History is always about science, learning, and continuous discovery. Primary written and oral materials lay the foundation for the development of numerous historical theories and make it possible to look deeper into the meaning of the most complicated historical developments and events. However, and Canadian history confirms this assumption, the process of historical research is often associated with the lack of clear knowledge and primary historical materials. The history of Canada is overfilled with controversies and events that do not have a clear historical explanation because for many years the process of historical investigation was limited to the analysis of available written materials and did not cover other, possibly more reliable explanations. The lack of primary knowledge about the earliest achievements and events and the distorted vision of aboriginal history have already turned into one of the major themes in the study of Canadas history. It would fair to say that in the context of Canadas history, the lack of primary knowledge not only resulted in numerous scientific controversies, but often became the source of the major historical conflicts.
Dickinsons review of Canadas history can be fairly regarded as the starting point in the analysis of various approaches that for years and decades dominated the vision of Canadas historical development. The earlier years in the history of Canada are the most difficult to understand, and Dickinson (1996) is correct stating that until well into the twentieth century, Canadian historians habitually depicted Natives as barbarians much in need of the civilizing influence of the whites (p. 11). Until present, professionals in history could not state with confidence that what they know about the earliest years in Canada is absolutely reliable and objective. To a large extent, the lack of such scientific confidence in the discussion of Canadas history is justified by the lack of primary written materials about the meeting of the French and Amerindians on the North Atlantic Coast (Dickinson, 1996). Also, the current gaps in the understanding of Canadas historical development are justified by the first natives being unable to document the events and changes in their lives (Dickinson, 1996). However, more often than not, the distorted vision of the early Canadas history is nothing else but a form of professional reluctance to re-evaluate and re-interpret the knowledge, which used to show Natives as Barbarians and Jacques Cartier as the first carrier of westernized knowledge for Amerindians (Dickinson, 1996). These controversies, although are being gradually resolved, still dominate the current vision of Canadas history. More importantly, they have already turned into a separate historical trend which makes it difficult to create an objective picture of Canadas history and which even used to be a reason of serious conflicts in the country.
Looking back to the times when, after the 1885 Rebellion Ottawa pursued the goal of violent assimilation of the native population with the whites, the lack of primary historical knowledge resulted in the escalating violence and exploitation of the native population and coercive implementation of the Euro-Canadian patterns of life (Miller, 1991). Apart from the fact that such coercion was justified by the economic and social interests, it also reflected the eternal historical misbalances, which by the end of the 1880s became even more acute closely related to schooling was a series of policies designed to encourage Indians, especially those of the western interior, to adopt agriculture. There was little awareness that the government was attempting to modify the economic activity of a distinctive group of people, a process that in Western Europe had taken centuries to accomplish (Miller 1991, p. 191). As a result, the lack of primary knowledge about aboriginal people and their traditions, on the one hand, created a controversy between them and the whites who could not and did not want to understand the meaning of their traditions and the rights they had on the Canadian land. On the other hand, the lack of primary knowledge reflected the misbalance of values and principles in the study of Canadas history. To some extent, this misbalance of values continues to dominate the vision of Canada and its historical development, and only now and under the influence of numerous scholarly and semi-scholarly works, scholarly opinions about aboriginal people are being gradually changed.
Throughout decades, the barbarian image of an aboriginal man dominated the study of Canadas history, and in many instances, the many books and journal articles written on the subject made it impossible to produce a single objective version of history in Canada. For years, Indians were depicted as inferiors, with their women representing the lower level of evolution, living without any religion and without any hint of civilization (Walker, 1991). Only with time a new humanistic vision of the aboriginal population gradually became the central element in the study of history in Canada. This was the result of the growing professional attention toward native studies, as well as the growing role of archeology and anthropology in the historical analysis. Although the problem with the lack of historical evidence was not fully resolved, and many native studies still reflect the limitedness of the historical vision in Canada, these scholarly and semi-scholarly accounts have already produced a serious scientific shift in historical consciousness, treating aboriginals as the critical elements of Canadas historical development, with their unique traditions and values.
