From: nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Re: When do we stop being outsiders? (WAS Re: The Journal on ...)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 19:31:22 GMT

In article <yHHBJB2w164w@sys6626.bison.mb.ca> boris@sys6626.bison.mb.ca (boris) writes:
>audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet) writes:
>
>> In article you write:
>> >  Do not use such words as "created".  It was here all along.
>> >Canada consists of more than just the east. The french didn't influence 
>> >much past manitoba. The country consists of the amalgamation of many 
>> >colonies and settlements. Some like BC, with no french influence at all.
>> >Technically "canada" was an act of the british parlament.
>> 
>> Not so. Canada didn't start in 1867. Before, we had the Union of
>> Canada, and before, Upper and Lower Canada. Before that,
>> Nouvelle-France covered about 3/4 of North America.
>Again I think you are in error. West past the great lakes the french 
>presence was mostly small settlements of fur trappers/voyagers and 
>trading posts strung out along the river routes. not much more. in fact 
>much of manitoba on west was hudson's bay company territory that was 
>really controlled by the aboriginals until after the dominion was formed. 
>West of the mississippi was considered to be spanish territory and the 
>new england colonies were very british until thier independance.
> That takes up about 3/4 of the north american land mass.
>new france was definatly concentrated along the st lawerance river. most 
>of what is now quebec's north was unsettled by the french until way 
>afterr they had lost the louisianna territories.
>  The past of the french in north america is not as extensive or grand as 
>you make it out to be.

Hmm, for one thing, you forget that Nouvelle-France took up much of
the middle of the continent, all the way down to Louisiana.

Consider that Napoleon sold Lousiana to the U.S., because he needed
money to finance his wars, and ceded Canada to Great Britain after
his losses on the battlefields of Europe.  The battle at the Plains
of Abraham, contrary to popular belief, was not the decisive battle,
only a squirmish in a major war opposing France and Great Britain on
two continents.  (Remember, for example, that France supported the
U.S. Revolution in order to make trouble for Great Britain.)

Heck, if Napoleon had played his cards right, much of North America
would be French today, with the area from Texas to California being
Spanish.  (Would we then see anglophone nationalist groups complaining
of domination by the arrogant French, or would these groups have been
assimilated by the dominant French culture?)

This concept would make an interesting frame for one of those alternate
universe novels Science Fiction writers keep coming up with...  What
WOULD the world be like, if Napoleon had won the battle at Waterloo,
and thus established France as the dominant world power instead of
Great Britain?

The Rhealist (Rheal Nadeau)                 |  Bell-Northern Research
Internet:  nadeau@bnr.ca                    |  Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 
BNR neither endorses nor censors my views   |  (613) 763-4266
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada