French-Canadian Nationalism
For nearly two centuries the inhabitants of New France lived their day to day lives
under the French Regime. The colony of New France was shaped by such institutions as the
Catholic Church, and the seigneural system. After the Conquest of 1763, the inhabitants of
New France now found themselves under the control of the British monarch. However, the
life for the inhabitants of New France, virtually remained unchanged. It was not until the
American Revolution, that the inhabitants of New France began to feel the British presence.
As a result of the American Revolution many British subjects, who became known as the
United Empire Loyalists migrated north to the British colonies. The loyalists who settled
in colonies were uneasy by the lack of government and demanded that some form of
government be established. The British, who feared another war in North America, were
quick to appease the loyalists concerns. Thus in 1791 the Constitution Act was
implemented. From its implementation major clashes developed between the French and
English populations. These major clashes in Lower Canada in the first decade of the
nineteenth century were caused by the implementation of the Constitution Act of 1791. It
will be shown that the French-Canadian response to these tensions gave way for the birth of
French-Canadian nationalism.
The Constitution Act of 1791, which was a result of loyalists demands, left some
English feeling somewhat dissatisfied, particularly with the division of the colony into
Upper and Lower Canada.
In Lower Canada the French population held an overwhel...
... middle of paper ...
...rneau, F. X.. History of Canada. Montreal: John Lovell, 1862.
Ouellet, Fernand. "French-Canadian Nationalism: Its Origins to the Insurrection of
1837," in Dale Miquelon, ed., Society and Conquest. Toronto: Copp Clark
Publishing, 1977, pp. 171-186.
Smith, Lawrence A. H.. "Le Canadien and the British Constitution", in Ramsay
Cook, Craig Brown, Carl Berger, eds., Constitutionalism and Nationalism in
Lower Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969, pp. 17-32.
Wade, Mason. The French Canadians: 1760 - 1967. Toronto: Macmillan of
Canada, 1968.
Wade, Mason. The French-Canadian Outlook. New York: McClelland and
Stewart Limited, 1964.
Wallot, Jean-Pierre. "The 1800's", in J. M. Careless, ed., Colonists ans Canadiens:
1760 - 1867. Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1971, pp. 95-121.
New France and Canada have many political contrasts and connections between each other. New France at the time had a monarchy ruling the colony, and a sovereign was selected by one person. The Hierarchy of New France was important to the structure of power, the Hierarchy went something like this: King, Governor, Minister of
In the 1770’s the British army was well known for its monetary wealth and professional well trained militia. American colonists were slowly getting more and more fed up with the inequality and taxation under British rule so they took a stand. Americans known as Rebels or Patriots fought in the Revolutionary War to gain independence from Britain. Some colonists also known as loyalists, thought that the Patriots had no chance against the professional militia so they stayed loyal to the crown. Although improbable at the start of the American Revolution, the colonists were able to defeat the British army and formally gain independence because they had great leadership from George Washington, similar goals that created high morale, and aided from
the French Revolution. Hunt, Lynn & Censer, Jack. University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press (2001)
Tensions were already high between English- and French-Canadians, especially after Ontario had stopped teaching French in Catholic Schools, and the conscription crisis only served to increase them.
The American Revolution was the event where 13 of Great Britain’s North American colonies acquired independence from Great Britain and went on to form the United States of America. In 1776, America declared its independence and in 1783, Britain accepted America’s independence. The American Revolution brought about change, because the rights, class structure and government in the colonies differed greatly from those in Great Britain.
The fall of Quebec was a turning point in Canadian history, changing it from a French colony to a British colony. Had this battle gone the other way, English might be the second language, not French. The battle of Quebec was one of many battles during the 'Seven Year War'. They called it the Maritime War. It was officially declared in May 1756. Britain and Prussia were on one side and France, Spain, and Austria on the other. The war moved across the Atlantic Ocean from Europe because the French and the British were fighting over furs and land. Britain, while subsidizing and aiding Prussia, its only European ally, sought victory in America and sent what was for that century an overwhelming number of regular troops in order to stiffen the military of the American colonies.
