Quebec and Its Historians: The Twentieth Century

II: Changing Views of the Canadian Sixteenth Century: from Narcisse-Eutrope Dionne (1891) to Marcel Trudel (1963).

II Changing Views of the Canadian Sixteenth Century From Narcisse-EutropeDionne (1891) to Marcel Trudel (1963) A conservative ideology dominated the intellectual life of French Quebec for many years after the abortive 1837-1838 attempt to do away with colonial rule. It was an ideology defined by the clergy and a large sector of the petite bourgeoisie . These middle class groups supported a general view of society that has been repeatedly described and analysed in numerous studies on Quebec ideology, and it is therefore unnecessary to summarize the main features of it here. Instead, I wish to show the influence of what I callclerico-conservative nationalism on the historical reconstruction of the "nation's" distant past. Furthermore, the way in whichQuebecers perceive their past has changed since World War I, and I would like to consider this in relation to the worksof Marcel Trudel. We will then be in a position to understand the influence of liberal ideology on the collective self-questioningthat occurred at the time of the Quiet Revolution. In examining Trudel's work, we will discover a retrospective vision of the French-Canadian destiny—a vision that was shared by "activist" intellectuals during the 1950s and 1960s, and generally by the recentlyemerged sector of the Quebec petite bourgeoisie described by various authors as the new elite or new middle class.1 31 32 Quebec and itsHistorians I have chosen two authors to demonstrate the areas of comparison and confrontation between the clerico-conservative concept of society and its liberal counterpart, which emerged in the middle of the twentieth century. NarcisseEutrope Dionne (1848-1917) and Marcel Trudel published two distinct reconstructions of the sixteenth century.2 Although often using the same documents, they were working threequarters of a century apart. Narcisse-Eutrope Dionne In several respects, Dionne is typical of Quebec's traditional elites. After four years of theology and philosophy at the Grand Seminaire in Quebec, he went on to study medicine.Following a few years of practice, he moved into clerico-conservative journalism, was subsequently named librarian of the Quebec legislature (1892), and in 1897 was promoted to provincial secretary-archivist, a post which he occupied until 1912. Like several nineteenth-century civil servants in Ottawa and Quebec, Dionne devoted his leisure time to history. A prolific and erudite amateur, he published several lengthy works,mainly on the early days of French Canada.3 In 1891 Dionne published La Nouvelle-France de Cartier a Champlain, 1540-1603,4 a scholarly work by contemporary standards. It contained many clarificationsof detail, including corrections of place names and dates that previous histories had left obscure, and dealt not only with discoveries but with map-making and economic conditions in the sixteenth century. There is no doubt that it represented a great advance in detailed knowledge. What concerns us, however, is to distinguish what sociological and ideological perspectives served as a basis for interpretation. For nineteenth-century historians, founding a colony presupposed considerable devotion, generosity, and disinterestedness . Colonial enterprise was only legitimate if undertaken for the greater glory of God, the need for converting the Amerindians being taken for granted. The next most important assumption was that colonists should be chosen according to moral criteria rather than the needs of economic development. According to nineteenth-century standards, Changing Views of the Canadian Sixteenth Century 33 therefore, the founding of Montreal was an ideal form of colonization. The city of Quebec, on the other hand, only attained the primarily moral and religious standards of colonization after 1600. These standards were set by the same people who defined the clerico-conservative concept of society , and it was this historical concept that served Dionne as an invisible yardstick in chronicling the sixteenth century. Of the work of Champlain and de Maisonneuve, he wrote: These two great Frenchmen laid the foundation of our nationhood and—astute builders that they were—rested it upon the immutable rock of the Catholic religion.... Could they have built a solid and unshakable structure otherwise? Never. I have no hesitation in saying so, because I am convinced that without religion as the mainstay, successful colonization is not possible. Even today, it is still true that the Christian ideal must preside over any undertaking of this nature. What is necessary today was no less so in past centuries [p. 17f.]. In stating the guiding principles of his work, Dionne was not merely justifying the role of colonizing missionaries...