Frenchifying Exam Question PDF

Question: Explain Frenchifying and how it affected the history of New France. Contrast it with Jesuit policies in New France. How did the conflict between these two shape the history of New France? Explain Frenchifying: - Frenchifying was a policy of assimilation prompted by the French government...

Question: Explain Frenchifying and how it affected the history of New France. Contrast it with Jesuit policies in New France. How did the conflict between these two shape the history of New France? Explain Frenchifying: - Frenchifying was a policy of assimilation prompted by the French government and some missionary groups, like the seminary persists (article) - Frenchifying was a policy implemented in New France in 1666 with the goal of assimilating Indigenous people into French society (article) - This Government policy was driven by the need to increase the colonies population and productivity (article) - Jean-Baptiste Colbert, the Minister of Finance, envisioned this policy as a complete cultural transformation of Indigenous people, where they would adopt French lifestyles, customs, and language. And that increasing the colony necessitated “civilizing” Indigenous people by assimilating them into French society (article) - The seminary persists prioritized european customs, fixed settlements and church structures (article) Jesuit Policies in New France - Jesuits followed a complete different way of engaging with Indigenous people as they has their own different motivations: saving the souls of Indigenous people by converting them to Christianity - The Jesuits viewed themselves foot soldiers of God in a war with Satan which they are specifically fighting in the “New World”/New France. - A big part of being a Jesuit was pain, suffering, and salvation - Suffering = closer to God’s will - Martyrdom = important, and being in New France was a good way to become a martyr - The Jesuits conversion approach was the complete opposite of the frenchification policy: The Jesuits employed a culturally adaptive approach meaning that they sought to engage with Indigenous cultures rather than imposing European costumes on them - This method involved learning Indigenous languages, understanding local traditions, and integrating aspects of their culture into the process of conversion - The Jesuits were very adaptable in their conversion efforts, an example of this is them establishing missions among the Huron in the 1630s and 1640s, venturing into the wilderness, living in native villages, and learning their languages. They established the Illinois mission in 1672, marking a commitment to remote missions, despite criticism from government officials who preferred missions closer to French settlements. - The Jesuits, motivated by a desire to save souls, believed that adapting to native cultures and translating Christian ideas into Indigenous languages would make the message of Christianity more accessible and appealing.  - They embraced Indigenous languages and cultural practices, incorporating them into Christian services, and focused on building relationships with Indigenous communities based on mutual understanding and respect. - This approach stemmed from their belief that true conversion could only happen if Indigenous people felt respected and understood, not forced to abandon their cultural identities. How did the conflict between these two shape the history of New France? Conflict: - The Frenchification strategy partly emerged from the French Government’s need to increase the colonies population and productivity - but also in reaction to their frustration regarding the Jesuits' culturally adaptive approach. - As an example for this frustration the article which examinee Jesuits and Seminary Priests in the Illinois Country, The article focuses on conflict that occurred between Jesuits and Seminary priests in the Illinois Country, specifically in the Tamaroa village (also known as Cahokia). The article examines this specific conflict to illuminate the broader debate over missionary strategies in the French empire - the Jesuits began to shift their thinking, arguing that conversion could be achieved without assimilation2. By the time Colbert formally announced the policy of francisation in 1666, which promoted the assimilation of Indigenous people into French society, the Jesuits had already begun to move away from this approach23. They believed that adapting to local practices would allow for more genuine conversions4. This difference in views sparked conflict between the Jesuits and proponents of francisation. - Governor Frontenac and Intendant Talon were strong advocates for francisation, criticizing the Jesuits for not focusing on teaching Indigenous people French and for establishing missions far from French settlements56. The king also expressed his view that teaching Indigenous people French and encouraging them to adopt French customs were essential for their conversion to Christianity - Despite this pressure, the Jesuits continued to pursue a missionary strategy based on accommodation, prioritizing learning Indigenous languages and adapting to local customs. They believed that forcing Indigenous people to conform to French culture would only serve to alienate them from Christianity and the French. This conflict is exemplified in the events surrounding the Tamaroa mission, where the Jesuits clashed with the Seminary priests, who were proponents of francisation - The Jesuits believed that the Seminary priests would be ineffective missionaries because they were unwilling to adapt to the lifeways of the Indigenous people10. The Seminary priests' lack of fluency in Indigenous languages further hampered their efforts11. Ultimately, the conflict over the  Tamaroa mission ended in a compromise, allowing both the Jesuits and Seminary priests to continue operating in the region, as well as in other areas on New France we see the missions of both the Jesuits and groups who used frenchification continue their efforts. So we see this conflict begin with contrasting approaches and opinions regarding each others approaches with the governments frustration of the Jesuits approach: Frenchifying? 