Conflicting Ideas of Canada's Past
He has been called a prophet, a traitor, a martyr, a visionary and a madman, but whatever one thinks of him, Louis Riel, remains one of the most controversial figures in Canadian history. Does this man who has continued to haunt Canadian history for more than a century after his execution, deserve all of those descriptions? After reading three different interpretations of the rebellions, it is still difficult to decide which is closer to the truth. All three authors retold the Metis history and although they differ on crucial issues, there was agreement on the basic facts. The primary difference amongst the three authors was whether the Canadian and Manitoban governments acted in good faith in carrying out the terms of the Manitoba Act, whether John A. MacDonald purposely deceived the Metis as to what Canada's intentions were with respect to the Canada-Metis Agreement and to what extent were there deceptions in the administration of the Metis land grants. How these three !historians attempt to encapsulate Riel's life, accomplishments, and mistakes is very different. How they attempt to separate fact from fiction and decide whether Riel was justified in his actions against the government is written from three very different
According to Flanagan, Riel considered the Manitoba Act and the promised amnesty, a kind of treaty that left the Metis free to "remove themselves", from confederation if the bargain were "broken in either of its branches. No doubt for years, decades, maybe even centuries to come, historians will st!ill be debating whether Riel was a hero and a patriot, or as the government claimed, a traitor!1G. Finally, when Riel realized there was an unbridgeable gap between himself and Jackson, he determined to go it alone, as he had in 1869. Stanley believes that up until the execution of Thomas Scott, the Red River Rebellion was relatively non-violent and the government probably would have forgiven the Metis indiscretions, because they even continued to follow the process of conciliation through to the passage of the Manitoba Act. Where their sympathies lie, how subjective they are and how they interpret the facts is quite evident, but there are many sides to history and every side must be examined if a fair judgment is to be made. The book explains that after Manitoba was inducted into the Dominion of Canada, the Metis population remained stable, but as the government began to mismanage the land the Metis began to flee to Saskatchewan. The natives had to fail in their stance against the government, because they were a "primitive people", standing against the march of "civilization,"1 they had to be pushed aside so the new country could progress. " 2The execution of Scott was a huge faux pas on the part of the Metis officials and it invited terrible reprisals from the government. Three authors, three separate views, and although history is supposed to be the facts of our past, it really all depends upon whose point of view the historian is interpreting. " This commission was announced to the Metis by telegram on the fourth of February and it should have ended the growing discontent amongst the Metis. Sprague wrote Canada and the Metis, a book that takes a more sympathetic approach towards the Metis.
Common topics in this essay:
Manitoba Act,
Saskatchewan Metis,
West Rebellion,
River Rebellion,
Canadian Government,
Canada Metis,
Saskatchewan Riel,
Pacific Railway,
Canada-Metis Agreement,
Western Canada,
manitoba act,
provisional government,
canada metis,
western canada,
rebellion 1885,
red river,
metis people,
rebellion 1885 reconsidered,
riel rebellion,
1885 reconsidered,
red river rebellion,
stanley believes,
riel rebellion 1885,
birth western canada,
laurier university press,
|
Acceptance Essays
