Those who trace their ancestry to the Acadians are welcome to visit the Maritime provinces of Canada to learn much about their family history. Coming here will bring your history to life! The historic settlements have been rebuilt and have animators to tell the Acadian stories. The Acadians will welcome their Cajun cousins with open arms!
I am just finding out about our history! My great grandmother was a medicine women and we never knew where it came from. Our grandparents never taught us Cajun French because they were hurt in school and public for this. She worked in a potato farm. They never told us.
It made me mad at first, but I am grateful for my connection to nature and the creator. I have been lead to this information randomly. I don’t even know how I came across all of this information. I just know I was lead to it. Now I am finding out more and more. I am thankful for the this documentation being exposed through the Acadians and Mi’Kmaq people. Thank you. It brings tears to my eyes to have the ability to find this information.
It was but we are still here, we exist all around the world Acadia is just not a piece of land anymore it's in our heart, our culture and in our language. L'union fait la force.
My father's ancestors are from Nova Scotia back to the mid 1600"s, my mother's ancestors are from Quebec back to the 1600's. My wife and I are both proud Acadians and I always refer to myself as Acadian whenever I am asked what my nationality is. Proud to be Acadian. L'union fait la force!
I am a South African Indian who immigrated from SA 20 years ago. Now "Canadian", I was honoured by Nelson Mandela and worked with the anti apartheid movement in SA. It brought me to tears when I watched this story that many people would not have know about. Thanks for taking the time and educating the world that evil and ethnic cleansing is not only being done to, black, muslims and other cultures but to Canadians as well. I hope that we renew peoples interest in Acadians beautiful culture. Thanks for posting.
Thank you for your comment but we are not Canadian we are Acadian, we still aren't loyalists to the crown. No one is actually Canadian it's a fake nationality an administrative title that allows you access to services from the crown corporation known as Canada . When I walk around Canada I see people as what they actually are, truth matters and you are the nationality you are born with no matter where you live on this Earth. If I move to Africa tomorrow I'm not going to magically become an African am I?
What's a South African Indian are you just trying to say you're an indigenous black person to South Africa? Or are your roots from India? Just so you know to educated North Americans an Indian is someone from India. First Nations people still call themselves Indians today but I don't do that.
I did the dna test and found out im from Acadian descent. My grandpa told me he spoke cajun French growing up too. Both of my parents are acadian, and its cool to learn about my ancestors
It blew my mind that Cajun is just "acadian" said differently and it has stuck (which is really cool, i love the word Cajun) mind blowing catching up to family history wtf
Hey! I know this post is a little old, but just wanted to say that my grandfather spoke Cajun French as well, as a boy. We live in south Louisiana. He would tell me stories about how they weren't allowed to speak French in school... they were forced to learn English. If they would speak French in the classroom they were hit, or humiliated in some kind of way in front of everyone. Many of the students stop going because of this. Anyways, just wanted to say this. Thanks for sharing!
I AM ...so many ppl in Canada have no idea about this. The province of Quebec is a very vibrant self actualized bastion of French culture in N. America. Canada has enough shit in it’s own history to lecture the US. But seems simpleminded and sad these kids were....just sayin’
@@iam8041 Bonjour cousin, I stayed with a cajun family in Houma and the father, Mr. White (Leblanc) told me that, when he was at school, the teachers would 'beat the French' out of you. SAD. Land of the free? My mom was a French teacher in NB and I proudly furthered my knowledge of French and Civil Law and got a great job working in French. My hope is that, with Codofil, French will make a comeback in Louisiana. There is so much potential there to attract French-speaking tourists. We could send you our surplus of tourists in Quebec city. We are overwhelmed in the summer!
Keep in mind part of the reason why the Acadians were deported was because of actions taken by the Mi'kmaq, instigated by the French colonial administration, with whom they were allies, against the British in Nova Scotia. So, the least they could do was help the Acadians out during a bad situation.
@@EdinburghFivelisten here you Scottish f*** why don't you stop posting your comments on every Acadian video you can find. Just another square head who hates Frenchman you need to go f*** yourself and we're ready to fight you again if we have to.
@@chais1111 Yes, The Acadian way of life is still alive and well because some escaped to NB and some small towns gave up their rights, eg; French shore, isle Madame and Cheticamp in Cape Breton . . .
@@johnnyj.7494 I'm from les iles de la madeleine (Magdalen Islands). I've traced my family back to 1667, coming from Larochelle, France to Port Royal Nova Scotia. They were deported in 1755 and got on the magdelen Isands around 1775. Tough breed of people to say the least. The culture is still strong . Proud Acadian and proud Canadian.
My maternal ancestors arrived in 1610 at Acadia. They were there for 145 years, assimilated well with the local tribes, they had children and then were expelled to places they had never been before. Many of them lost their lives.
I live in outback Australia. My mother emigrated from France and we are alone out here. Aboriginal culture is rich here but I cannot help but look with envy and entranced by francophone Canada. Please do all you can to preserve your rich cultural heritage. thanks
Dr. Amy Sturgis never ceases to amaze me with the wealth of her knowledge on so many topics. She was one of my favorite teachers of all time. Amazing visuals to go with the history as well. Fantastic!
Hey @@barryrenouf3450 - It is a fallacy that Acadians are Métis. There were a few French settlers who married Mi'kmaq but the genealogical records just do not support the idea. Furthermore, the historical record does not support the creation of a societal/cultural development that was a blending of Indigenous and European ways.
@@EdinburghFive the majority of the French Settlers married Indians. My gegealogicial record shows that I am Metis but I claim aboriginal status. I hunt, trap, fish and basically live off the land. What does that make me?
Hi@@barryrenouf3450 It is a myth that "the majority of the French Settlers" in Acadia or even in Quebec "married Indians". The records just do not support this. The Quebec genealogical records are extensive and detailed and these, as mentioned, just do not support the idea of métissage. Although your genealogical records show you have Indigenous ancestry that does not necessarily make you Métis. To be Métis takes a bit more than just saying you are. "Hunt, fish, and basically live off the land" - no stereotyping on your part! Since when does carrying on those activities make you Indigenous? I know a few people of European descent that do the same but that does not make them Indigenous. I know Indigenous people who don't hunt, fish, etc., but that does not make them any less Indigenous.
@@barryrenouf3450 - Not the case. Most Acadians, if they have any indigenous ancestry, it is very distant. Furthermore it takes far more than a few ounces of indigenous ancestry to call oneself Métis. Just because I have lets say German ancestry does not make me German culturally.
,@@EdinburghFive not the case; how do you know how much "Indian" is in the descendants of the Acadians? I have been to France and the DOA's look more like Indians then Frenchmen.
Hi @@barryrenouf3450 - Well one of my reference documents is the Dictionnaire généalogique des familles acadiennes by Prof Stephen White. There are certainly people in France today that descend from Acadians but there are very few there as most of the Acadians who had been deported to France left, mostly to Louisiana. I have encountered many Acadians from Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, as well as Cajuns from Louisiana and they do not in general look like North American indigenous people. I think you missed the point of my comment above. It was mostly with respect to the use of the term Métis. Having Indigenous ancestry does not make one a Métis. I have friends who are Acadian with Indigenous ancestors and they would never identify as Métis.
