymond Tanghe[3], Canadian Prime Minister (1896-1911) Sir Wilfrid Laurier tried to pass a motion favouring a degree of tolerance regarding instruction in the French language. Sir Wilfrid Laurier‘s motion was defeated and Sir Charles Tupper called for an election. Priests told Quebecers not to vote for Liberal candidates (the party). If they did, they would commit a “mortal sin.” Rome ruled in favour of a separation between Catholicism and politics.

Canada was very British. Its national flag, the Canadian Red Ensign, represented Canada as a nation until it was replaced by the maple leaf design in 1965. (See Canadian Red Ensign, Wikipedia.)

The Canadian Red Ensign, the national flag of Canada from 1957 to 1965. (See: the Canadian Red Ensign on the Register of Arms, Flags and Badges)

Confederation

Let us return to Confederation (1867). To a vast extent, Quebec’s language laws stem from John A. Macdonald’s categorical refusal to allow the creation of “separate” schools, i.e. French-language instruction outside Quebec. However, Quebec had not entered Confederation unreservedly. It was allotted a province where French-speaking Canadians could maintain their language and their faith, which Québécois remember. Moreover, an alliance with Britain could preclude annexation by the United States. Living in the British Empire promised safety and the prospect of election to the Assembly. Confederation would stretch Canada from sea to sea, a lovely vision. Railroads were being constructed.

However, in 1867, when British North America became the Dominion of Canada, several anglophones, many of whom were former citizens of the Thirteen Colonies, still entertained such notions as the Rights of Englishmen.

The Rights of Englishmen is an assumed group of rights that had its roots in the basic rights granted in the Magna Carta. The idea reached its peak during the British settlement of North America. By this time colonial Englishmen felt they were entitled to certain additional rights and liberties.

(See Rights of Englishmen, Wikipedia.)

During the late 18th century and most of the 19th century, the British Empire was at its zenith, which reinforced placing the British in a superior position. The Rights of Englishmen was a concept that could justify seeking independence from Britain, the motherland. The American Revolutionary War (1775-1783) created the independent United States of America, a republic. However, the same motivation, the Rights of Englishmen, could lead the inhabitants of the former Thirteen Colonies to move to a British Colony where they expected to be treated as Englishmen. United Empire Loyalists left the United States to settle in British North America where they were given large lots:

The Crown gave them land grants of one lot. One lot consisted of 200 acres (81 ha) per person to encourage their resettlement, as the Government wanted to develop the frontier of Upper Canada. This resettlement added many English speakers to the Canadian population. It was the beginning of new waves of immigration that established a predominantly English-speaking population in the future Canada both west and east of the modern Quebec border.

(See United Empire Loyalists, Wikipedia.)

The Manitoba Schools Question

As of Canadian Confederation (1867), Quebec would have French-language and Catholic Schools, as well as English-language Protestant schools. But as immigrants settled in other provinces, they had to attend non-confessional English-language schools. Outside Quebec, most French-speaking Canadians were assimilated. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, then prime minister of Canada, oversaw the “addition” (The Canadian Encyclopedia) of Alberta and Saskatchewan to Confederation. The only compromise he could reach was the Greenway-Laurier Compromise (Manitoba), which wasn’t much.

The Laurier-Greenway compromise was a regulation on schools named after Canadian Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier and Manitoba Premier Thomas Greenway. This compromise came after the adoption in 1889 of the notorious Official Language Act, which made English the sole language of Manitoba government records, minutes, and laws. Other laws abolishing French in all legislative and judicial spheres followed, leading to the disappearance of Catholic schools.

(The Greenway-Laurier Compromise, 1896.)

The compromise is described as follows:

The Laurier-Greenway compromise contained a provision (section 2.10) allowing instruction in a language other than English in “bilingual schools,” where 10 or more students in rural zones and 25 or more in urban centres spoke this language.

(The Greenway-Laurier Compromise, 1896.)

Thomas Greenway would be the Premier of Manitoba in 1888, three years after Louis Riel‘s execution on 16 November 1885. Thomas Greenway had been a friend of Sir John A Macdonald in the earlier years of his career. He

is remembered, however, for the elimination of minority educational rights for Roman Catholics; the MANITOBA SCHOOLS QUESTION dominated provincial and federal politics during his years as premier. He remained leader of the provincial Liberals until his election as MP for Lisgar in 1904.

(See Thomas Greenway, The Canadian Encyclopedia.)

The Manitoba Schools Question & the Quebec Question

The MANITOBA SCHOOLS QUESTION migrated to provinces other than Manitoba and it resulted in a mostly unilingual Canada. In fact, the “schools question” became “la question du Québec,” the Quebec question. As I noted above, immigrants to Canada who settled outside Quebec were educated in “uniform” schools, or schools where the language of instruction was English. Therefore, outside Quebec, most Canadians were anglophones. This created a malaise in Quebec and this malaise led to both the Quiet Revolution and the establishment, by Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson, of a Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism (19 July 1963-1969).

The Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism

The mission entrusted to the royal commission was

to inquire into and report upon the existing state of bilingualism and biculturalism in Canada and to recommend what steps should be taken to develop the Canadian Confederation on the basis of an equal partnership between the two founding races, taking into account the contribution made by the other ethnic groups to the cultural enrichment of Canada and the measures that should be taken to safeguard that contribution.

(See Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, Wikipedia.)

The Commission was co-chaired by André Laurendeau, publisher of Le Devoir, and Davidson Dunton, president of Carleton University. The Commission recognized, officially, that Canada was a bilingual and bicultural country. Canada’s founding nations, other than its First Nations, or Amerindians, were France and Britain. The work of the Commission led to the Official Languages Act of 1969. However, its findings could not justify the creation of French-language schools across Canada. These were created in Acadian communities and in certain districts. During the century separating Confederation (1867) and the Official Languages Act (1969), Canada became a largely English-language country. Yet, in the 1970s, French immersion schools were created, as well as summer immersion programmes. English-speaking Canadians also formed an influential association: Canadian Parents for French.

Bilingualism has its advantages. It can lead to a fine position in the Civil Service, in the Military, in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and elsewhere. I taught French to civil servants. At first, some expressed reticence. French was being “thrown down their throat.” Two weeks later, or by coffee break, these students enjoyed learning French.

History could not be rolled back, but the Official Languages Act of 1969 was a blessing. It recognized that Canada’s founding nations, other than its First Nations, were France and Britain. However, French-speaking Canadians had been recognized earlier. Governor James Murray refused to assimilate Britain’s new subjects and, as noted above, Sir Guy Carleton negotiated the Quebec Act of 1774 which restored the Seigneurial System. Habitants would work for their seigneur and provide tithe (la dîme) to the clergy. The Test Act was no longer required for an applicant to join the Civil Service or to run for office as a member of Parliament. The arrival of the United Empire Loyalists in British North America changed matters. So did Confederation. French-speaking Canadians were a minority and most lived in Quebec.

Quebec’s Language Laws

Five years after the passage of the Official Languages Act of 1969, Quebec Premier Robert Bourassa‘s Liberal Government passed Bill 22. In 1974, Quebec declared itself a unilingual province. In 1977, Quebec passed Bill 101, the Charter of the French language. Bill 101 dictated unilingual posting and the enrolment of immigrants in French-language schools. English-speaking Canadians of British ancestry could be educated in English-language schools. Other English-speaking Canadians could not. (Education is a provincial portfolio.) Bill 22 did not please English-speaking Montrealers, nor did Bill 101. Many anglophones left Montreal and Toronto gained status. Moreover, Quebec’s language laws often affected the life and the career of French-speaking Canadians living outside Quebec. These individuals had to explain Quebec and compensate for language laws. Teachers had to create French-speaking Canadians. Besides, where would immigrants find refuge? Most immigrants are seeking a peaceful environment. During WW II, several French-speaking European royals lived in Quebec.

