# Talk:Raid on Grand Pré

I think the section headings need to emphasize Grand Pré as the center of the expedition, so I've reworded and restructured them to that end.  Note that I intend to expand the background and aftermath sections -- there is currently no description of what is being attacked (what are the demographics and geography of the village and Acadia more generally), or any post-raid accounting by the Acadians (this is all available in Griffiths and the other sources).  Also, non-Nova Scotians reading this may not understand why the tide is such a, well, big deal. Magic♪piano 13:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Headings are great. I look forward to see you develop it further.  --Hantsheroes (talk) 13:57, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

[copied from view history edits]

People don't need to see the drawing of the criminal who murdered and scalped innocent people. His drawing is already part of his biography. - 06:12, 23 July 2012‎ Donnacona
bias opinion against new englanders, image of Church is historically important to article --Hantsheroes (talk) 00:10, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
I am not bias against new englanders, since I live in New England. However, the image of Church instead of Grand Pre, is as sinister as putting James Eagan Holmes` photo instead of the Aurora cinema photo in 2012 Aurora shooting. You forget that Church attack a people who had nothing to do with the Raid on Deerfield.  Like attacking Virginians for what Massachusetts did. Furthemore, he went out of his way not only to kill people, burn their homes, destroy their crops, but scalp them as well. Church is nothing but another Holmes, and I have no bias against people living in Colorado for that.--Donnacona (talk) 01:39, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Historian John Faragher makes the erroneous assertion that Church's Raid on Grand Pre was only in retaliation for the Raid on Deerfield.  He also virtually neglects the warfare emanating from Acadia that was killing New England civilians along the Acadia/ New England border in Maine.
For 75 years, through six wars, New England and Acadia were in conflict (see four French and Indian Wars, Father Rale's War and Father Le Loutre's War). The standard warfare of the time on both sides involved attacking civilians through frontier warfare/ scalping.   By the time Church conducted the Raid on Grand Pre, the Wabanaki Confederacy of Acadia and French officers of Acadia had conducted two militia campaigns against New England Civilians along the Acadia/ New England border in Maine (see the Northeast Coast Campaigns in 1688 and 1703 ).   Church was a colonial hero of New England and was supported by the state to retaliate.  After Church's raid on Grand Pre, the Confederacy and French officers of Acadia continued numerous campaigns to kill New England/ British civilians along the New England/ Acadia border in Maine (See the Northeast Coast Campaigns  1723, 1724, 1745, 1755).  The killing of British civilians continued in Nova Scotia throughout Father Le Loutre's War. While many Acadians may have remained neutral in these affairs, there is evidence that some joined the resistance to the encroaching British Empire (And so they should have). There is also much documentation on the close connection between the Mi'kmaq and the Acadians (e.g., they intermarried, shared Catholicism).  The best authors that focus on the military history of this region during this period are John Ried, Stephen Patterson and John Grenier.--Hantsheroes (talk) 05:00, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Your points are valid ones! Thank you for the update!  However, you have to remember that out of 40,000 Abenakis in Maine, very few survived the taking of their lands and the killing of their people by the English colonists. I grew up in Lewiston, Maine, and the Androscoggin tribe were practically wiped out, and those that survived moved to Odanak in the province of Quebec today. The Raid on Deerfield were the Pocumtucs desire for retaliation for the English settlers having taken their land and murdered their people, thus asking the help of Canadiens who also wanted retaliation for the Lachine massacre. I agree that the Acadians are mixed with the Mi'kmaqs, but you have to rememeber that it was the English colonists who took the land from the Abenakis and Mi'kmaqs, and not the Canadiens or the Acadians.  The two priest involved helped them in what they believed was an injust taking of native land and killing of innocent people.  However I agree that two wrongs don't make a right, and that one side is no better than the other. I am not bias, but only want the entire truth to be brought out in this encyclopedia.--Donnacona (talk) 15:24, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Agreed.  I think the post-colonial scholarship/ sensibility that honours multiple perspectives on the past is very important. In the last number of decades, the warfare of the Wabanaki Confederacy/ Acadians/ French Priests has been lost which I think is a shame. Those who resisted the British Empire taking over their lands deserve to be remembered.  I don't want to judge either side as being "wrong" for using the standard warfare of the day. At the same time, from a contemporary perspective, I do not think the British were on the same moral ground in the conflict.  The British were clearly stealing/ conquering aboriginal land.  At the same time, I find using a contemporary sensibility to judge the past unhelpful in trying to understand the choices of historic figures.--Hantsheroes (talk) 15:47, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: "Church is nothing but another Holmes, and I have no bias against people living in Colorado for that."
Church was acting under orders in wartime, doing things that were not unlike what his enemies were doing.  Holmes is a maniac; these things are unrelated.
As far as inclusion of the image, I think it ought to be included, although I don't particularly care where.  We don't omit pictures of Adolf Hitler from World War II, this is no different. Magic♪piano 18:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)