Cajun here, my Dad is a Gaudet and we can trace our roots back to Jean Gaudet, one of the first from France to settle in Nova Scotia. Fascinating history. ⚜
My dad is from Acadian descent and we can trace our roots back to one of the first. We have Arsenault and Le Blanc in our family. Maybe we are cousins 😁
Acadian culture is very much alive! A lot of my Acadian ancestors either were born and died in Acadia, just missing the expulsion, or were expelled to Louisiana and died there. A lot of the marriages in my tree show husbands and wives taken apart from each other, one to Louisiana and one back to France. It’s all quite tragic but empowering to see the culture survive regardless so much effort to destroy it. My lines are the Delaune, Caissy, Boudrot, Hebert and Cancienne. Interesting to see similar names in the comments, so I figured I’d share as well. Very informative video!
Hi Meghan D. No Acadians were expelled to Louisiana. The Acadians were deported to the British American colonies from Massachusetts to Georgia, to England, and France. All the Acadians who ended up in Louisiana do so immigrating there on their own.
As I finished listening to this story and updating my tree, I discovered my ancestral grandmother was 82 and not allowed to disembark from the deportation ship in Virginia and died
Dig into the history of the Acadians and I think you will find it was not all as rosy as Prof Sturgis implies. They were pretty much like everyone else. Their neutrality was a reaction to the circumstances of living in a borderland area between two opposing empires. They tried to tread a path between these warring parties and unfortunately failed in the end.
@J OneLife - On the most part the Acadians stayed out of the fray that occurred between the Mi'kmaq and their enemies. There are records though of some Acadians aiding the Mi'kmaq by running guns to them as well as providing other supplies. A good business opportunity perhaps! By the time the Acadians settled in the region there were really no "natives" the Mi'kmaq were fighting against with perhaps the exception of the Beothuk in Newfoundland. To the southwest in New England the Mi'kmaq were allied with the Indigenous groups there and thus aided them in attacks against New England colonists. The French (non-Acadians) administration at Louisbourg and Quebec certainly directly worked with the Mi'kmaq against there mutual enemies by providing supplies, guns and powder, military leadership, as well as soldiers. Of course this all changed in 1755 and the Acadians who escaped the British became fast allies with the Mi'kmaq. They carried on a Petite Guerre against the British. They caused the British a lot of trouble but in time the shear force of arms by the British and the loss of supplies from the French after the fall of Louisbourg doomed the Acadians and the Mikmaq.
Despite my name I am mostly of Acadian descent and I consider myself to be Acadian or Cajun. We are still here - and when I meet another Acadian right away I feel a connection and a familiarity. Its in our DNA - we are all connected. Also proud of my distant MI'kmaq heritage. Proud to descend from the Mius family and the Broussards and other militant Acadians who fought until the end. Vivre l'Acadie !
Broussard (Beausoleil) was both an angel and a devil. He indeed helped many Acadians and fought the British after 1755. Prior to 1755 though, he was simply a troublemaker and paid lacky of the French imperial administration. His early troublemaking, many taking place during times of official peace between France and Britain, helped create the circumstances that led to the British to distrust the Acadians. These were selfish and opportunistic acts on his part. A bit of 'Hero Syndrome'.
"The happiness (the Indians) enjoyed from their intercourse with the French is their perpetual theme - its their golden age. Those who are old enough to remember it, speak of it with rapture, and the young ones are taught to venerate it: "They never took from us our lands, indeed they were in common with us - now if a poor indian attempts to take a little bark from a tree to cover him from the rain, up comes a white man and threatens to shoot him, claiming the tree as his own"." (William Henry Harrison, 1809).
@@honestranking48 what is the English way? In Acadia before the GRAND DÉRANGEMENT Natives attacked the Brittish. After the GRAND DÉRANGEMENT, the Brittish were conquerers, organized governance, gave Acadians FREE GRANTS, where ever they were squatting. BTW the Lady speaking knows just enough to get LIKES, she is talking thru her head, several major statements just not true. Again, the motive is getting LIKES.
@@jean-claudearsenault224 The British put a bounty for the scalps of Micmacs. Genocide? As far as the Acadians are concerned, did you know that three years after the GD the British granted Nova Scotia its first Legislative Assembly? To elect a representative, you had to be protestant, to sit in the Assembly, you had to be protestant. One of the first pieces of legislation, the Land Act said that to own land you had to be protestant. I mean, you get the picture. The Cradle of Canadian Parliamentary Democracy? Not something to be proud of.
10th generation Acadian here from Cape Breton, Nova Scotia. My Grandma was a Gallant ascended from Michel Hache dit Gallant, Son of Pierre L'Arach, and her mother was a Benwaw aka Benoit / Lejuge aka Lejeune Doucet's. My peeps hid in the woods of ile st Jean, ile Royal and NFLD with the M'igmaw who had married into my Gallant and Benoits family line a century before the expulsion. We are still here today thriving along side other deep rooted Acadian families. when our people emerged from the forests integrating into british dominion society we anglofied our surnames so to sound more british, my 3 great gdad Born Augustin Benoit become Angus Bennett lol took us half the 20th century to figure all this out ... Vive la L'Acadie
Dont go to Nova Scotia go to the acadian peninsula in new brunswick, Im from there caraquet/shippagan and after the bridge is the best place to really know alot of where your from, We speak a croocked french
My ancestors founded Lafayette, LA (Mouton) and Lake Charles, LA (LeBleu) All from Acadia. Very proud of my French history. We’re still here. Scattered though we are, we haven’t forgotten who we are and where we came from.
I’m half Acadian from Louisiana through my mother. My ancestor is Joseph Broussard, “Beausoleil”. I also, through my grandmother, have mi’kmaq family. I would love to visit the areas where my ancestors lived. It would be amazing!
This video on Acadian expulsion is quite better than anything else I have seen on RU-vid tonight. Congratulations to professor Sturgis and her team for such a professional presentation.
@@EdinburghFive I agree with you that professor Sturgis's knowledge of the Acadian expulsion is not as thorough as one should expect. From what I remember, she stated or implied TWICE that the British deported the Acadians to Louisiana. What I found refreshing is that she was telling the Acadian story from a different perspective, being an American with some knowledge of Native American history. I also liked the visuals with the historic lithographies in this documentary. Clearly, some time and money was spent by Learn Liberty on this doc. I can't hold that inaccuracy against prof Sturgis about Louisiana because, for a long time, I also thought that is where the Acadians were sent to. Mind you, I grew up in NB, I studied Canadian history at school, and I don't remember being taught anything that contradicted that narrative. Back in my high school days, our history teachers did not spent a whole lot of time on Acadian history. I studied in a French high school and I guess we had the same history books that Quebec students had and we followed the same curriculum focusing on New France, not Acadia. As a consequence, very little time was spent on the history of our ancestors. My situation is not unique, because I remember hearing from an Acadian lawyer who grew up in Louisiana that only about half an hour of his American history course in high school was spent covering Acadian history. He explained that this was how the State was telling its Acadian citizens that they were not important and did not matter. In connection with this, I wanted to say that I now live in Ottawa, where we have a history museum (actually located in Gatineau). In the previous iteration of this museum, there was a complete room dedicated to Acadians, where you could learn how good Acadians were at building dikes. However, there was NO MENTION of the events that started in 1755, as if it never happened. In the new version of the Canadian museum of history, there is now more room for natives but the Acadian room is gone. All we have is, perhaps, a single artifact relating to the expulsion. If you visit the War museum, you will not find anything there related to operations of 1755 either. What you will see in front of the Canadian War museum is a National Holocaust Monument. It seems to me that it does say a lot about Canada. There is nothing we like more than to lecture others about right and wrong, but we keep quiet about Acadians, Natives, Métis, and other groups. And I though Museums are places where you go to learn stuff. As George Orwell said, he who controls the past controls the future. It is because of this situation that I root for those who behead who topple statues. Sadly, it seems that it is the only way that we can learn the truth.
Hi@@kamikazes03 Nice to hear from you and thank you for the comments. Other than the obvious errors Prof. Sturgis makes about Acadian history, my main beef is with the fact as an Academic she knows she has to thoroughly research her work and make sure it stands up to scrutiny of the facts. History professors must be held to a higher standard when it comes to commenting on history.
@@EdinburghFive Unfortunately, the same could be said of museum curators, our political leaders and even our monarch. I heard a Louisiana lawyer named Warren Perrin explain how he went about presenting a petition related to the Acadian expulsion at Buckingham palace and being told early on by the representatives of our queen that this event never happened... Everyone has a bias and a narrative. I do, and so do you. I am looking forward to a Canadian history written by Chinese-Canadians or Muslim-Canadians or others. Have you ever noticed that every year for the last twenty years our Prime Minister had to stand up in the House of Commons and apologize to this or that group for historical wrongs that had been ignored? What does that say about our history? Now, statues are coming down, street names are changing and even some town names will have to change. There is a beautiful bronze statue of Samuel de Champlain located on a spectacular hill called Nepean Point. At the base of the statue was located a second statue, a native warrior. Ten years ago, after much public pressure, the warrior was removed because it was felt the ensemble made him look inferior to the white explorer. Our history has to reflect who we are.
Hi @kamikazes03 - I have met Mr. Perrin. Interesting fellow who is also a little fast and loose with the facts. He for one should also be held to a higher standard. I am not so sure he was told the Acadian deportation "event never happened". In fact, he received the apology from the British crown. As for museum curators, those positions have always been very political. Museums tend to create and tell myths, based on history, that tell the broad story of a place, people and/or nation. We always need to safeguard against just how far off the museums drift from the facts. They tend not to narrate and display the contextualized cold, hard reality of history. As for your Canadian museums hopefully, they tweak an interest that then has the individual look for more information, in good research, on the topic. I do agree it is a shame that statues, etc., are being taken away. This is happening everywhere and thus we have been handed a great opportunity to rewrite a more truthful history, yet like the past, are simply erasing it. Back to academic historians. I agree we all have biases but Academics are trained or at least should be trained to look at history from all angles, with lack of emotion, reviewing the facts and placing them in context, as best as can be determined at the time given the evidence available. We can, and should change interpretations as new evidence is presented. As always not just one researchers work should be considered. Multiple views need to be considered. History today tends to be written by people from many backgrounds and this is truly for the better.
Three Gagnon brothers are among the first colonists and that our family is one of the oldest in the country of Canada. The Gagnon Brothers were originating in the town of Tourouvre in the old French province of the Pole. In the medium of XVIe century, this family lives in a small town called "Gagionnière." I am of Gagnon ancestry. As a country we must remember racism, discrimination and prejudice affect all walls of life regardless of origin, ethnicity and religion. This type of eradication of the French caused people like me to wonder why the family is so ripped apart from intergenerational trauma. I have over 35 cousins and can't find one and the year is 2022. Thank you for sharing this history. Many do not know how our own "caucasian race" have faced many of the same barriers and prejudice and discrimination and eradication of a species also. 55% of Acadians were killed. Why does no one remember? Because entire families and generations were wiped out within 15 years, so we need to share our story. I am of proud Gagnon origin. My family came to Canada with a K in 1632.
@@EdinburghFive nope not acadian. You are correct !! Just putting it out there for families to unite! Some could have been married with acadians absolutley
My meme told me when I was very young that we were Acadian and made sure to teach me that while people are mostly good you have to always be aware that at any time that can flip and it's your job as not just a man but as a person to be ready for that.We're kinda seeing that now.
You do understand that Acadia was a British colony and had been since 1713. As far as raiding, I suggest you read up on the history of France's involvement in the region, particularly from the mid-1740s onward. Talk about raiding, all without a care of the consequences for the Acadians
@@EdinburghFive I have a History degree from Carleton University in Ottawa, ON, Canada and currently am the curator for a local Museum from which you can fully *see* the St. Lawrence River so, yes, I am fully aware of broad French raiding taking place in what was then "New France". However, as it pertains to this quote, I was thinking more along the lines of the general attitude of those French v British who first chose to *colonize*, i.e. settle and stay for good, not the majority who planned to come "make their fortune" (originally in pelts, later in timber, gold, etc.) and then return to their place of origin.
@@texadian3392 Good to hear from you and to converse with another history scholar. What is your history degree in? I find your comments a bit odd though. The video by Professor Sturgis is with respect to the colonial Acadians who settled in what is today largely Maritime Canada. The French colonials of New France's St Lawrence Valley of your reference are distinctly not the same people. About the only thing the Acadians shared with the Canadians of New France was language and religion. Culturally and economically these two peoples had diverged somewhat primarily based on different economic imperatives. The economic basis of New France was the fur trade and the St Lawrence Valley settlements’ farming economy was there to support that effort and the colonial administration of the colony. In Acadia the fur trade made up a very small piece of the economic effort and output. The economy of Acadia was largely agricultural that generated trade with New England and Louisbourg. New England and Louisbourg's economies were different from each other and from that of fur trading New France. New England's economy at the time was diverse, encompassing agriculture, forestry, fishing, and shipping. That of Louisbourg was based around the western Atlantic fishery as well as the security of New France, by guarding the sea lanes to Quebec. Although you may be familiar with the "raiding taking place in what was then "New France", are you familiar with the situation and context in Acadia? Your understanding of the "general attitude of those the French v British" raison d'être in North America being, as Professor Sturgis puts it, equating British to raid and the French to trade, is a little off the mark. It is quite clear the British were not on the whole or even in any large numbers coming to "make their fortune" (originally in pelts, later in timber, gold, etc.) and then returning to their place of origin." This did indeed happen for small numbers of people in both New France and the British North American colonies. The fact that the population of the British North American colonies was so large dispels the idea of venturing to the New World, make a fortune, and then leaving. For the vast majority coming to the New World was a one-way trip. By the way, your 'see' insertion is interesting. Is this indicating that because someone lives in an area they are somehow imbued with an expertise on the history of the region? We of course know living in a place does not make one an expert. I have seen the St Lawrence on many occasions. Truly a lovely place, great people, culture, etc. Although René Descartes' cogito, ergo sum, is a truism; incola, ergo novi, does not apply. This video was a very poor attempt by Professor Sturgis to pass along a bit of the history of the Acadians and their deportation. Within the first few minutes she makes many errors and continues to do so throughout the rest of the video. Please see my comments scattered throughout the comments below. My first posts are about six years ago. It is reasonably apparent Professor Sturgis academic expertise is not in Acadian history or the British and French colonial period of North America. I find it a bit bombastic her comment that if the Acadian communities had been left alone there could have been "an alternate vision of how North America could have unfolded".