Bill 22 and Bill 101 created tension, and so did Quebec’s two referendums on sovereignty: the 1980 Referendum (20 May 1980; defeated by a 59.56% margin) and the 1995 Referendum (30 October 1995; defeated by a 50.58% margin). The first referendum took place four years after René Lévesque‘s Parti Québécois was elected (1976). Both referendums proposed sovereignty (independence), but the wording of the 1995 referendum included a reference to a “partnership” with Ottawa:

Do you agree that Québec should become sovereign, after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership, within the scope of the Bill respecting the future of Québec and of the agreement signed on 12 June 1995?

(See Quebec Referendum (1995), The Canadian Encyclopedia)

Conclusion

I wish Sir John A. Macdonald had not created the “schools” question. Sir Wilfrid Laurier might have been able to support the re-introduction of French as a language of instruction had the French not linked language and faith inextricably. But I doubt that religion played as important a role as the language of instruction:

Despite Macdonald's reluctance, Manitoba entered Canada as a province. English and French-language rights were safeguarded in the new legislature and the courts. Protestant and  Roman Catholic educational rights were protected, but the right to education in either English or French was not.(See Manitoba and Confederation, The Canadian Encyclopedia.) Bold characters are mine.

As you know, I spent forty happy years in English-language provinces and had decided never to return to Quebec because of disputes between anglophones and francophones. I knew I could not survive in such a climate. Truth be told, I am not doing very well.

Canada’s two founding nations were separated for a century to the detriment of French-speaking Canadians and Canadian unity. How would French-speaking Canadians save their language? Quebec passed language laws, and these have generated acrimony. I have heard Canadians express pride because a family member was educated at an English-language Quebec University without learning French. Anglophones can live in Quebec without using French. The Eastern Townships is a bilingual region of Quebec because it was settled by United Empire Loyalists. My grandfather, who was born and raised in the Townships, could not speak a word of French. However, Quebec’s language laws erode what English-speaking Canadians view as their rights. As for Québécois, they monitor the survival of the French language, which they view as their right. They pass abrasive language laws. Quebec is a unilingual province inside a bilingual Canada.

It could be that such a notion as the Rights of Englishmen had survived in the collective memory of Quebecers of British origin. As for French-speaking Canadians, I would not exclude the negative consequences of being “conquered.” They may look upon themselves as a defeated people.

I have a photocopy of Hubert Aquin‘s article entitled L’Art de la défaite, published in Liberté, 1965. Aquin writes that the Rebellion of 1837-1838 is irrefutable proof that French Canadians are capable of anything, including stirring up their own defeat.[4]

La rébellion de 1837-1838 est la preuve irréfutable que les Canadiens français sont capables de tout,voire même de fomenter leur propre défaite.

Robert Baldwin and Louis-Hippolyte Lafontaine built a bilingual and bicultural Canada. English-speaking and French-speaking Canadians are compatible and equal. English-speaking Quebecers do not have to learn French. Fortunately, many anglophone Canadians have attended and still attend a private French school or are sent to a French school in Switzerland. Enrolment in a private school can be costly. These individuals have “grace.” I’ve known many and married one.

John Ralston Saul attended an Alliance Française school. He wrote a book on the Great Ministry of Robert Baldwin and Louis-Hippolyte LaFontaine. (See John Ralston Saul, Wikipedia.) Many share the view that Canada was born before Canadian Confederation. 

He argues that Canada's complex national identity is made up of the "triangular reality" of the three nations that compose it: First Peoples, francophones, and anglophones. He emphasizes the willingness of these Canadian nations to compromise with one another, as opposed to resorting to open confrontations. In the same vein, he criticizes both those in the Quebec separatist Montreal School for emphasizing the conflicts in Canadian history and the Orange Order and the Clear Grits traditionally seeking clear definitions of Canadian-ness and loyalty. (See John Ralston Saul, Wikipedia.)

Isn’t it possible to study French or English at school, as a second language? It is not that old-fashioned an idea. After all, Quebec managed the Pandemic in both French and English.

But I must go … This post is too long.

RELATED ARTICLES

____________________

[1] Micheline Bourbeau-Walker, « Le Récit d’Acadie : présence d’une absence », in Édouard Langille et Glenn Moulaison, éditeurs, Les Abeilles pillotent: mélanges offerts à René LeBlanc, Revue de l’Université Ste-Anne, Pointe-de-l’Église, 1998, pp. 255-275. ISBN 2-9805-909, ISSN 0706-8116

[2] Denis Monière, Le Développement des idéologies au Québec des origines à nos jours, Montréal, Éditions Québec/Amérique, 1977, p. 209.

[3] Raymond Tanghe, Laurier, artisan de l’unité canadienne, MAME, Figures Canadiennes, 1960, pp. 48-49.

[4] Hubert Aquin, « L’Art de la défaite », Liberté, Volume 7, numéro 1-2 (33-38), janvier–avril 1965, p. 33.

See https://stikeman.com/en-ca/kh/canadian-employment-labour-pension-law/quebec-s-bill-96-takes-in-effect-as-of-june-1-2022-what-quebec-employers-need-to-know

—ooo—

Love to everyone 💕

John Ralston Saul

Cameron of Lochiel (Les Anciens Canadiens) [EBook #53154]

© Micheline Walker
21 June 2022
(revised 22 June 2022)
WordPress

The Conquest: its Aftermath

04 Wednesday Aug 2021

Posted by in France, Nouvelle-France, Scots in Canada, the Conquest

≈ Comments Off on The Conquest: its Aftermath

Tags

, , , , , , ,

By an unknown artist, James Murray was given to the National Portrait Gallery, London, in 1942. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

—ooo—

Our series of posts on Aubert de Gaspé’s Les Anciens Canadiens have reached an exciting point. France has been defeated, and the ruling families of Quebec are returning to France, but they must do so promptly.

After the sinking of l’Auguste, Governor James Murray gave the reprieve that had saved the d’Habervilles to all prominent French families. In fact, they would no longer be forced to return to France. Therefore, Quebec still had its seigneurs. Papineau was a seigneur, so was Aubert de Gaspé, and the Lotbinières, and others. They were Canada’s aristocrats, but their life in France could be humbler after a long absence. If they left in a hurry, their fate could be disastrous. However, while the Royal Proclamation of 1763 benefited Amerindians, George III of England demanded the assimilation of the French.

Québec in 1774 (Google)

The Royal Proclamation of 1763

  • Amerindians protected
  • James Murray does not enforce assimilation

The Royal Proclamation created the Province of Quebec. It gave the British monarch (the king or queen) the power to buy and sell land belonging to Indigenous people. It made sure that the British would have more power than the French. Also, it attempted to assimilate the French. Through assimilation, the British believed the French should lose their language, traditions, and religious beliefs so that they would become like them.

(See Royal Proclamation of 1763, The Canadian Encyclopedia)

In other words, under the Royal Proclamation of 1763, Amerindians were given a large reserve. This reserve was a wide and long strip of land west of the Thirteen Colonies. This region of North America had fallen to Britain, but it could not be home to the British living in the Thirteen Colonies. Although the Royal Proclamation of 1763 was the Amerindians’ Magna Carta, the citizens of the Thirteen Colonies looked upon George III’s document as an “intolerable act” on the part of Britain.

Moreover, while George III’s Proclamation of 1763 protected Amerindians, the French ran the risk of being assimilated, which takes us back to Les Anciens Canadiens. After the sinking of l’Auguste, not only did Governor James Murray postpone the departure of the d’Habervilles from New France, but he extended this reprieve to every prominent citizen of New France who, as noted above,,, could also remain in Canada. But more importantly, James Murray did not enforce assimilation.

His willingness to allow French law and custom in the courts further alienated the merchants and led to his recall in April 1766 and he left Canada in June. Though charges were dismissed, he did not return to Canada though he retained nominal governorship until April 1768.

