I seem to recall this as well (recall from stories told by elderly grandparents) The way I remember it, The British holed up in the city all winter, under siege from French troops. When the spring breakup came in May, all eyes were on the St. Lawrence to see which Navy was going to come sailing in. The story I was told was that when the British flag was spotted on the first vessels to come in the spring, the “betrayal” of the colony by the motherland (France) was complete.
Of course, my ancestors came from Upper Canada, so the stories I’ve been told may be suspect.
There’s a very significant difference between that and what I actually said, which is that it’s pathetic to still hold as a sore spot a battle fought 250 years ago. Nationalism can be okay. Remembering history is great. Considering a long-over battle some sort of politically offensive matter is absolutely, flat-out stupid. How mesmerizingly dumb does a person have to be to think a battle fought in 1759 makes English Canadians better than French Canadians? As dumb as a box of hair, that’s how dumb.
Christ, most people are over Pearl Harbor, and that was 182 years more recent.
So how many Texans are still bitter over it and would oppose its reenactment? Hell, Americans still re-enact Civil War battles, and enthusiastically, I might add, on both sides of that long-ago war.
The Civil War has the advantage where the losers can say they won more battles than the winners. Puts a different spin on things.
I am a reenactor, and this bit of PC is annoying, but hardly unique. There are actually a few wars that are not reenacted due to cultural issues. I have yet to see anyone reenact the Mexican-American war, for example.
Interesting you should mention the second battle of Quebec.
Allegedly, the re-enactors were planning to re-enact the battle of Sainte-Foy as well (which as you note is the one which the French won) - something which those protesting appear to have not noticed.
If any single battle can be credited for the loss of Quebec, it is this one:
The see-saw between French and British forces in North America could have gone on indefinitely, were it not for the destruction wrought on the French fleet.
My wife and 3 kids do Am. Rev. War re-enactment (as colonial loyalists), and I assure you you are spot on in your assessment. Tho it might be tricky prioritizing those two goals, because as much fun as they have, they take their educational role quite seriously. And history is one of the many areas in which the majority of the population seems exceedingly ignorant.
The 7-years’ war is on of my son’s main areas of interest, and it is very obvious how little most people understand about that conflict, and it’s implications on so many future events. So I’d favor just about anything aimed at shedding more light on that era.
I understand that mentality, but I don’t so much of a correlation between the reenactment of a battle and the Orangemen on parade. The latter like to march through contentious areas (in Northern Ireland at least) to celebrate/commemorate an act which brought continued oppression of a sizeable portion of Ireland for several centuries.
To answer the OP if we pander to every single group that dislikes one or other pieces of history being reenacted,taught in school etc.then we would never remember any of our histories and those that forget the past are doomed to repeat it so they say.
We’ve had this sort of nonesense in England as well,a few years ago as part of,I believe,the Queens Jubilee celebrations there was to be a recreation of the Battle of Trafalgar but at the last minute the two fleets were designated the Red and the Blue or somesuch incase we offended the French.
I’ve been in Turkey as a Brit on my own surrounded by Turks on Gallipoli Day where they celebrate the repulse of the British/Commonwealth forces during the WW! battle and though there was plenty of goodnatured banter I cant honestly say that my feelings were outraged.
I’ve also been a sole Englishman in a crowd in Ireland celebrating the Easter Rising and wasn’t offended and for that matter have watched and enjoyed on several occassions the mock sea battle between the Royal Navy ship and the American pirate vessel on the Las Vegas strip without any noticeable trauma.
Though I think the last one is rigged cos every single time the Brit gets sunk.
But on a more serious point I think that no public event whether or not you are for or against it should ever be cancelled through threats of trouble.
I think that there are some people out there who get a power kick out intimidation over and above any real concern about the event itself.
But Lust4Life, all the battles you described are merely battles between large countries (Trafalgar) or battles that helped preserve or obtain the independence of a country (Gallipoli, Easter Rising). Yes, in these last two cases your country was defeated (right, the British actually won the Easter Rising, but it still helped pave the way toward Irish independence), but there was never any risk that it would lose its freedom.
The Battle of the Plains of Abraham is seen as a battle in which a whole nation was defeated and made an underclass for centuries. That’s a whole lot different. There are other interpretations of the battle – as I’ve said, I don’t think it was quite as decisive as some think it was – but this one is a dominant one. I don’t think you’d consider the Easter Rising or the Battle of Gallipoli to be dark days in your history, Lust4Life. The Plains of Abraham may very well be a dark day in my history. Actually I probably wouldn’t call it that, but I’m not going to celebrate it either.