My 5th great grandfather was 10, and his parents killed during expulsion. He was sold into indenture but worked it, earned and apprenticeship and ended up being very successful.
6th Great grandfather killed? My 9th died while left to suffer in Bristol, neglected and in poor health in 1756. My 6th Great grandfathers of this line were born in 1805 and 1816. My 5th Great Grandfather was born in 1837 well after the expulsion which occurred in 1755-1764. I can go to my grandmother's line which is filled with the "2nd youngest of the 2nd youngest" generations.... and my 5th great grandfathers were born between 1758 and 1770. Your line must have some big disparities between generations (older men with younger wives having kids while they're old). Mine does...but just shy of your line. Or you're a bit older than myself which makes "McGregorGirl" seem like an unusual nickname. My grandmother, who is still alive, can most certainly say her oldest 5th great grandparents would have been adults during this period but... she's not from an Acadian line. She's from a Mayflower line. Her 5th Great Grandfather's own great grandfather was a passenger.
@@Bonzi_Buddy Yes. A long line of grandmothers who were second or third wives, as well as older women. Part of my family line are McGregor's hence the name. I am in my early 50's, my mom was almost 40 when I was born, my grandma was over 40 when she had my mom, she was born in 1893, to her father and his second wife. Her father was around my age when she was born, and he fought in the civil war. My dads side is a lot the same. He was in his mid 40s when I was born ( youngest of 11 ), and he was youngest of 18 (long line of Irish Catholics, they have children till they can't anymore LOL ). His father was in his 60's when he was born. My family treee is full of this kind of thing as far back as I can find, and that's clear back to the Wars of the Roses on one side, and almost 800 years on another.
@@McGregorGirl So you have all that family crest stuff and probably some region/church back in the old country your family was part of. Very cool. That's where many of those records were made. Royalty in the family or nobility definitely gets you back to that time so it isn't crazy to have such knowledge. I have some Irish ancestry that might have that but ... unknown relative/NPE stuff. Probably no records that show parents as the birth certificate didn't even state a last name for my grandfather. Crazy! My wife's polish great grandparents are the dead end for her line there...and her mother who is still alive that's her grandparents that are a dead end! That's awful! One of my oldest relatives was a French Mathematician who had some advances in Algebra. I certainly didn't inherit those genes! :D
The French Acadians of today had the last laugh on Governor Charles Lawrence of Nova Scotia at the time of the 1755 Expulsion or upheaval of the French Acadians, because the descendants intermarried with the Scottish and Irish settlers who settled in Northern New Brunswick near the Acadia Peninsula where the majority of the settlers were French Acadians who escaped the round up of being deported somewhere else. Today in Northern New Brunswick you would find some McLaughlin's like myself who speak French fluently and who followed the tradition and customs of the French Acadians and the Celtic traditional customs also because of their Irish and Scottish roots. So too bad for Governor Charles Lawrence! Banana! The French Acadians lives on! Vive L'Acadie!
Just a small correction on this ...it is not pronounced "Mic Mack", It is pronounced it is pronounced "Meek Maw" (Miꞌkmaq < Soft q). Excellent Video (My heritage is Acadian from Bathurst/Tracadie area)
New England Acadian, here. My family, from both sides, have ancestors who were at Annapolis and Gran Pre, as well as distant Mi'kmaq heritage on my mother's side. I owe my presence on this earth to the Mi'kmaq people - Why didn't my ancestors become Cajun? Why did they flee north to Quebec? I'm not sure if I'll ever know, but I say a hearty wela'lioq to my Mi'kmaq ancestors and friends for saving my Acadian ancestors. :-) Very informative video, thank you!
My ancestors from Acadia were displaced and ended up in Guilford, New Haven. The "Acadian House" they stayed in is still there. My 6th great grandma is Marguerite Anastasie Hébert, she was a child when the Acadians were expelled.
As an Acadian myself, I find this account to be a whitewash. Acadians weren't a monolithic group of utopian individualists. Prominent Acadian leaders took part in raids and wars against the British. Lawrence used the actions of that violent nationalist fringe as the pretense to cleanse my entire society. We Acadians have plenty of reasons to be proud of our heritage as it actually happened, we don't need to pretend that we were a perfect little solitude.
Give. Me. A. Break. If you’re at war with the members of a country and they refuse to swear allegiance to you once you’ve conquered them, they get either occupied (bad) or expelled (bad). The idea that the losers of a war are always victims is idiotic.
EdinburghFive Acadians were part of the French empire and many of them at the urging of Catholic missionaries resisted British rule or outright took up arms along with the Mikmaq. Thats the same French who encouraged raids against English settlements across New England, like Deerfield MA. To pretend the Acadians were neutrals is naive sillyness. To apply modern UN definitions to these ancient situations is sillyness. To ignore the fact the Acadians were abandoned by their own government is also sillyness. At least we got cool music and food out of it.
Did the British ask anybody else in the colonies to swear allegiance? The British signed the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. They had the option then to tell anyone on that territory to leave. They did not. They had one year to do so. They did NOTHING. At the end of the year, the residents of the territory became British subjects. Seems simple enough to me. Forty plus years went by. Then they come up with this swearing allegiance bs. The Acadians were British subjects. They had the protection of the Magna carta against arbitrary seizure of land and exile. Either the rule of law applies or it don't.
Yeah, she is trashing "American exceptionalism" but this occurred before there was even an America. America being viewed as "exceptional" in text didn't happen until the 1800s and the actual person that coined the phrase "American exceptionalism" was Joseph Stalin but in the negative context that it was an exception to the preferred communist model that countries will naturally move to via violent revolution. Why even bring up the phrase? What a kook.