(See James Murray, The Canadian Encyclopedia)

The Assembly

  • James Murray criticized
  • the Quebec Act of 1774

James Murray was criticized and recalled, but he completed his term in office, and, as noted in earlier posts, James Murray paved the way for Guy Carleton’s Quebec Act of 1774. The Quebec Act was a more “intolerable act” than the Royal Proclamation. It has also been viewed as somewhat flawed because it was negotiated with Seigneurs, the Clergy, and the bourgeois. “Habitants” were disappointed, but the French in Canada did not lose their language, religion, seigneurs, or Code Civil. The Quebec Act of 1774 is particularly significant because the French-speaking population of the former New France were granted the same rights as the Colony’s English-speaking citizens, which meant that, henceforth, they could run for office.

The Colony had yet to attract English-speaking immigrants. Canada was not an attractive destination. In 1970, Margaret Atwood published The Journals of Susanna Moodie, a book of poetry in which she tries to imagine writer Susanna Moodie’s feelings about life “in the Canada of her era.” At first, in 1774, Canadiens were the majority, but a Governor could form an assembly. Immigrants arrived: Scots who lost their homes and, soon, United Empire Loyalists. A blend, however, was initiated earlier, to which Les Anciens Canadiens is a testimonial. Although New France had fallen, Cameron of Lochiel remains a brother to Jules d’Haberville, and he helps him find his way in a new Canadian élite. Therefore, despite the fall of Nouvelle-France, Jules can enter a career. Furthermore, Jules has met and loves a young Englishwoman in his travels. The two will marry.

Lord Durham’s Report

Canadiens still faced obstacles. In his Report on the Rebellions of 1837-1838, Lord Durham wrote that the people of Quebec did not have a literature, nor did they have a history: “un peuple sans histoire ni littérature.” In response to John Lambton, 1st Earl of Durham‘s demeaning remark, Canadiens created two literary movements: le Mouvement littéraire de Québec, the Literary Movement of Quebec, whose members congregated in poet Octave Crémazie‘s bookshop, and le Mouvement littéraire de Montréal, whose most prominent author would be poet Émile Nelligan. Aubert de Gaspé was a member of le mouvement littéraire de Québec. Les Anciens Canadiens was published in 1863. Les Anciens Canadiens is not the first novel published by a French Canadian. Phillipe-Ignace François Aubert de Gaspé, Aubert de Gaspé’s son, published L’Influence d’un livre in 1837. Aubert de Gaspé père worked with his son. So, L’Influence d’un livre may have been Philippe Aubert de Gaspé’s introduction to the world of letters. He was a born writer and his imprisonment had acquainted him with immense sorrow, but he wrote a fine novel at the age of 76.

Conclusion

Chapter XI/X of Les Anciens Canadiens, Légende de Madame d’Haberville (Madame d’Haberville’s Story), is the story of a mother who will not stop mourning the loss of her daughter. The little girl is burdened by buckets filled with her mother’s tears. She sees her child in a dream or vision. This inner tale may reflect the grief of realistic Canadiens. They had to go on and could because they had a “bon Anglais” in James Murray, the Scottish governor of Britain’s new Colony. James Murray commiserates when he listens to Monsieur de Saint-Luc’s account of the shipwreck of Augusta, an unfortunate accident. Henceforth, he will be a kinder governor.

Une grande pâleur se répandit sur tous les traits du général ; il fit apporter des rafraîchissements, traita monsieur de Lacorne avec les plus grands égards, et se fit raconter dans les plus minutieux détails le naufrage de l’Auguste. Ce n’était plus le même homme qui avait voué pour ainsi dire à la mort, avec tant d’insouciance, tous ces braves officiers, dont les uniformes lui portaient ombrage.

Les prévisions de M. de Lacorne se trouvèrent parfaitement justes ; le gouverneur Murray, considérablement radouci après la catastrophe de l’Auguste, traita les Canadiens avec plus de douceur, voire même avec plus d’égard, et tous ceux qui voulurent rester dans la colonie eurent la liberté de le faire. M. de Saint-Luc, surtout, dont il craignait peut-être les révélations, devint l’objet de ses prévenances, et n’eut qu’à se louer des bons procédés du gouverneur envers lui. Ce digne homme, qui comme tant d’autres, avait beaucoup souffert dans sa fortune, très considérable avant la cession du Canada, mit toute son énergie à réparer ses pertes en se livrant à des spéculations très avantageuses.

Les Anciens Canadiens (XV: pp. 364-365)

[General Murray turned as pale as death. He was no longer the same man who had carelessly consigned so many brave officers to their doom just because the sight of their uniforms displeased him. Presently he called for refreshments, and, treating Saint-Luc with the most profound consideration, he inquired of him the most entire particulars of the wreck.

What M. de Saint-Luc had foreseen presently came to pass. Thenceforward Governor Murray, conscience-stricken by the loss of the Auguste, became very lenient toward the Canadians. Those who wished to remain in the Colony were given liberty. M. de Saint-Luc, whose possible revelations he may have dreaded, became the particular object of his favour and found nothing to complain of in the governor’s attitude. He set his tremendous energies to the work of repairing his fortunes, and his efforts were crowned with well-merited success.]

Cameron of Lochiel (XIV: 226-228)

RELATED ARTICLES

Sources and Resources

Wikipedia, The Canadian Encyclopedia, & Britannica
Les Anciens Canadiens (ebooksgratuits.com). FR
Cameron of Lochiel (Archive.org ), Sir Charles G. D. Roberts, translator. EN
Cameron of Lochiel is a translator of Gutenberg [EBook#53154], Sir Charles G. D. Roberts. EN

—ooo—

Love to everyone 💕

P.S. My last two posts were nearly erased. I’ve rebuilt both, hence the delay. I’ve added that once Louisbourg fell to Britain, on 26 July 1758, ships could go up the St. Lawrence River unhindered, which meant that Quebec could fail. It fell on 13 September 1759.

The French and Indian War (1754-1763)
Portrait of James Murray as a young man by Allan Ramsay, 1742. (Scottish National Portrait Gallery, Edinburgh) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

© Micheline Walker
4 August 2021
WordPress

Last Words on the Battle of Jumonville

25 Sunday Jul 2021

Posted by in Britain, France, Nouvelle-France, The French and Indian War, The United States

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

Jumonville Glen (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

—ooo—

Writing the Battle of Jumonville Glen was very difficult. I had conflicting sources. For instance, I could not determine whether Coulon de Jumonville was killed as the skirmish ended or later. He was killed at Jumonville Glen. It was a skirmish, and he was alone.

Moreover, my text kept being revised. So, I nearly destroyed the post. It seems that Coulon de Jumonville was killed by Tanacharison. But, the Jumonville affair cast suspicion on George Washington and no one witnessed the event. Our only certainties are that Jumonville was killed.

I should have mentioned that George Washington (February 1723-December 1799) was only 22 at the Battle of Jumonville Glen. Tanacharison, who was 54, died soon after Jumonville Glen, an ambush and skirmish. It is now called a skirmish.

My conclusion is that wars are absurd. The people of New France are still fighting to retain their identity. As well, France lost the Seven Years’ War. Yet, the starting point was an ambush. That an ambush should lead to wars, including a world war, is disorienting. So is an entry stating that Washington started the wars. As noted above, Washington was 22 or 23 years old, probably 22, in 1754.

WHEN YOUNG GEORGE WASHINGTON STARTED A WAR.

I inserted a source, but I could not separate the source and the videos it shows. It is a learned source and the gentleman we hear does not throw stones. The link is the Jumonville Skirmish, but I am now shown Error 404 and the information given to readers is in French. If one speaks French, the site is available. I’ll search again. The following link may take a reader to information. One must pay.

George Washington in the French & Indian War on Vimeo

Washington was ordered to remove the French from the Ohio Country, which may have given him latitude.

Aubert de Gaspé is pointing out the absurdity of war. France lost New France and New France lost its motherland. These consequences are not glitches. The Battle of Quebec) 1775) was an early battle during the American Revolutionary War.

Many seigneurs were sent back to France, but Aubert de Gaspé was not. He had descendants.