The American Revolution has great importance on the way the United States views itself. Contrary to popular belief, Americans were not separate people subject to British tyranny. A large portion of American colonialists thought of themselves as British. There are many ideas and causes as to why the American Revolution began. Differing political traditions, both parties economic interest, trading interest of those involved in transatlantic commerce, Britain’s large debt that accumulated during the Seven Years War, mutual misunderstandings, and the Great Awakening are many of the reasons that the colonist began to revolt against England.
Beginning in mid-1789, and lasting until late-1799, the French Revolution vastly changed the nation of France throughout its ten years. From the storming of the Bastille, the ousting of the royal family, the Reign of Terror, and all the way to the Napoleonic period, France changed vastly during this time. But, for the better part of the last 200 years, the effects that the French Revolution had on the nation, have been vigorously debated by historian and other experts. Aspects of debate have focused around how much change the revolution really caused, and the type of change, as well as whether the changes that it brought about should be looked at as positive or negative. Furthermore, many debate whether the Revolutions excesses and shortcomings can be justified by the gains that the revolution brought throughout the country. Over time, historians’ views on these questions have changed continually, leading many to question the different interpretations and theories behind the Revolutions effectiveness at shaping France and the rest of the world.
First of all, each of the different colonies’ founders all expressed sentiments to establish a solid and uncorrupt government. One that would honor God. This government would be made up of a Governor, and a general Assembly and/or provincial Council where most political and judicial decisions would be made and agreed on together. In the Mayflower Compact, Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, and the Frame of Government of Pennsylvania, men were given the right to vote and choose the officials and representatives who would have a place in the government. These first colonies also promised the people that justice would be restored, it would not be sold, or withheld.
During the late eighteenth century the colonies were in a fight for independence; a fight for a revolution from a government that had oppressed them, taxed them, and basically enslaved them. So why did the new government they were struggling to construct so closely resemble the government they detested to be under? Thirteen colonies all fighting against one common foe, however governing themselves would cause many obstacles within. The new government was being pieced together from the only political system they have even been a part of, a monarchy. As a result there was a severance between the people on how the government was to be run. Some felt it was too democratic while others opposed claiming it was not enough. Colonists really didn't have a choice in the matter. It was going to be a trial and error situation until they could agree how to govern the new world. Even with the Articles of Confederation established, many things were still unethical and people felt that the new government was no better then the government they condemned. In time the fight for independence would change many things however the "Revolution" of the new government was a slow process. Some aspects of Parliament remained leaving speculation to whether or not this was a revolution at all.
Canada is known by outsiders to be a very peaceful country. But if you ask any Canadian they well tell you that is unfortunately not the case. For there is a large ongoing conflict between Canadians. The conflict is between the French and the English, or more specifically between Quebec and the rest of Canada. As a result of this conflict, along with some wrongdoing and propaganda. Quebec has considered and has gone as far to hold referendums over Separatism (Surette,2014). Separatism is that the province of Quebec separates from the rest of Canada to form its own country. Which would have immense effects on indubitably Quebec but also the rest of Canada (Martin, 2014). This report will focus on the root causes and origin of Quebec Separatism, the current state of Quebec Separatism and finally how we as a society can act towards Quebec Separatism.
government, t. p. (n.d.). Quebec Nationalism - Quebec History. Faculty.marianopolis.edu. Retrieved May 27, 2012, from http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/quebechistory/events/natpart4.htm
After the end of French Revolution, as the empires slowly diminished, countries wished to become independent and develop nation-states. Possibly one of the first nationalists was Johann Gottlieb Fichte, who attempted to urge Germans to be individual from people of other nation-states. Many years later, more people became interested in nationalism, some in more positive ways than others. Ernest Renan questioned the definition of an actual nation, and what constituted a nation. However, not everyone agreed with nationalism. John Acton strongly opposed nationalism and maintained that its primary goal was not freedom. Unfortunately, the negative connotations and slight misinterpretation of the works of each of the pro-nationalist authors gave rise to war, both the Great War and Second World War. Acton was right to oppose nationalism, as early thinkers such as Fichte, Mazzini and Renan gave unclear notions of nationalism, which contributed to misinterpretation of literary texts.
To summarize the book into a few paragraphs doesn't due it the justice it deserves. The beginning details of the French and Ind...