I'm Acadian, my great-grandparents are descendants of those expelled from Canada. My grandfather was raised on the Atchafalaya Basin riding horses without saddles, catching catfish and hunting rabbits, speaking French and kissing gators to get money from Yankee tourists just like his daddy did, and his granddaddy did. And I got no clue where all this beautiful poetry about these people is coming from, I have never met a more argumentative and honry sort of people in all my life. If you tell them that it's a beautiful day out, they are going to argue with you and call you a liar. And they have been this way for Generations. Sure we have some good cookouts and some laughs but Cajuns love a good argument and a good fight. I know this because I am one. It's just this is the one fight we didn't win. There are several Cajuns that fought in World War II in the Pacific Theater that are known for their bravery and their avarice in battle. But lose one fight against the British and everybody never wants to forget that one instance you lost a fight and had to move because of it. It happened to Will Smith and they made a TV show about him.
Well, one might ask why the Acadians were not ready to defend themselves? Maybe it was because they were counting on the French State to do so? Anyone who knows history understand that the French were equally (if not more) brutal than the English. So this whole idea that this event started a new trend is really a fallacy. This was the consequence of a very, very long history of state violence. By no means the British were unique here.
Broussard was in fact instrumental in causing the Expulsion of the Acadians. He was a pawn in France's intrigues in the region that destabilized the area. The Acadians mostly wanted to stay out of the dueling imperial fray, exercising their neutrality, but individuals such as Le Loutre, Broussard and the Mi'kmaq allies of the French continued to stir up trouble within British territory. Broussard of course did assist in the Acadians who had fled after the opening of hostilities of the Seven Years War and deportations. So does that make Broussard a hero or villain? A bit of both.
@@EdinburghFive I am also a child of dit Beausoleil but I am not sure if I agree with your assessment. To protect ones own isn't aggression. That said, the is this inconvenient fact: www.smithsonianmag.com/history/when-young-george-washington-started-war-180973076/#:~:text=A%20just%2Ddiscovered%20eyewitness%20account,the%20French%20and%20Indian%20War&text=On%20the%20night%20of%20May,encampment%20in%20the%20Ohio%20Valley.
Hi @@SeanBourg - Good to hear from you. The Acadians have a very interesting history. It is a historical fact what Broussard did before the Severn Years War period. He would not have been protecting the Acadians from the British before this period as there were no hostilities between the British and the Acadians at that time. There was more hostility coming down on Acadians' heads from the French, Mi'kmaq, and a few Acadians like Broussard. He was a trouble maker who later becomes a hero. An example of this was the forcing of some Acadians out of British territory into French territory by the French, using the Mi'kmaq to threaten the Acadians who did not want to leave. Broussard leads some of these Mi'kmaq groups. Later Broussard of course becomes invaluable in the defense of Acadians. Once the deportations start the die was cast for those Acadians who had escaped capture and deportation; they now had to fight for survival. Broussard was there to assist in this defense and carry on a guerrilla war against the British. So initially Broussard was an aggressor who helped create the situation in Acadia that led to the deportations. Redemption and the creation of his hero status come his way falsely as a product of his own aggressive acts. Some Acadians have a love-hate relationship with characters like Broussard and Leloutre. They helped create the problem but when the Acadians finally did need them they were there to assist. History is never simple nor one-sided. Not sure why you included the link about George Washington. Although its an interesting story about Washington's bungled foray against the French it was hardly the factor that leads to the Seven Years War/French and Indian War. Anyone who knows the history and context of the period understands it was a very complex situation. The Seven Years War was in a sense really the conclusion of the War of the Austrian Succession that had taken place in the 1740s. Although a peace treaty had been signed ending this war the tensions still existed between France and Britain. The period between the War of the Austrian Succession and Severn Years War was really a period of detente at best. The situation was just waiting for something to happen to cause a rupture into open war. Washington's act was just one of these.
Hello there @@EdinburghFive - I greatly appreciate your response. I would love to know more as I am always suspicious of the "single narrative" we often have about people and their interactions. I do concede that I am not a historian by trade and only view history thru the heart and eyes of an spectator. I will agree, the Acadians have a very interesting history that is very much over looked. I do confess that I know very little of the historical accounts that Broussard lead Mi’kmaq raiding parties in attacks against his own people. This is new to me I am unable to find accounts of this. If possible, I would very much appreciate if you can share these source with me - I am always interested to learn more about my ancestors either it be good or bad. It is better to have the whole picture of a person or group of people. I do agree that Broussard’s actions leading up to the Seven Years War is a matter of documented historical fact. This said, I have to disagree in regards to the statement that there were no hostilities or from the occupying British in regards to the French or First Nation members of the region. There was an ample history of such hostilities that Acadians like Joseph Broussard lived in during his time and prior to his introduction to this theater of conflict. At the time of Broussard’s involvement in fighting at the Battle of Grand Pré during King George’s War the British and French Acadians had 44 years of open war in within the 90 years that prior to his involvement in Father Rale’s War. • English colony, 1654-1667 • King William's War, 1688-1697 • Queen Anne's War, 1702-1713 • Father Rale's War (Dummer’s War), 1722-1725, (3) A few of these conflicts lead to periods of British occupation during which the French were banned from immigrating to this region or they were relocated out of areas that the British desired for themselves. it is also worth noting that Broussard was born in Port Royal (1702) and would have been a child during the Seige that occurred in 1710. I can imagine that this coupled with the few times he faced charges in the British courts as a young man lead to a rebellious mindset. This leads us to King George's War (1744-1748) in which Broussard joined in 1747 at the Battle of Grand Pre at the age of 45. It is only convenient that it ended 18 months before the start of Father Le Loutre's War (1749-1755) - the point at which I imagine is what you were referencing when you spoke of Loutre and Broussard being “troublemakers” or having “create the situation in Acadia that led to the deportations”? Conveniently nearly 20 years after the statement was made in the British House of Lords that "It seems as though the French in Nova Scotia will never be good British subjects to her Majesty ... This is why we believe that they should be expulsed as soon as the necessary forces, which will be sent to Nova Scotia, are ready." There is also the statement "It is highly important to preserve these Indians attached as they have always been to France; the English have been deterred from forming any settlement in Acadia solely by the dread of these Indians. All this consumption greatly increases the expenses, but it is impossible to avoid them, without abandoning the Indians of Acadia and the Micmacs, who, of all the nations, are the most faithful to us" (JSTOR 30303469). This definitely paints the picture of a powder keg waiting to be ignited! I may be stringing things together, but it really does seem like a convenient scapegoat to say the actions of two men justified acting on a statement that had been made nearly 30 years prior. Even worse, should we take Father Le Loutre's War as something separate then an ongoing series of wars between the two nations and colonies? If we are to discount the wars leading up to Father Le Loutre's War - then yes, Broussard would seem like an aggressor. But I would argue that context is very important. If the state of affairs leading up to this event is taken into consideration the situation is more complex than a narrative of a group of agitators causing turmoil against a peaceful occupying nation. In regards to Washington, if this is in fact true his actions in 1754 against native tribes could have been easily spun as another round of upcoming aggression from the British settlers against their French and First Nation neighbors. But then again this is not really relevant to Broussard since the Expulsion of the Acadians started within months after his event (prior to the action Seven Year War). The Seven Year War just solidified the point of no return. It is interesting though that similar to Broussard, he is historically seen as a hero in many historical accounts within the USA with many of having a love/hate relationship with him (more of the later seen in the past days it would seem). I find it interesting that it is considered a "blunder" rather than something intentional. The truth is probably the same for both men, they were nothing more than cogs in a machine that was more complicated than they could understand.