Through his novel, Aubert de Gaspé suggests that one can adjust to changes. Jules did. Aubert de Gaspé also suggests that the enemy may be an adopted brother. Jules and Arché are reunited. It is as though, the seigneurs of New France had been in the military. Jules’s father looked old because he had fought battles.

The George Washington in the French & Indian War on Vimeo is a fine link. So is Tanacharison. No one looks very good, except Aubert de Gaspé. I have ordered two books so I can learn more.

Sources and Resources

Bluhm, Raymond K. “Battle of Jumonville Glen”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 21 May. 2021, https://www.britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Jumonville-Glen. Accessed 25 July 2021.
Jumonville Glen Skirmish · George Washington’s Mount Vernon

Love to everyone 💕

The French and Indian War (1754)

© Micheline Walker
25 July 2021
WordPress

The Battles of Quebec

19 Monday Jul 2021

Posted by in American Civil War, France, Québec, The French and Indian War

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

The Battle of Sainte-Foy by George B. Campion, watercolour.

I am writing this post for the second time. In his Anciens Canadiens (1863), Aubert de Gaspé describes the 1) Battle of the Plains of Abraham, fought on 13 September 1759. He also describes the 2) Battle of Saint-Foy, fought on 28 April 1760. At Sainte-Foy, the Chevalier de Lévis tried to recapture New France. 3) Moreover, on 31 December 1775, after the fall of New France and the Quebec Act of 1774, the American Continental Army attacked Quebec City. This battle is the only Battle of Quebec. Battles 1 & 2 took place in Quebec City, or nearby. At the Battle of Quebec, revolutionary forces were under the command of General Richard Montgomery, who was killed, and Benedict Arnold, who was wounded. “Daniel Morgan and more than 400 men were taken prisoner.” (See Battle of Quebec 1775, Wikipedia.)

We are at the very beginning of the American Revolutionary War. Future Americans looked upon George III’s Royal Proclamation of 1763 and Guy Carleton’s Quebec Act of 1774 as “intolerable acts.” Future Americans were defeated by a “motley” garrison (see Battle of Quebec, Wikipedia) under the command of Sir Guy Carleton. By virtue of the Royal Proclamation of 1763, future Americans could not settle west of the Thirteen Colonies. As well, because of the Quebec Act of 1774, Canada’s defeated French-speaking population, who lived in a very large Province of Quebec, were unlikely to join American revolutionary forces.

Hostilities : The French and Indian War

The French and Indian War (1754-1763), or hostilities between the French and their Amerindian allies, on the one side, and the British, on the other side, started in the Ohio Country. The first engagement was the Battle of Jumonville Glen (1752). A force of 35 Canadiens was under the command of Joseph Coulon de Jumonville, but Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville, a Canadien and a seigneur, was assassinated. The British General was George Washington who was accompanied by the Half King.

The French and Indian War (1754-1763), or hostilities between the French and their Amerindian allies, on the one side, and the British, on the other side, started in the Ohio Country. The first engagement was the Battle of Jumonville Glen (1752). A force of 35 Canadiens was under the command of Joseph Coulon de Jumonville, but Joseph Coulon de Villiers de Jumonville, a Canadien and a seigneur, was assassinated. The British General, a very young George Washington, was accompanied by the Half King or Tanacharison. A video, embedded below, suggests that Jumonville was killed by the Half King. (See Tanacharison & Battle of Jumonville Glen, Wikipedia.)

The Jumonville Affair: the Half King
Burning of the French ship Prudent and capture of Bienfaisant, during the siege
of Louisbourg in 1758, Richard Paton

Engagements other than hostilities in the Ohio country are listed below:

The Battle of Carillon/Battle of Ticonderoga was quite outstanding, from a military point of view. On the French side, Montcalm and Lévis had a force of 3,600 regulars, militia, & Indians. They were opposed, on the British side, by 6,000 regulars, 12,000 provincial troops, rangers, & Indians. The French built a barrier behind branches, foliage, and other obstacles, creating an impossible terrain, and fired at the advancing troops. The Battle of Beauport or Montmorency was fought on 31 July 1759, which bode quite well for the French. But, at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham, British forces consisted of 4,400 regulars and colonial rangers opposing a garrison of 3,400 men (1,900 regulars and 1,500 colonial militia and natives). Quebec fell. The battle lasted twenty minutes, and both commanders, thirty-two-year-old James Wolfe, and Louis de Montcalm, aged 47, were fatally wounded. (See Battle of Carillon, Wikipedia.)

Battle of Carillon/Fort Ticonderoga

Cameron of Lochiel, a Highlander, fought at Louisbourg (1758), at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham (1759) and at the Battle of Sainte-Foy (1760). As for Jules d’Haberville, he fought at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham and at the Battle of Sainte-Foy. The former brothers will be reunited despite Jules’s inimical first reaction.

The Plains of Abraham and the Battle of Sainte-Foy

Aubert de Gaspé describes the Battle of the Plains of Abraham and the Battle of Sainte-Foy. Gaspé’s numbers may not be accurate. Moreover, Aubert de Gaspé believes that the French won the Battle of Saint-Foy. So do other sources. In chapter XIV/XIII, Jules d’Haberville and Cameron of Lochiel are reunited and Aubert de Gaspé’s description of the defeated is very eloquent. The defeated are forever defeated.

Vae victis ! dit la sagesse des nations ; malheur aux vaincus ! non seulement à cause des désastres, conséquences naturelles d’une défaite, mais aussi parce que les vaincus ont toujours tort.

Les Anciens Canadiens (XIV: p. 314)

[Vae victis! says the wisdom of the nations. Woe to the conquered!—not only because of the ruin which follows defeat, but because the vanquished are always in the wrong.] 

Cameron of Lochiel (XIII: 198-199)

At the Battle of Sainte-Foy, fought on 18 April 1760. The French had 5,000 regulars and militia and The British forces consisted of 3,800 men. On the British side, a total of 1,259 men were killed and 829, wounded. Three-quarters of British casualties were Fraser Highlanders. The French lost 146 men and 640 were wounded. Aubert de Gaspé views the Battle of Sainte-Foy as a French victory, but it did not tip the balance at the Treaty of Versailles 1763. France had abandoned its North American colony.

Aubert de Gaspé devotes one chapter to Les Plaines d’Abraham, it is Chapter XIV in the original French text and Chapter XIII (p. 198) in Cameron of Lochiel, Sir Charles G. D. Roberts’s translation. The Plains of Abraham therefore follows the Chapter entitled L’Incendie de la côte du sud which reveals Arché’s struggle as a soldier who is ordered to harm his Canadiens friends. However, continuity is not broken.

– Tu as vaincu, Montgomery ; mes malédictions retombent maintenant sur ma tête ; tu diras que j’ai déserté à l’ennemi ; tu publieras que je suis un traître que tu soupçonnais depuis longtemps. Tu as vaincu, car toutes les apparences sont contre moi. Ta joie sera bien grande, car j’ai tout perdu, même l’honneur.
Et, comme Job, il s’écria :
– Périsse le jour qui m’a vu naître !

Les Anciens Canadiens (XII: p. 280)

[“You have conquered, Montgomery; my curses recoil upon my own head. You will proclaim that I have deserted to the enemy, that I am a traitor as you long suspected. You will rejoice indeed, for I have lost all, even honor.” And like Job, he cursed the day that he was born.]

Cameron of Lochiel (XI: 218-219)

As a soldier, Arché is rehabilitated in the Battle of Quebec.

De Locheill s’était vengé noblement des soupçons injurieux à sa loyauté, que son ennemi Montgomery avait essayé d’inspirer aux officiers supérieurs de l’armée britannique. Ses connaissances étendues, le temps qu’il consacrait à l’étude de sa nouvelle profession, son aptitude à tous les exercices militaires, sa vigilance aux postes qui lui étaient confiés, sa sobriété, lui valurent d’abord l’estime générale ; et son bouillant courage, tempéré néanmoins par la prudence dans l’attaque des lignes françaises à Montmorency, et sur le champ de bataille du 13 septembre 1759, fut remarqué par le général Murray, qui le combla publiquement de louanges.

