Meggie Macdonald

I have come to the definite conclusion that history is more alive in Canada than in many other places in the western world, but for a much less conventional reason.  Recently, re-enactors and various historical groups felt that a re-enactment of the battle of the Plain of Abraham on the anniversary of the pivotal clash would be an excellent idea.  They had been practicing for months, engaging historians both professional and amateur with years of experience, reproduction experts to ensure that costumes and equipment were as original as possible, and a large number of 18th century history enthusiasts to participate in what could have been an epic of historical revisitation.

The battle on the Plains of Abraham took place on 13th September 1759 and represents the reversal of fortunes for France in its competition with England over control of North America.  The French lost.  Their general, the Marquis de Montcalm, engaged the enemy English from outside the walls of Quebec City and was soundly defeated by forces under the command of General James Wolfe, who himself died at the site.  Although there would be other battles, some won by the French, and others by the English, by 1763, the Seven Years’ War was concluded with the Treaty of Paris, and France relinquished all control over its American colonies.  Canada thus became British North America and, a little more than a decade later, after the American colonies to the south declared their independence and won the Revolutionary War, would remain the last bastion of British imperial interests on this continent.

Now, 18th century history is not my forte, and it never has been.  I simply could never work up the enthusiasm for a period of history so closely resembling my own.  Nearly every 18th century historian would vehemently argue this point, that the century was more than unique and more than distant, that it was something incredibly original and diverse and worth studying in extremes.  That is how I feel about Roman history, and I applaud the enthusiasm of anyone who loves such a thing so much that they want to learn every last spec of detail about it.

The re-enactment of the battle on the Plains of Abraham was to be an excellent way to show the immediacy of Canadian history and the value of knowing about it.  And in a way, it did.  Separatists in Quebec went up in arms over the proposed staging of the ‘conquest’ of French Canada by the English and, in the end, the re-enactment went ahead 250 miles away in New York State.  Globe and Mail feature writer Ian Brown reported on the success and failure of this historical event.

All the participants involved were shocked and appalled when it was decided that the re-enactment could not take place because it would insult French Canadian history.  A celebration of a ‘conquest’ can be nothing but that.  Arguably, when the Eurostar high-speed train service between Paris and London was begun, and it was decided that the trains would leave from a rejuvenated St. Pancras International train station rather than Waterloo, to avoid the awkwardity of French passengers disembarking at a station named after the site of Napoleon’s greatest defeat, the situation is very similar.  But as re-enactors state, this was not an event meant to tarnish the indelible stamp that French culture has added to Canadian history, but rather to bring history closer to a country that may have lost touch or lost interest.

The interest is certainly still there.  In a way, trying to bring back the immediacy of Canadian history has been a success, because the social and political implications and tensions rose up like a geiser when the event was suggested.  Clearly history in Canada is not nearly as far removed from modern society as an ancient historian like myself would believe.  Even though the event had to be moved away from the site of the original battle, and even though this caused hurt and outrage among those wishing to celebrate history as a shared concept as well as those who do not wish to celebrate the changing tide of history, it shows that the events of history still resonate in startling ways more than 200 years later.

If people can get this emotional and this involved in the reproduction of historical events, can we not also claim a proximity to history that is more than immediate, more than latent, but still inextricably bound to our self-definition as Canadians?  Such a wonderful thought appeals on so many levels that I could not help but comment on it here.