@@SeanBourg It is really great to hear from someone who has more than just a very casual interest in history and in particular the history of the Acadians. If you are reading papers from JSTOR you are certainly looking in the right places for information about the colonial Acadians. Definitely read as much as possible about the history of the entire northeastern region of North America as well as the European history of the period. This will inform you about the complex dynamic that eventually had such dire consequences for the Acadians. - I believe what I actually said was “…no hostilities between the British and the Acadians at that time.” The British were not an occupying force in Nova Scotia. After 1710, under the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht, the territory is ceded to the British by the French. Over this entire period, right up to 1755 there were no actions by the British against the Acadians in Nova Scotia, as they were British subjects. The Acadians lived in relative peace over this period. Their farms prospered, families grew, they had elected representatives to help them deal with the British administration at Annapolis, etc. The very small garrison at Annapolis Royal rarely ventured more than a few miles from Fort Anne. This was the case because the French attempted to always play the Mi’kmaq off against the British soldiers. Even after 1749 and the establishment of Halifax, the British-Acadian relationship did not change that much. The actions by the French and Mi’kmaq against the British certainly did not help the Acadians in their plight to steer a path of neutrality between these belligerents. - As for the wars you list, the Acadians in Nova Scotia had very little to no involvement in these. These hostilities were largely between the Indigenous groups with French support against the New England colonies, and French troops with Indigenous allies fighting against the British. The Acadians did get caught in the middle of these from time to time. As in all societies, there are also a few who don’t go along with the many and thus there were Acadians who did support the Indigenous groups and the French. Broussard of course is one of these young fellows. - Up until 1710 even though the British took control of Acadia from time to time it was really nominal in nature. They defeated the French garrison, sent them home to France, asked the Acadians to be good fellows, and then largely left them to their own devices. New England merchants set up trading operations with the Acadian; a very welcome accommodation for them. - As for the Battle of Grand Pré, the French were the aggressors. French Canadian troops had invaded the British colony to support the d’Anville expedition. The expedition as we know was a disaster and the remnants of the fleet sailed back to France and the Canadian troops that had tried to attack Annapolis Royal in the fall march back to Beaubassin to settle in for the Winter. The British at Annapolis Royal are concerned the French Canadians would return in the Spring and thus called for reinforcements from New England to defend the colony. The British decide to send some of the troops to Grand Pré as an outer defense against a Spring attack. The French decide to attack in the winter. This was something that was rarely seen in warfare at that time. The surprise attack was carried out by French Canadian troops, Mi’kmaq allies, and a few Acadians. It is interesting that during the French Canadians march from Beaubassin to Grand Pré there were Acadian villages they avoided over concern these Acadians were too pro-British and would send a warning to them. At Pisiquid the troops had to contain the village for fears someone would leave and warn the British. - There was never a period when Acadians were banned from immigrating nor did the British move Acadians off the land they wanted. Until 1749 there were no British colonists in Nova Scotia. At Annapolis Royal, there were British troops and a few merchants. Some of the merchants and soldiers even married Acadian women. Given the lack of ability for the British to project any real power across the colony, they could not stop the Acadians from moving around or leaving the colony. The Acadians drove the British administrators at Annapolis Royal a little crazy at times when they would just decide to settle a new piece of land wherever they liked. The British even bought the seigneurial rights to administer the lands and collect taxes. That was a wasted expenditure for the British. - You are correct about Broussard having been at the 1710 siege. As he grew up, he was a troublemaker and thus rightfully charged by the administration. I suspect there were many Acadians at the time who thought he was a bad apple. Cont' in next post
The French did not colonize Acadia/Nova Scotia in the 1500s. They arrive in the early 1600s. None of your ancestors were "forced into Louisiana" as the British did not deport a single Acadian there. The Acadians were all deported to other places. All Acadians who end up in Louisiana went there by their own choice.
Just found out I’m Acadian, have been searching for my paternal grandpas birth parents and I finally found them, Menuire/Miller Family of Nova Scotia :)
Bienvenue mon ami 🙋🏼♀️ you must try to visit L’Acadie sometime. Up here in Nova Scotia, PEI, & NB aka Acadia you will find your roots with many many connections, cousins and friends. And any Acadian who visits these shores especially for the first time will have a transformational experience. Most tell of the uncontrollable emotions that overcome their souls. It is impossible to explain in words the overwhelming flood of emotion every Acadian no matter where you come from in the world feels. It’s a homecoming of sorts .. you just know you are finally home.💯 it is absolutely life changing. But please, Don’t take my word for it, come experience it for yourself, you won’t regret it. ☮️💟
As a Cajun person who doesn’t speak French and is disconnected from the culture, I sometimes feel shame about not being able to carry it on. But I just try my best to be proud of my American heritage while also still honoring and remembering the old Acadian culture.
An important lesson always have the means to defend your life with swift and savage violence lest you be taken advantage of by a state or people who are more ready and prepared to commit violence. A historical stay strapped or get clapped
The general line of Prof Sturgis' narrative is OK but she has many major errors in the facts. See my other comments throughout the conservation below. Her idea that somehow North American society would be radically different today if the Acadians had been left alone is just foolish and naive; especially so coming from a professor.
She has gotten a lot wrong here. The British did not send the Acadians to Louisiana; they never owned Louisiana, so how could they? The Spanish King was the one who encouraged the Acadians to move to Spain's newly-acquired Louisiana colony. The Acadians had a strong reputation for cattle raising and that's why Spain wanted them in Louisiana. We were the first cowboys. My own ancestors were given their land grants in Louisiana from the King of Spain, dated July 4, 1776, coincidentally. Also, the British governor of Nova Scotia, NOT the British King, made the decision to exile the Acadians, because one of my ancestors, Beausoleil Broussard, was inciting the local Indians to revolt against the British. Thus le grande derangement happened, and I grew up in Louisiana instead of Nova Scotia. She's right that half of the Acadians died in that exile, however. Queen Elizabeth II apologized for it in the early 1980s, I believe. It's nice to see people talking about le grande derangement, but it would be nicer to see them stick to the facts and not push their own agenda. Also, it would help to talk about the incident in the context of the Seven Years War, which was what inspired the exile in the first place. My family was exiled because of a war, not because of some clever modern theories based on "ethnic studies."
wasn't beausoleil broussard dropped on Haiti then led other acadians to Louisiana ? i taught the Acadians who were encouraged to move to Spain were the one who were deported on the second wave to France and England
@J OneLife The place in carribeans? Of course will be more tanned there but dark is a mix up words cause blacks are what's really dark. Natives that I saw are not dark.