For years and centuries, the vision of history in Canada was dominated by the discriminative attitudes toward aboriginals. The study of Canadas history intentionally minimized the role of aboriginal people in the development of Canada and treated them as inferiors. The lack of primary materials was the determining force in the development of the misbalanced historical view of Canada. Sometimes, this lack of primary knowledge turned into real-life conflicts between the white and the native populations in the country. While the growing number of scholarly and semi-scholarly native studies makes it difficult to create the most objective picture of Canadas history, they nevertheless signify the slow shift in the scholarly consciousness, which recognizes the aboriginal people as the critical elements of Canadas history and respects the contribution they made to the development of the modern Canadian state.
Dickinsons review of Canadas history can be fairly regarded as the starting point in the analysis of various approaches that for years and decades dominated the vision of Canadas historical development. The earlier years in the history of Canada are the most difficult to understand, and Dickinson (1996) is correct stating that until well into the twentieth century, Canadian historians habitually depicted Natives as barbarians much in need of the civilizing influence of the whites (p. 11). Until present, professionals in history could not state with confidence that what they know about the earliest years in Canada is absolutely reliable and objective. To a large extent, the lack of such scientific confidence in the discussion of Canadas history is justified by the lack of primary written materials about the meeting of the French and Amerindians on the North Atlantic Coast (Dickinson, 1996). Also, the current gaps in the understanding of Canadas historical development are justified by the first natives being unable to document the events and changes in their lives (Dickinson, 1996). However, more often than not, the distorted vision of the early Canadas history is nothing else but a form of professional reluctance to re-evaluate and re-interpret the knowledge, which used to show Natives as Barbarians and Jacques Cartier as the first carrier of westernized knowledge for Amerindians (Dickinson, 1996). These controversies, although are being gradually resolved, still dominate the current vision of Canadas history. More importantly, they have already turned into a separate historical trend which makes it difficult to create an objective picture of Canadas history and which even used to be a reason of serious conflicts in the country.
Looking back to the times when, after the 1885 Rebellion Ottawa pursued the goal of violent assimilation of the native population with the whites, the lack of primary historical knowledge resulted in the escalating violence and exploitation of the native population and coercive implementation of the Euro-Canadian patterns of life (Miller, 1991). Apart from the fact that such coercion was justified by the economic and social interests, it also reflected the eternal historical misbalances, which by the end of the 1880s became even more acute closely related to schooling was a series of policies designed to encourage Indians, especially those of the western interior, to adopt agriculture. There was little awareness that the government was attempting to modify the economic activity of a distinctive group of people, a process that in Western Europe had taken centuries to accomplish (Miller 1991, p. 191). As a result, the lack of primary knowledge about aboriginal people and their traditions, on the one hand, created a controversy between them and the whites who could not and did not want to understand the meaning of their traditions and the rights they had on the Canadian land. On the other hand, the lack of primary knowledge reflected the misbalance of values and principles in the study of Canadas history. To some extent, this misbalance of values continues to dominate the vision of Canada and its historical development, and only now and under the influence of numerous scholarly and semi-scholarly works, scholarly opinions about aboriginal people are being gradually changed.
Throughout decades, the barbarian image of an aboriginal man dominated the study of Canadas history, and in many instances, the many books and journal articles written on the subject made it impossible to produce a single objective version of history in Canada. For years, Indians were depicted as inferiors, with their women representing the lower level of evolution, living without any religion and without any hint of civilization (Walker, 1991). Only with time a new humanistic vision of the aboriginal population gradually became the central element in the study of history in Canada. This was the result of the growing professional attention toward native studies, as well as the growing role of archeology and anthropology in the historical analysis. Although the problem with the lack of historical evidence was not fully resolved, and many native studies still reflect the limitedness of the historical vision in Canada, these scholarly and semi-scholarly accounts have already produced a serious scientific shift in historical consciousness, treating aboriginals as the critical elements of Canadas historical development, with their unique traditions and values.
For years and centuries, the vision of history in Canada was dominated by the discriminative attitudes toward aboriginals. The study of Canadas history intentionally minimized the role of aboriginal people in the development of Canada and treated them as inferiors. The lack of primary materials was the determining force in the development of the misbalanced historical view of Canada. Sometimes, this lack of primary knowledge turned into real-life conflicts between the white and the native populations in the country. While the growing number of scholarly and semi-scholarly native studies makes it difficult to create the most objective picture of Canadas history, they nevertheless signify the slow shift in the scholarly consciousness, which recognizes the aboriginal people as the critical elements of Canadas history and respects the contribution they made to the development of the modern Canadian state.