Les Anciens Canadiens (XIV: pp. 321-322)

[Lochiel had cleared himself nobly of the suspicions which his foe, Montgomery, had sought to fix upon203 him. His wide knowledge, his zeal in the study of his profession, his skill in all military exercises, his sobriety, his vigilance when in guard of a post, all these had put him high in esteem. His dashing courage tempered with prudence in the attack on the French lines at Montmorency and on the field of the first Battle of the Plains had been noticed by General Murray, who commended him publicly.]

Cameron of Lochiel (XIII: 202-204)

Conclusion

I will break here. The battles have been listed. The Battle of the Plains of Abraham (1759) and the Battle of Sainte-Foy 1760). I may separate the Battle of Quebec (1775) from the battles fought during the French and Indian War (1754-1763).

After the battles come sorrowful souls seeking redemption.

RELATED ARTICLES

Sources and Resources

Wikipedia, The Canadian Encyclopedia, & Britannica
Les Anciens Canadiens (ebooksgratuits.com). FR
Cameron of Lochiel (Archive.org ), Sir Charles G. D. Roberts, translator. EN
Cameron of Lochiel is Gutenberg [EBook#53154], Sir Charles G. D. Roberts, translator. EN
Une Colonie féodale en Amérique: l’Acadie 1604 – 17 (Rameau, Google Books)


—ooo—

Love to everyone 💕

New France (Google)

© Micheline Walker
19 July 2021
updated 20 July 2021
WordPress

The Order of Good Cheer

19 Saturday Jun 2021

Posted by in Amerindians, Canadian History, France, Quebec history

≈ Comments Off on The Order of Good Cheer

Tags

, , , , , , ,

L’Ordre de Bon Temps, 1606 par Charles William Jefferys (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“To brighten the atmosphere and foster the esprit de corps amongst the sieur de Poutrincourt, lord of Port-Royal’s staff members, Samuel de Champlain had the idea to create “the order of Good-Cheer” during the winter 1606-1607. In turn, the members of the small elite of Port-Royal were to prepare a gastronomical meal for their fellow-members, with the fruit of their hunting and fishing in the rich Acadian natural environment plentiful with game and fish of various kinds. From time to time, the sagamo Membertou and its close relations were also invited to share the feast during which the person in charge of the eve entered ceremoniously in the main room of the Habitation wearing around his neck the collar of the Order that he would tend to the future host of the next evening. In the current rebuilt Habitation, today a national historical place of Canada, one can easily imagine the atmosphere of these evenings. The government of the province of Nova Scotia reestablished the order of the Good Cheer and it is possible to become join it.”
(H. P. Biggar in The Works of Samuel de Champlain)
(See Order of Good Cheer, Wikipedia)

—ooo—

The Order of Good Cheer

The Order of Good Cheer was founded by Champlain in 1606. Champlain thought that scurvy was caused by idleness. L’Ordre de Bon Temps was chartered by Jean de Biencourt de Poutrincourt et de Saint-Just and Pierre Dugua, Sieur de Mons. In its earliest days, Huguenots came to Acadie and then Quebec City, but mostly to Acadie. They were fishing and had been fishing for a long time off the coast of the current Maritime Provinces of Canada. Acadie was founded in 1604 by Dugua de Mons, four years before Samuel de Champlain founded Quebec city. L’Ordre de bon temps could not cure scurvy, but a happy social life lessens stress. But it may have created the “race” John Neilson (1776-1848), an acquaintance of Aubert de Gaspé (1786-1871), describes to Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859). John Neilson depicts The French in Canada as “remarquablement sociables,” which they had to be, among themselves, and, also, in their relationship with the British. They were a conquered nation.

In an earlier post, I compared a seigneur’s dining table to Carl Larsson‘s depiction of a Christmas dinner at his house. To be more accurate, the Order of Good Cheer is the ancestor to merriment in New France, both in Seigneuries and in the humbler homes of the habitants. In fact, it characterizes the behaviour of voyageurs. Voyageurs had to have a strong upper body and a good voice. They sang as they paddled their canoe. Dissatisfied with his American canoemen, John Jacob Astor asked that an exemption be made to the Embargo Act of 1807 so he could recruit Canadiens as canoemen for the American Fur Company and its subsidiary, the Pacific Fur Company. (See the Voyageurs Posts)

A Supper at the House of a French-Canadian Seigneur

After Dumais is rescued and a doctor has been sent for, everyone thanks providence and eight persons repair to the seigneur d’Haberville’s dining-room to eat supper. Traditionally, meals in Canada were le déjeuner (breakfast), le dîner (dinner) and le souper (supper). In Cameron of Lochiel (1905), Sir Charles G. D. Roberts uses the word supper to translate le souper. In earlier days, the people of Britain used the word supper, but in provinces outside Quebec, French-speaking Canadians may say dîner-souper because people could be confused.

Aubert de Gaspé describes une armoire, a large cabinet, containing blue dishes from Marseille. So, there is a degree of opulence on the shores of the St Lawrence.

Le couvert était mis dans une chambre basse, mais spacieuse, dont les meubles, sans annoncer le luxe, ne laissaient rien à désirer de ce que les Anglais appellent confort. (VI: p.110)
[The table was spread in a low but spacious room, whose furniture, though not luxurious, lacked nothing of what an Englishman calls comfort.] (V: 76-77)

By comparing the chambre basse to English comfort, one senses that Philippe Aubert de Gaspé is seeking validation. The novel is historical and, to a large extent, biographical. Historically, New France was defeated in 1759, but Aubert de Gaspé’s novel is part of a collective effort to rebuild New France, albeit in books. The French lived comfortably. In fact, Aubert de Gaspé is a descendant of Charles Aubert de la Chesnaye (1632-1702), reportedly the richest man in New France. Aubert de la Chesnaye owned several seigneuries and he was also a fur trader. Fur traders, called bourgeois, were mostly individuals who could afford to hire voyageurs.

Louis XIV did found the Compagnie des Indes occidentales in 1664. He wanted to take the fur trade away from bourgeois, many of whom were not French. The Company closed in 1674. It had lasted a mere ten years. (See Compagnie des Indes occidentales, Canadian Encyclopedia.) The Hudson’s Bay Company, a British company, was chartered in 1670. Fur trading is no longer its main mission, but it has yet to close. Fur trading was extremely lucrative, but the North West Company, headquartered in Montreal, was not established until 1779, after the conquest, by Scottish immigrants. It closed in 1821 when it was merged with the Hudson’s Bay Company. One would presume that Charles Aubert de la Chesnaye was a bourgeois fur trader.

As for the Seigneur d’Haberville (Aubert de Gaspé himself), the jewel of his manoir‘s dining-room is its armoire. The French in Nouvelle-France had armoires as did their European ancestors. In Les Anciens Canadiens, the D’Haberville’s armoire is also called a “sideboard” or buffet, a more common piece of furniture in the dining-room of other nations.

Un immense buffet, touchant presque au plafond, étalait, sur chacune des barres transversales dont il était amplement muni, un service en vaisselle bleue de Marseille semblant, par son épaisseur, jeter un défi à la maladresse des domestiques qui en auraient laissé tomber quelques pièces.(VI: pp. 110-111)
[A great sideboard, reaching almost to the ceiling, displayed on its many shelves a service of blue Marseilles china, of a thickness to defy the awkwardness of the servants.] (V: 76-77)

On a lower part of this side board, one finds a box (une cassette) filled with silverware.

Au-dessus de la partie inférieure de ce buffet, qui servait d’armoire, et que l’on pourrait appeler le rez-de-chaussée de ce solide édifice, projetait une tablette d’au moins un pied et demi de largeur, sur laquelle était une espèce de cassette, beaucoup plus haute que large, dont les petits compartiments, bordés de drap vert, étaient garnis de couteaux et de fourchettes à manches d’argent, à l’usage du dessert. (VI: p. 111)
[Over the lower part of this sideboard, which served the purpose of a cupboard and which might be called the ground floor of the structure, projected a shelf a foot and a half wide, on which stood a sort of tall narrow cabinet, whose drawers, lined with green cloth, held the silver spoons and forks.] (V: 76-77)

Later, Aubert de Gaspé mentions silver goblets.