My grandmother's father is a Leblanc, I did a DNA test and learned I'm deeply connected to several families of the Acadian land. I also realized I have ALOT of 4th cousins so it's very very likely those of us with Leblanc in our family tree are related in some way
My direct ancestors did; while many of their parents and siblings either stayed where they were deported (Maryland/New England/France etc) or they went down to LA.
My mothers' mom was an Acadian! I now better understand why I am the way I am! I respect Fully their way of living & life! I wish that they were left alone....to live and to prosper! I also learned recently my fathers' mother was Miq ' mac! Very interesting, indeed! I also love the art ...reminds me House on the Prairie! Ty for documenting this!
This Professor unfortunately has very little background in the study of the Acadian period or the historical context needed to understand what happened. This is not her area of research so I am surprised she would weigh into the topic. See my extensive posts throughout this site. It was a tragic episode of history without a doubt. The Indigenous people of the Maritime region of Canada are the Mi'kmaq.
Although an interesting video, Dr. Sturgis' comments on the matter of Acadian colonial life contain a number of errors as well as very simple non-contextualized interpretation of events. She, like many authors who do not have an in-depth understanding of Acadian history, continue to portray Acadians as “unsophisticated” (her words) and in a Longfellowish utopian style. We owe it to Acadians of the past, present, and future to provide a greater contextualized and nuanced portrait of the Acadians of the colonial period. If they were anything, they were a sophisticated and adroit people who for many years steered a successful path between the two antagonistic imperial powers of France and Britain. Here are a few examples of the errors contained in Dr Sturgis’ comments: - The erroneous date of 1606 as the year of Acadian settlement. The first settlement in what we refer to as Acadia was in 1604 at St Croix (located now on the New Brunswick/Maine border). Although this settlement failed after just one winter the French explorers/merchants continued on by settling in 1605 at a location a few miles west of current day Annapolis Royal, NS. These first French adventurers established a settlement primarily for commercial purposes (furs, fish, and exploitation of other resources.) - After 1613 the trading colony was abandoned and not re-established until the early 1630s, this time on the southwest (LaHave) coast of Nova Scotia. After 1636 these French settlers relocated to Port Royal (Annapolis Royal). The agrarian settlers of the 1630 and the later 1670s influx became the originating peoples we now know as the Acadians. This thus has the Acadian settlement period ranging over an approximate 120 and 75 year period. - During the expulsions that commenced in 1755 the British did not send any Acadians to Louisiana. The Acadians who did immigrate to Louisiana did so from locations in France and the American colonies, through their own choice, and not until the 1760s and 1780s. - The people we know as the Acadians did not refer to themselves as such. The use of the term ‘Acadian’ largely comes from British and French officials when referring to the French who were settled in Nova Scotia. It was not until well after the Expulsion that Acadians primarily refer to themselves in this manner. - There was loss of life during the expulsions but not as Dr Sturgis inadvertently portrays. Her earlier demonization of the British and her lack of context could and likely does leave most to think the loss was in the form of British military slaughter and attack. The terrible losses took place mostly via shipwrecks. On a further note Dr Sturgis seems to contend that if the Acadians had been left to their own devices, the entire future of North America could have been much different - in her words the British “destroyed this alternate vision on how North America could have unfolded”. This is certainly a bit of an academic stretch. The Acadian population (18,000 at best but likely under 15,000) was small in comparison to the other European populations in North America at the time. Quebec’s population as of the late 1750s was 60,000+. That of British North America from 1740 to 1760 rose from about 900,000 to nearly 1.6 million. Mere population dynamics alone, in relatively short order would likely have altered Acadian cultural ideals and even subsumed it entirely.
EdinburghFive she also seems to paint a rather rosey picture of the Acadians as pacifists. In comparison to the participation of larger Quebec in conflict with the Anglo-Americans, Acadian participation in conflict appears limited until one researches the Priest raids and wars. The war of Father Le Loutre in particular had many brutal elements of frontier total war.
I would be very interested in reading your report, if you still happen to have a copy. It sounds intriguing. As a student of military history, I often find the pure neutral thesis put forward in the advocacy of the Acadian people to be questionable, however. As you have mentioned, this was not a militarized society, and as a population group had little allegiance to the French Crown. This was particularly true when discussing the middle of the 18th century. Despite this, joint Wabanaki and Acadian raids against English settlements did occur with regularity, with the example of Baron de St Castin's and his men's actions throughout King Philip's War serving as evidence of one such affair, the Avalon Peninsula campaign as another. These were often violent in the manner of all frontier wars, though admittedly small in scale. While I do appreciate and largely agree with the politically disinterested view of Acadians during these periods of Colonial war, I also concur with Maurice Basque's opinion that Acadian historiography often ignores the military actions and contributions of its people in favour of furthering the Evangeline narrative.
I stopped watching 5 minutes into this. She's kind of a fraud and miss characterized the historical context. Yes, the expulsion was shocking, but there was a lot of inhumane behaviors all around and this was the norm for the time. No one had clean hands. The Indians were launching raids on New England settlements, burning villages, killing settlers, kidnapping women and children whom they held hostage for ransoms. They were engaged in proxy wars with the Brits and French to fight other tribes along the coast. The Acadians were launching raids on New England villages on the coastline and harming commerce. The British were ceded Acadia by the French -- they didn't steal it. They gained a colony of French citizens who were not loyal to them and who were engaged in trying to expel the British. No one had clean hands in this. No one. My family was part of the Expulsion, too.
I'm a Boudreau too my family was originally from Kankakee Illinois. My father's parents moved to California before he was born. I still have extended family in Illinois.
I know where the Mouton family descendants are? They spell it like this Moulton..there from Tobique first Nation...all most near Quebec.The majority of them live up around there...
@@kevinrees5855 Are u sure ?she talkimg about my clan micmac ! And Acadian where and descendants of Nova Scotia and of course the name is spelled the same not all tribes have the same blood line. ..the Acadians were involved with native ppl.
There are so many glittering generalizations and historical errors in this diatribe that I could not make it all the way through the video. Acadia may have had many incidents in its taking by the British, but it was not ethnic cleansing. The French who still occupy the region would take issue with such calls, let alone the lack of state initiatives to terrorize or destroy the peoples still living there. It is far more complex then this is describing and I expect far better from Learn Liberty
dont sanitize it, tell it the way it was, the people with the most guns made the rules, and the history, they were all out for what they could get, with no exceptions
We have/had 5 fairy mounds here in Nova Scotia. The thought just crossed my mind that maybe they are mass graves of Acadians? Perhaps why they are covered up and built upon. Perhaps it was more of a genocide than an expulsion?
There was no mass execution and burial of Acadians. Something of that nature would have somehow shown up in the records and stories of the people. Sorry, but wild speculation on your part.