1660s & 1670s: We need to Frenchify the Indigenous, to bring together the French & “Natives” to “constitute one People and one Race” - Get French men (in the colony!) to marry Indigenous women - Get families to adopt Indigenous children This will unite & make our colony great! Government blamed the Jesuits - why aren’t they civilizing the “natives”?! Conflict - Ideals vs Reality Ideals: Obviously the “natives” were culturally deficient and would immediately see that the European ways of doing things were superior Obviously intermarriage & assimilation would lead to European norms being the norm! No religion, no culture, no government, no authority, no manners, no proper language - there’s a void to fill When this didn’t work, the French government got frustrated with the Jesuits for their failure Why were they allowed to “Indianize” themselves? Why were they behaving “like the savages” and enjoyed “an animal life”, doing little more than hunting and fishing? Indianizing “Though many nations imitate the French customs, I observed, on the contrary, that the French in Canada in many respects follow the customs of the Indians, with whom they have constant relations. They use the tobacco pipes, shoes, garters, and belts of the Indians. They follow the Indian way of waging war exactly; they mix the same things with tobacco; they make use of the Indianbark boats and row them in the Indian way; they wrap a square piece of cloth round their feet, instead of stockings, and have adopted many other Indian fashions.” - Peter Kalm  - We see each Frenchifying approach continue regardless or the dispute just as we see the jesuit approach continue: - For Frenchifying: intermarriage between French Men and Indigenous Woman became a big way to attempt an achevial of the desired assimilation - 1660s & 1670s: We need to Frenchify the Indigenous, to bring together the French & “Natives” to “constitute one People and one Race” - Get French men (in the colony!) to marry Indigenous women - Get families to adopt Indigenous children - This will unite & make our colony great! Jesuits approach continued: - Christian teachings taught using Indigenous customs: Jean de Brébeuf wrote "What the Hurons Think about Their Origin" with the goal of putting the Wendat creation story into a Christian model - Using the incentive of guns to leverage conversion with Indig people Frenchifying, a policy of cultural assimilation introduced in New France in 1666, was driven by the French government’s vision of uniting French settlers and Indigenous populations into a single, cohesive society. Promoted by figures such as Jean-Baptiste Colbert, this strategy sought to "civilize" Indigenous people by integrating them into French customs, language, and lifestyle. Frenchifying was envisioned as a means to increase the colony's population and productivity, aligning with broader colonial goals. Missionary groups like the Seminary priests actively supported this approach, emphasizing European norms such as fixed settlements, structured church practices, and French language adoption. In contrast, the Jesuits adopted a culturally adaptive approach to their missionary work. Motivated by a desire to save souls, they rejected the assimilationist ideals of Frenchifying, choosing instead to engage deeply with Indigenous cultures. The Jesuits viewed themselves as foot soldiers of God, fighting a spiritual war against Satan in the “New World.” They embraced pain, suffering, and martyrdom as pathways to salvation, seeing their presence in New France as an opportunity for ultimate sacrifice. This dedication fueled their commitment to their culturally adaptive strategy, which involved living among Indigenous communities, learning local languages, and incorporating Indigenous customs into Christian teachings. For example, Jesuits like Jean de Brébeuf reinterpreted Wendat creation stories within a Christian framework, demonstrating their efforts to contextualize Christianity in Indigenous cultural terms. The conflict between Frenchifying and Jesuit approaches became a defining tension in New France. The French government grew increasingly frustrated with the Jesuits, accusing them of failing to "civilize" Indigenous people and instead "Indianizing" themselves by adopting aspects of Indigenous culture, such as tobacco use and birch bark canoeing. Officials like Governor Frontenac and Intendant Talon criticized the Jesuits for establishing missions far from French settlements and neglecting to teach Indigenous people French. Proponents of Frenchifying viewed these measures as essential for creating a unified and productive colonial society. However, the Jesuits resisted this pressure, believing that forcing Indigenous people to conform to French culture would alienate them from both Christianity and French society. Instead, they prioritized accommodation, maintaining that learning Indigenous languages and adapting to local customs would foster more genuine and lasting conversions. The Tamaroa mission in the Illinois Country exemplifies this conflict. Here, Jesuits clashed with Seminary priests over missionary strategies. The Seminary priests, committed to Frenchifying, struggled to connect with Indigenous communities due to their unwillingness to adapt to local customs and their lack of language fluency. The Jesuits, by contrast, emphasized accommodation, believing that adapting to local practices would make Christian teachings more accessible. Although tensions persisted, both missionary groups continued their efforts, reflecting the unresolved nature of this conflict. The differing goals of Frenchifying and the Jesuit approach explain the stark contrast in their strategies. The Jesuits’ culturally adaptive methods allowed them to build meaningful alliances with Indigenous communities, fostering mutual trust and cooperation. While their ultimate goal was still conversion to Christianity, they believed this could only be achieved by engaging with Indigenous cultures on their terms. By learning Indigenous languages, respecting local customs, and embedding themselves within Indigenous societies, the Jesuits created long-term relationships that were crucial for both their spiritual mission and broader colonial diplomacy. They also leveraged practical incentives, such as access to guns, to encourage conversion, blending spiritual goals with material benefits. In contrast, proponents of Frenchifying, including the Seminary priests, assumed that intermarriage and forced cultural assimilation—essentially making Indigenous people "more French"—would create a unified colonial society. This coercive approach often alienated Indigenous groups, undermining potential alliances. The divergent attitudes reflect two fundamentally different ways of viewing the Indigenous population: as allies to be engaged on their terms versus subjects to be molded into European ideals. Ultimately, these conflicting approaches shaped the history of New France by highlighting the tension between spiritual and colonial priorities. While Frenchifying prioritized assimilation to build a cohesive settler society, the Jesuit strategy of adaptation maintained crucial Indigenous alliances, ensuring both access to conversion opportunities and broader colonial stability. Together, these approaches encapsulate the competing visions of how New France navigated its relationships with Indigenous peoples, leaving a legacy of both cooperation and conflict. - Builds alliances and relations - Jesuits - How do you get along with people that have an entirely different culture? And how does that affect what gets kept and what gets thrown away? - NF was a collection of very different ppl.. How did that work out? How Frenchifying or Jesuits shaped NF - These are two different ideas of what it means to be Christian / Catholic / A good French person on the soil of New France. So how does that influence interactions? - Jesuits understood what was going on in New France  - The French that did Frenchifying like the Seminary Priests, felt that the Jesuits were not Frenchifying right, how does that influence their world - This was a multicultural society.. How did that play out They had very different ideas of what the purpose of New France is - What is going on if you think I can marry people and force them to become more like me.. Thats a different attitude than the Jesuits