Eight persons were at table, which is a small number. The French faced a major difficulty: finding supplies. As for the food, Brillat-Savarin would envy the pâté :

Ce pâté, qu’aurait envié Brillat-Savarin, était composé d’une dinde, de deux poulets, de deux perdrix, de deux pigeons, du râble et des cuisses de deux lièvres : le tout recouvert de bardes de lard gras. (VI: p. 113)
[This pasty, which would have aroused the envy of Brillat-Savarin, consisted of one turkey, two chickens, two partridges, two pigeons, the backs and thighs of two rabbits, all larded with slices of fat pork.] (V: 78-79)

Aubert de Gaspé was well informed. He had read the best authors. Each chapter of Les Anciens Canadiens begins with a learned quotation, Latin is used frequently and the Seigneur d’Haberville knows about Brillat-Savarin, the author of The Physiology of Taste (Physiologie du Goût). (See Brillat-Savarin, Wikipedia.) Every chapter of his book begins with a learned quotation from writers who are not necessarily French or French Canadians. Alfred Lord Tennyson (1809-1892) is quoted in chapter VI/V. Tennyson lived in the 19th century, which reveals that Les Anciens Canadiens was written in 1863.

A seigneur, le Seigneur de Beaumont will propose a toast to Arché.

– Remplissez vos gobelets ; feu partout, s’écria M. de Beaumont : je vais porter une santé qui, j’en suis sûr, sera bien accueillie. (VI: p. 118)
[“Fill your glasses! Attention, everybody,” cried the Seigneur de Beaumont. “I am going to propose a health which will, I am very sure, be received with acclamation.”] (V: 80-81)
(Beaumont)

Monsieur de Beaumont praises Archie:

“Votre conduite est au-dessus de tout éloge.” (VI: p. 118)
[“What you have done is beyong all praise.”] (V: 81-82)
(Beaumont)

Of special interest to us, Scots in Canada, is a reference to the Scotch reel. (p. 126) In footnote 9, we learn that the Scots brought reels to Canada shortly after the conquest. This footnote refers to the past, but events in Les Anciens Canadiens occur from 1757 until the conquest.

Les scotch reels, que les habitants appellent cosreels, étaient, à ma connaissance, dansés dans les campagnes, il y a soixante et dix ans. Les montagnards écossais, passionnés pour la danse comme nos Canadiens, les avaient sans doute introduits peu de temps après la conquête. (VI: p. 146)
[Scottish reels, which habitants call cosreels, were, to my knowledge, danced in the countryside, seventy years ago. Scottish Highlanders, who were as fond of dancing as our Canadiens, had introduced the reels shortly after the conquest.]

THE Stranger

Chapter V/VI features a stranger who does not seem altogether human.

Une longue chevelure blonde lui flottait sur les épaules ; ses beaux yeux bleus avaient une douceur angélique, et toute sa figure, sans être positivement triste, était d’une mélancolie empreinte de compassion. Il portait une longue robe bleue nouée avec une ceinture. Larouche disait n’avoir jamais rien vu de si beau que cet étranger ; que la plus belle créature était laide en comparaison. (VI: p. 133)
[“This stranger was a tall, handsome man of about thirty. Long fair hair fell about his shoulders, his blue eyes were as sweet as an angel’s, and his countenance wore a sort of tender sadness. His dress was a long blue robe tied at the waist. Larouche said he had never seen any one so beautiful as this stranger, and that the loveliest woman was ugly in comparison.”] (V: 90-94)

David Larouche meets the stranger when he is taking his tithe to his parish priest. David, also called Davi, has so much to give that he needs a sled to carry his tithe. The stranger congratulates him, but David says there could have been more. If the weather had been better, his tithe would be larger.

The following year, he is carrying his thite because the bundle is so small. But the weather was as he wished, but too much so, as in the proverb.

– Jamais souhait ne vint plus à propos, répondit Larouche, car je crois que le diable est entré dans ma maison, où il tient son sabbat jour et nuit ; ma femme me dévore depuis le matin jusqu’au soir, mes enfants me boudent, quand ils ne font pas pis ; et tous mes voisins sont déchaînés contre moi. (VI: p. 136)
[“‘Never was wish more appropriate,’ answered Larouche, ‘for I believe the devil himself has got into my house, and is kicking up his pranks there day and night. My wife scolds me to death from morn till eve, my children sulk when they are not doing worse, and all my neighbors are set against me.'”] (V: 93-94)
(David Larouche)

The French in North America had to trust in Providence. Hostile Iroquois could kidnap children, but they could also listen to Dumais and release Arché. Moreover, colonies were at the mercy of victories and defeats between colonial powers.

This character, the stranger, is a bit of an archetype. He may be the stranger who comes to the door and whom one believes is Jesus. (Notre Seigneur en pauvre). Novelist Germaine Guèvremont introduces a stranger in her 1945 Le Survenant (The Outlander). (See RELATED ARTILES) This novel, a trilogy, was made into a very popular television serial and is the subject of two films. Aubert de Gaspé, however, depicts a stranger who can predict the future and, in 1757, the future is ominous. We are two years away from the conquest. Montcalm will lose the Battle of the Plains of Abraham on 13 September 1759.

Les Anciens Canadiens also has it sorceress, other than la Corriveau. When the sorceress sees Archie, she knows that he will harm the family.

Va-t’en ! va-t’en ! c’est toi qui amènes l’Anglais pour dévorer le Français ! (IX: p. 208)
[“Avaunt! Avaunt!” continued the witch with the same gestures, “you that are bringing the English to eat up the French.”] (VIII: 134)
(Marie, the sorceress)

Between Christmas and Lent

On the shores of the St Lawrence, there are very few stores. Preparing a meal is difficult. As well, habitants are scattered over a large territory. Consequently, there are good months and bad months. But winter comes bringing “lavish abundance.” Between Christmas time and Lent, there are gatherings and one feasts.

– Nos habitants, dispersés à distance les uns des autres sur toute l’étendue de la Nouvelle-France, et partant privés de marchés, ne vivent, pendant le printemps, l’été et l’automne que de salaisons, pain et laitage (…)
Il se fait, en revanche, pendant l’hiver, une grande consommation de viandes fraîches de toutes espèces ; c’est bombance générale : l’hospitalité est poussée jusqu’à ses dernières limites, depuis Noël jusqu’au carême. C’est un va-et-vient de visites continuelles pendant ce temps. Quatre ou cinq carrioles contenant une douzaine de personnes arrivent ; on dételle aussitôt les voitures, après avoir prié les amis de se dégrayer (dégréer); la table se dresse, et, à l’expiration d’une heure tout au plus, cette même table est chargée de viandes fumantes. (VII: p.169)
[“Our habitants, scattered wide apart over all New France, and consequently deprived of markets during spring, summer, and autumn, live then on nothing but salt meat, bread, and milk, and, except in the infrequent case of a wedding, they rarely give a feast at either of those seasons. In winter, on the other hand, there is a lavish abundance of fresh meats of all kinds; there is a universal feasting, and hospitality is carried to an extreme from Christmas time to Lent; there is a perpetual interchange of visits. Four or five carrioles, containing a dozen people, drive up; the horses are unhitched, the visitors take off their wraps, the table is set, and in an hour or so it is loaded down with smoking dishes.”] (VI: 113-114)

Conclusion

Jules and Archie are about to leave for Europe. Archie will return as a British soldier and will set ablaze his friend’s manoir. But the Order of Good Cheer still inhabits the mind of a people who have otherwise lost everything. One rebuilds. Blanche will not marry Archie, but he will live nearby and never marry. A humbler manoir has been rebuilt and Aubert de Gaspé remembers the dinners of old. It seems a duty to share meals, not so lavish as before, but generous. The Order of Good Cheer, myrth, is a constant in the literature of the conquered Canadiens.