@@EdinburghFive In 1851, Francis Parkman was the first historian to document Lord Amherst's “shameful plan” to exterminate Indians by giving them smallpox-in- fected blankets taken from the corpses of British soldiers at Fort Pitt in "1763". Of some 3,100 Acadians deported after the fall of Louisbourg in 1758, an estimated 1,649 died by drowning or disease, a fatality rate of "53 per cent". Between 1755 and 1763, approximately 10,000 Acadians were deported. They were shipped to many points around the Atlantic. The first official census, held in 1671, registered an Acadian population of more than 400 people, 200 of which lived in Port-Royal. In 1701 there were about 1,400; in 1711, some 2,500; in 1750, over 10,000; and in 1755, over 13,000. Soo ..3000 weren't deported. I wonder where they are buried? Or how about the 53% mortality rate? Does that mean over 7000 bodies needed to be disposed of? It seems possible and we'll documented.🍀 I also agree the mounds in N.S could be something more traditional. I think it'd be worth a look:)
@@EdinburghFive The first claims regarding the castle at the New Ross Nova Scotia property originate with Joan and Ron Harris, the landowners from the early 1970s until 1990. In 1972. She believed the mansion was probably destroyed in 1654 by Robert Sedgwick, acting on the orders of Cromwell. The first organized French settlement in Acadia was founded in 1604. This if true places a castle in Acadia. Cromwell is famous for creating heaps of dead bodies. Concerning Cromwell and the Irish estimates of the drop in the Irish population resulting from the Cromwellian campaign range from 15 to 41 percent. nearly 618,000 people of the country's pre-war population died. Where are they buried? It seems very likely that many of these so called fairy mounds are indeed mass graves disguised as ancient burial sites.🍀
Hey@@luketracey3269 - I am very aware of the story of the so called New Ross 'Castle'. It is of course wild speculation and wishful thinking by a couple who neither had a clue about the history nor had the ability to identify the site properly. Archaeological surveys of the site prove it to be nothing more than a few natural formations and nineteenth-century ruins. It is a long walk through lot of woods from the Acadian's very few and very small settlements to the New Ross area. There was nothing there of interest to the Acadians. How would Sedgwick have known about the so called 'castle'? He certainly did not stumble upon it. Not sure what the deportation of the Acadians has to do with Cromwell, as the event happened nearly a century after his death. Mass graves of whom? Where are these 'fariy mounds'. Again there was no mass execution of Acadians. The idea is bunkum.
Francois Savoie was my 10th great grandfather. He came from France to Acadia, Canada, married Catherine LeJEUNE, and had 9 children. Francois Savoie arrived in Acadia c1651. Census 1671: Port Royal: Francois Scavois 50, Catherine LeJeune 30 (sic 40), Francoise 18 (married), Germain 17, Marie 14, Jeanne 13, Catherine 9, Francois 8, Barnabe 6, Andree 4, Marie 1 1/2; 4 cattle, 6 arpents. Francois Savoie is said to be the progenitor of all the Savoie families in Southwest Louisiana. Though I am a descendant of Francois' son *Germain, my line of descent did not end up in Louisiana. Francois' 3rd great grandson left Canada and settled in Kansas, and after that, 2 generations later, Jean Baptiste Savoie settled in Illinois. His son, John Francis Savoie, settled in Albion, Indiana. He was my great grandfather. From the Acadian Expulsion in 1755 to 1763, some of the fourth generations of Acadian Savoies remained in exile or were held in prisons in Halifax. Many died from diseases and heartbreak.
Much of what is said in this video is wrong. Prof Sturgis area of expertise is not Acadian or northeastern North American colonial history. See my comments posted six years ago and subsequent posts.
the answer, greed promoted bigotry, they wanted the land, and thats ok, because you were french, thats all the excuse they needed to get rid of the competition, its still happening, just a different place and different promoted bigotry, what hasnt changed, we want what youve got, we just need an excuse, the indians lost far more than you, were you on their side then, are you now ?
New Brunswick did not exist then. It was all Nova Scotia. "Nova Scotia was partitioned, and the colony of New Brunswick was created on August 16, 1784" (Wiki)
I've loved Dr. Amy and her commentary on a number of subjects since I first heard her on StarShipSofa. However, this bit is positively dripping with obvious bias. History is rarely ever as cut and dried and as she seems to imply here. I rather doubt that had we all simply adopted the noble Acadian peace loving kumbayahness that we would now be living in a global utopia.
@@MacAutopsy in a way it does Catholic France was killing Protestants in Europe with the pope's blessing, England was Protestant, France was seizing lands and countries from Protestants-look at the size of France today compared to other European countries, England and France were in a continual state of war, Catholic sizing-a form of ethnic cleansing, England did not want Catholics in the colonies because they were not loyal to England
Although this was truly a sad point in our North American History, and what was done horrible (mostly due to Lawrence and his personal and past issues), in the end I have to say I am fortunate that it happened because I wouldn't be here today otherwise. Shockingly, I have one ancestor who arrived on a ship in Massachusetts, and another (an official from Massachusetts) who inspected that same ship. It would be another 5 generations before the families would intermix by marriage.
Before anyone condemning our government for evil acts, May I start the fact the US government was not the only government neither the first government that sponsored "cleansing" or "removing" other ethnic groups on the conquered land. In fact, almost every government that ever existed did some forms of ethnic cleansing or "relocating" the native population when they conquered the land. I'm not saying that we should justify our government actions but we should not forget that we human species are competitive against each other and have done this towards each other since the dawn of time.
Not all of them lived on as Cajuns. many founded little Cadies in Quenec and alot of Acadian returned into the maritimes provinces. NOT all Acadians did that.. only a few but the British didn't have the time to sort out the "bad apples" so to make sure that whom ever was supporting France didn't they made the Acadian leave their lands forcefully. The Acadian were assured that they would not need to swear to the British Crown.
Not all of the Acadians just a few and because of those few the British were afraid that the Acadian while claiming Neutrality would side with the French during the Seven Years war or the French Indian war. The Acadian were peacefull but events was set up against them. Even when the British official promised that they would not need to swear fealty to the King of England, others decided otherwise and used that as a way to deport the Acadian and also because they wanted all of their fertile lands
The "British official [never] promised that they would not need to swear fealty to the King of England" They were required to swear fealty but had initially achieved an understanding of neutrality. This changed in 1755 when they were asked to provided an unqualified oath, one that did not allow for neutrality.
So why did they supposedly help the french during the war? Seems a little strange after this. Seems like the colonies got abandoned by any official support.
Wow...a good historical argument to support 2A rights! I used to travel quite a bit to Nova Scotia and learned about the Expulsion year ago. I have traveled to Quebec several times and they are generally friendly if you soeak a little French. The small remaining French towns and enclaves on the southern Bay of Funday side, they did not welcome English speakers. I wanted to understand why. I propose there is an occult aspect to this story, a bit of Masonic turf war involved as much as politics, there is considerable Masonic presence and geomantic imprinting in the Gaspereau Valley, Windsor area of NS. There is a Jesuit/Grand Orient Lodge connection with the French Accadians...and many relocated to the French Quarter area of New Orleans. Some may say this was to stay on the Line. The French Quarter, it goes without saying - has a reputation.
