|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
History is shrouded in mystery. It is the job of a historian to make sense of what is true and what is not when evaluating different accounts of an event. This can be applied to the history of the Acadians, a French people who once flourished in the maritime region of Canada. In analyzing two accounts of Acadian history, it is apparent that many different conclusions can be made on what is seen as the defining moment of their past: “Le Grande Deportation.” In one account analyzed, historian Naomi Griffiths argues that the Acadians had a right to the land upon which they lived, and that British policies aimed at removing the French presence from Nova Scotia. One the other hand, in his article “The Expulsion of the Acadians,” Bruce Fergusson takes the position that Acadians were “ultimately the authors of their own fate.” Both authors present a strong case, and what comes out at the end of an analysis of the two articles is clear: there is no one side that was completely at fault in the deportation of the Acadians, rather it was a series of events and decisions from both the Acadian and British camps that led to the expulsion of the Acadian people from the Maritimes in 1755. The most apparent issue when discussing the deportation of the Acadians is one of oaths. The issue at the time was whether Acadians should be forced to swear an oath that promised loyalty to the king and to bear arms- the British position, or if they should swear oaths promising neutrality- the Acadian position. When examining Griffiths’ article “Acadian Identity: The Creation and Re-creation of Community” her position on the matter is clear. She believes that the Acadian belief that they had the right to neutrality was enough. The Acadians, between 1727 and 1730, she says, “had sworn to a variety of oaths of loyalty, most of which contained written provision for their neutrality and all of which had been sworn with a verbal promise of such neutrality being guaranteed.” Her point is well-built, but fails to take into account that Acadians could break this oath of neutrality. This point Fergusson does address. First of all, he completely dismisses Acadian claims for an oath of neutrality, calling it “fantastic.” Furthermore, he tackles what Griffiths failed to, the reality that Acadians broke their oath.
Approximate Word count = 1493
Approximate Pages = 6
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|