So even though the reenactors just wanted to replay what they consider an important battle and possibly raise awareness of history, they did unknowingly hit an “Orangemen on parade” nerve.
We can argue that the Battle of the Plains of Abraham / the Conquest was an event that brought oppression to a sizeable portion of Canada for centuries.
Yes, but again proceeding with this event may possibly have resulted in violence and innocent bystanders being injured. This is why I felt that cancellation was the prudent measure in light of public safety. And, as mentioned, separatist tensions have been easing in the last decade or two in Quebec. I would really hate to have old wounds reopened because it was perceived that the democratically correct thing to do would be to proceed with the reenactment. Giving in to the potentially violent minority in this case seems like the right decision. Hell these are the same separatists who wanted Paul McCartney banned from the 400th birthday celebration in Quebec. Why? Because he’s British after all. :rolleyes: Link.
So, can you imagine what a battle reenactment might have done for relationships?
Weasn’t this battle about 15 minutes in lenght? Go ahead! Now, for some REALLY fun re-enactment battles-like the Battle of Kursk! Question: where do we get all of those tanks?
Most unlikely. A few people sent threats, but nothing serious. The organizers blamed these few threats for their decision to cancel the reenactment, but the real reason is the lack of support they got from the Quebec government.
As I’ve said, the event’s organizers weren’t able to get support from the (federalist) government of Quebec. When the event was still supposed to be held, premier Jean Charest made a point to say he wouldn’t attend. Fact is, almost nobody in Quebec thought this reenactment was a good idea, not just a “potentially violent minority” (which is a handful of people anyway).
In all fairness, many people thought the 400th anniversary of Quebec City, being Quebec City’s party and everything, should be celebrated with a keynote concert by a local artist – or an artist from somewhere in Quebec, anyway – and not a random international artist like McCartney. I’d say they’re not wrong. But McCartney’s concert was well-received anyway.
But apart from the fact that we’re talking two and a quarter centuries ago do you actually feel that you are living under an oppressive government?
We in Britain are unitied with France in what is becoming a superstate apart from the fact that we were allies in two world wars and not too many years ago I recall at the Royal tournament in London French and British Army bandsmen recreated Waterloo in music so dont you think that you may be taking this just a tad too seriously?
A little aside on this topic in Holland they have a military celebration in the Netherlands every year to celebrate the WW2 battle of Arnhem and foreign units are invited.
The actual event is one big pissup basically after the invited foreign troops jump in so places are eagerly sought.
For British troops preference was always given to serving soldiers whos relatives actually fought in the battle.
The story goes that as the Herc carrying our blokes was flying in somebody noticed a new boy occupying one of the much sort after places and asked him suspiciously why he was there.
My grandad fought at Arnhem.
Oh really what unit was he in ?
Ninth SS Panzer Division.
LOL! My wife worked in a community building where Hindu services were held. One Indian person, in an attempted compliment, said, “You are so polite. Are you English?”
“No, I’m Welsh.”
“Isn’t that that same thing?”
She stood ramrod stiff and said, “We held the English at the River Severn for six hundred years before we were defeated through TREACHERY.”
No, I wouldn’t say this. Canada is far from an oppressive country. But there’s no denying that for centuries French Canadians lived basically as an underclass in this country they helped create, and the main reason for this was that their conquerors became the upperclass. (Okay, this is a simplification; some would say that it was actually their own damn fault. They’re partly right.) This isn’t something that can be forgotten easily. And even today, without getting into political debates, we can say that for a large number of people in Quebec, maybe a majority, Canada isn’t quite their own country. So they don’t have a country they can really call their own. All of this can be traced back to the Conquest, for which the Battle of the Plains of Abraham is shorthand.
Yes, I’m quite aware that in terms of national woes, all this doesn’t rise to the level of the Jewish diaspora’s before the creation of Israel, and probably not even to the level of the Irish before independence. But it exists nevertheless. People want to feel like they have a place in the grand scheme of things.
France and Britain are two independent and prosperous countries, all this stuff about losing part of their sovereignty to the EU aside. The Battle of Waterloo didn’t end France’s existence as a state. I think they were even still a powerful country afterward.
Cute story, but a bit chilling I must say. Thankfully Germany is also a prosperous country today, and a friend to the rest of Europe and the rest of the world.