As Philippe Aubert de Gaspé chronicles the past, building a literary homeland, he also creates Cameron of Lochiel, an intriguing figure, bridging a past and a future.

RELATED ARTICLES

Sources and Ressources

Les Anciens Canadiens (ebooksgratuits.com). FR
Cameron of Lochiel (Archive.org ), Sir Charles G. D. Roberts, translator. EN
Cameron of Lochiel is Gutenberg [EBook#53154], Sir Charles G. D. Roberts, translator. EN
Une Colonie féodale en Amérique: l’Acadie 1604 – 17 (Rameau, Google Books)

—ooo—

Love to everyone 💕

Sir Ernest MacMillan’s Notre Seigneur en pauvre
Un Ancien Canadien

© Micheline Walker
19 June 2021
WordPress

The Scots as Explorers

04 Friday Jun 2021

Posted by in Explorers, France, Québec, Scots in Canada, the Fur Trade

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Sir Alexander Mackenzie painted by Thomas Lawrence (c. 1800 – 1801), courtesy National Gallery of Canada (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

—ooo—

Sir Alexander Mackenzie (1764-1820): first to cross North America north of Mexico on 22 July 1793.
Simon Fraser (1776-1862): first to go down the Fraser River, 1808. The Fraser River leads to the Pacific.
David Thompson (1770-1827): a cartographer (British).
Alexander MacKay (1770-1811): Alexander Mackenzie’s cousin. He died on 15 June 1811 (the Tonquin ).
Alexander Ross (1783-1856): Oregon Settlers. (Franchère’s voyageurs).
Gabriel Franchère (1786-1863): took voyageurs from New York to the mouth of the Columbia River (the Tonquin).
the Fraser River.
the Columbia River.
the Tonquin (1807-1811).

In my last post, I noted that voyageurs and Amerindians worked for explorers. When beavers were nearing extinction fur traders became explorers in the hope of finding precious pelts west of a formidable obstacle: the Rocky Mountains.

The first European to cross the continent

Alexander Mackenzie (1764-1820) was the first European to cross the North American continent north of Mexico. In 1788, the North West Company sent him to Lake Athabasca, in Northern Saskatchewan, where he was a founder of Fort Chipewyan. In 1789, he navigated the Mackenzie River, named after him, and reached the Arctic Ocean. Such was not his goal. He then turned around and travelled the Mackenzie River south, but he did not go as far as the Pacific Ocean. The Mackenzie River is extremely long. In 1793, Alexander Mackenzie again sought a passage to the Pacific. He was advised not to travel down the Fraser River, but to use instead the Bella Coola River, which took him to the Pacific Ocean. Alexander Mackenzie reached the Pacific on 22 July 1793. He did so 13 years before the Lewis and Clark expedition (see Alexander Mackenzie, Wikipedia). Alexander Mackenzie is the first person to cross the continent north of Mexico, but he was not alone. Alexander Mackenzie was

[a]ccompanied by two native guides (one named Cancre), his cousin, Alexander MacKay, six Canadian voyageurs (Joseph Landry, Charles Ducette, François Beaulieu, Baptiste Bisson, François Courtois, Jacques Beauchamp) and a dog simply referred to as “our dog”, Mackenzie left Fort Chipewyan, in Northern Saskatchewan, on 10 October 1792, and traveled via the Pine River to the Peace River. From there he traveled to a fork on the Peace River arriving 1 November where he and his cohorts built a fortification that they resided in over the winter. This later became known as Fort Fork.

See Alexander Mackenzie, Wikipedia

Had so shrewd an investor as John Jacob Astor (1763-1848) not suspected that there were pelts to harvest on the West Coast of the current United States, he would not have established the Pacific Fur Company (1810-1813), a subsidiary of the American Fur Company (1808). Nor would he have asked Gabriel Franchère (1786-1863) to recruit voyageurs in Quebec and to take them aboard the Tonquin around Cape Horn and past the Columbia Bar, called the “Graveyard of the Pacific.” Eight men died. The Tonquin left New York on 8 September 1810. It arrived at the mouth of the Columbia River on 22 March 1811. Aboard were Alexander MacKay and Alexander Ross. However, Fort Astoria would not survive because the United States was losing the War of 1812. John Jacob Astor sold the Pacific Fur Company to the North West Company and Fort Astoria was renamed Fort George. I have told the story of the Tonquin in earlier posts (see RELATED ARTICLES). Moreover, we have a page containing a list of posts on the voyageurs.

One may therefore suggest that it was in the best interest of the North West Company to ask Alexander Mackenzie to find a passage to the Pacific Ocean. However, Alexander MacKay had accompanied his cousin on his expedition west of the Rocky Mountains. After the demise of Fort Astoria, MacKay sailed north on the Tonquin and died (15 June 1811) when the ship was attacked by chief Wickaninnish and then blown apart by James Lewis, a clerk who was seriously wounded and could not escape.

Alexander Mackenzie was the first European to cross the continent north of Mexico, but, as we have seen, he was not alone. Moreover, in 1808, Simon Fraser would also reach the Pacific Ocean, or nearly so. Simon Fraser’s task, however, was to settle forts past the Rocky Mountains. He was a settler. Both Alexander Mackenzie and Simon Fraser were Nor’Westers. The Hudson’s Bay Company played a lesser role in promoting the fur trade west of the Rockies.

Alexander Ross, who travelled on the Tonquin, can also be considered a settler. He helped Gabriel Franchère‘s stranded voyageurs settle in the Oregon Country. Many married Amerindian women. So did Alexander Ross. He married the daughter of an Okanagan Chief. Alexander Ross left precious accounts of his travels. Ross’s Adventures of the First Settlers on the Oregon or Columbia River, 1810-1813, written in 1849, chronicles life on the Tonquin and the settling of voyageurs in the Oregon Country. Alexander Ross was associated with the Pacific Fur Company, the North West Company, and the Hudson’s Bay Company, in that order.

The Oregon Country, however, was a disputed area. The British felt entitled to the territory down to the 42nd parallel. As for the United States, it claimed all territory extending north to the 54th parallel. The Oregon Treaty of 1846 settled matters. In other words, in New Caledonia, the future British Columbia, the border was defined several years after the War of 1812.

Alexander Mackenzie, Simon Fraser & David Thomson (Photo credit: The Canadian Encyclopedia)
Pre-1825 portrait of Simon Fraser (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Simon Fraser: twenty-four men in four canoes…

Rivers (fleuves) flow into the sea. So, west coast rivers flow into the Pacific Ocean. However, the Fraser River, is unnavigable. Simon Fraser and his crew canoed through turbulent and, all too often, narrow passages between mountain ranges. Portages were necessaries, but explorers and their crew had to walk down the side of mostly perpendicular cliffs. Simon Fraser knew about the rapids and also knew about the cliffs of the Fraser River. As well, hostile Amerindians lived along the Fraser River. Yet, on 28 May 1808, twenty-four men in four canoes left Fort George, settled by Simon Fraser. Simon Fraser lost one canoe and would have lost a man, had it not been for an agile native, Métis, or voyageur.

Alexander Mackenzie was the first to reach the Pacific Ocean by land. However, Simon Fraser (1764-1862), who canoed down the turbulent Fraser River in 1808, is not the lesser hero. On the contrary, he was the first to “establish permanent settlements in the area” (see Simon Fraser, Wikipedia). He secured Britain/Canada’s claim to territory north of the 49th parallel. Moreover, he provided proof that fur could be harvested west of the Rocky Mountains. Fraser sent a winter’s harvest of fur to Dunvegan (Alberta).

Just before leaving Rocky Mountain Portage, Fraser sent the winter’s harvest of furs to Dunvegan (Alta). It included 14 packs from Trout Lake – the first furs traded west of the mountains. Fraser was delighted with their quality. “The furs are really fine,” he noted in his journal. ” They were chiefly killed in the proper season and many of them are superior to any I have seen in Athabasca…

See Simon Fraser, The Dictionary of Canadian Biography

Conclusion

Scots were everywhere in the fur trade. But explorers did not acquire wealth. However, what is most significant is the blend of individuals who worked peacefully finding a passage by land to the Pacific Ocean. Moreover, they worked in teams and teams included Amerindians, Métis, and voyageurs. François Beaulieu II, a Métis and a Yellowknife chief. He was a guide to Alexander Mackenzie and, as we have seen, Alexander Mackenzie was accompanied by his cousin Alexander MacKay when he crossed the North American continent. When John Neilson had a conversation with Alexis de Tocqueville, he was mostly right. A blend of the two “races,” French-speaking and English-speaking Canadians, was possible. We have a bad Anglais in Jonathan Thorn, the Tonquin’s captain. He mistreated aboriginals who then killed nearly all the men aboard the Tonquin.

The Scots who came to Canada had fallen to England at the Battle of Culloden, in 1746. So had the French, in 1763, a mere 17 years later. Travel accounts, including L. R. Masson’s Bourgeois de la Compagnie du Nord-Ouest (Volume II), an Internet Archive publication, name partners who are Scots, but have French and Amerindian friends, or interact with the French and the Amerindians. These are good years, if not a mythical past. Quebec’s music has Celtic roots and its literature features un bon Anglais who is a Scot. He is Les Anciens Canadiens‘s Archibald Cameron of Locheill, a Scot. Jules d’Haberville, a seigneur‘s son, befriends Arché, a Scot and a Catholic.

Next, we read Philippe Aubert de Gaspé‘s Les Anciens Canadiens (see Sources and Resources)

RELATED ARTICLES

Sources and Resources

—ooo—

Love to everyone 💕

The Descent of the Fraser River, 1808, by C. W. Jefferys

© Micheline Walker
4 June 2021
WordPress

The Auld Alliance and the Scots Guard: Scots in Canada

20 Thursday May 2021

Posted by in France, Québec, Scotland

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

Jehanne d’Arc et sa Garde écossaise. Painting by John Duncan Scottish symbolist painter (Commons Wikimedia)

—ooo—

The Auld Alliance and the Scots Guard

A colleague suggested that John Neilson, who was born in Scotland, may have been influenced by the long friendship that has united Scotland and France. The Auld Alliance dates back to 1295. That year, Scotland and France joined forces in an effort to curb England’s numerous invasions. Moreover, in 1418, Valois Charles VII of France appointed a Scots Guard who would be bodygards to the King of France. “They were assimilated in the Maison du Roi,” the King’s immediate entourage (See Garde écossaise, Wikipedia). In fact, several members of the Scots Guard settled in France permanently. The Auld Alliance was replaced by an Anglo-French alliance under the terms of the Treaty of Edinburgh, 1560.

Joan of Arc at the Siege of Orléans by Jules Eugène Lenepveu, painted 1886–1890 (Wikipedia)

The Garde écossaise is remembered for its role in the Hundred Years’ War. It was appointed by Charles VII, who may not have been crowned had Jeanne d’Arc not heard voices and followed their call. The Siege of Orléans had lasted six months and the English and their French allies appeared to be defeating France. The siege collapsed nine days after Joan’s arrival. The image inserted at the top of this post, a painting by John Duncan, shows Jeanne d’Arc and her garde écossaise. She has the support of angelic Scottish guards which suggests a somewhat supernatural victory.

The Auld Alliance may have exerted a very real influence on the mind-set of Scots who explored Canada guided by Amerindians and voyageurs. Scots also engaged in the fur trade. As for Mr Neilson, a Scot, he promoted an amicable blend of the French and English “races” in Canada: nation building. When Mr Neilson met Alexis de Tocqueville, he spoke French. He had said to his mother that by marrying Marie-Ursule he wanted to help eradicate the “baneful prejudices” that separated the French and the British. As early as 1822, a Union Bill was proposed in the hope that the French in Canada would be assimilated. (See John Neilson, Dictionary of Canadian Biography.)

Louis-Joseph Papineau and Mr Neilson were sent to England as delegates. They presented a petition against a proposed Union Bill (see John Neilson). The Union Bill was introduced in 1822 in the hope that Union would lead to the assimilation of French-speaking Canadians. The French, in Canada wanted to retain their cultural identity. They were, as John Neilson and Robert Baldwin saw them: a nation.

However, he could see “baneful prejudices.” One shares John A Macdonald‘s vision of a country that stretched from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean, but he was not as kind un Anglais as John Neilson. We will meet un bon Anglais in Philippe Aubert de Gaspé’s Les Anciens Canadiens, an historical novel (1863). Scottish Archibald Cameron of Locheill, called Arché, is a bon Anglais. As the main architect of Canadian Confederation, John A Macdonald, a Scot, furthered colonisation in his relationship with both Amerindians and French-speaking Canadians. As we know, Quebec would be the only province where the languages of instruction would be French or English.

The two Canadas were united following Lord Durham‘s Report on the Rebellions of 1837-1838. However, assimilation did not occur. Robert Baldwin and Sir Louis-Hippolyte La Fontaine‘s effort led to a bilingual and bicultural Canada which was granted a responsible government in 1848. Theirs was the Great Ministry. In fact, it is somewhat difficult for me to understand that, as the main architect of Canadian Confederation, John A Macdonald furthered colonisation in his relationship with both Amerindians and French-speaking Canadians. It was a throwback. As John Neilson told his mother, there were “baneful prejudices” (des préjugés funestes).

La Princesse de Clèves remembered

Ironically, the Auld Alliance and the Scots Guards take us back to Madame de La Fayette’s Princesse de Clèves. Henri II, King of France, was accidentally but fatally wounded by one of his Scottish guards, Gabriel 1er de Montgommery. They were jousting. Henri II forgave Gabriel de Montgommery, or Gabriel de Lorges. However, Catherine de’ Medici would not be so kind. He was captured as a protestant leader, and Catherine watched from a window as he was tortured and decapitated.

After Henri II’s death, François II, who had married Marie Stuart, was King of France and, as Marie Stuart’s husband, he was also King consort of Scotland. An emissary signed the Treaty of Edinburgh (1560), an Anglo-French alliance. However, Francis II died of an ear infection in December 1560. He had reigned for a mere fifteen months. Marie Stuart returned to Scotland, but she was a Catholic in a country where citizens were converting to Protestantism. As Mary, Queen of Scots, Marie Stuart was beheaded.

As for Canada, Quebec folklore has Celtic roots and many French-speaking Canadians have Celtic ancestry. However, New France was conquered. We are, therefore, looking at different dynamics. John Neilson was an exceptional Canadian.

—ooo—

“In every combat where for five centuries the destiny of France was at stake, there were always men of Scotland to fight side by side with men of France, and what Frenchmen feel is that no people has ever been more generous than yours with its friendship.”
Charles de Gaulle, 1942 in Auld Alliance

RELATED ARTICLES

Alexis de Tocqueville and John Neilson: a Conversation, 27 August 1831
(13 May 2021)
Alexis de Tocqueville on Lower Canada (17 Janvier 2018)
Canadiana.1 (page)

Sources and Resources

John Neilson (Dictionary of Canadian Biography)
Document2 (ameriquefrancaise.org)
http://www.ameriquefrancaise.org/media-1557/Tocqueville_Mr._Neilson.pdf
Upper Canada – Library and Archives Canada (bac-lac.gc.ca)
Denis Monière, Le Développement des idéologies au Québec (Éditions Québec/Amérique, 1977), Chapître III.
The Union Bill of 1822
House of Stuart, Wikipedia

—ooo—

Love to everyone 💕

I apologize for a long absence.

Capitaine des Gardes du Corps du Roi, (1820) (Wikimedia Commons)

© Micheline Walker
20 May 2021
WordPress