This article examines the different ways in which the engagement of Muslim political loyalists is... more This article examines the different ways in which the engagement of Muslim political loyalists is represented in the historiography. Confronted with very few archives available to understand why some Muslim Algerians still supported French colonial rule up to its last days, historians have used a materialist lens, supported by gender conventions, to explain the incomprehensible: while the men were self-interested opportunists, the women were naïve and manipulated middle-class ‘évoluées”. The description of their activity in different locations (the men in newspapers’ current pages and in military documents, the women in people magazines) has confirmed that assessment. This article argues that we should consider more critically the archives produced by the French state and medias of the time in order to understand the multiple ways in which former subjects negotiated the end of colonialism
Contrairement a un mythe historiographique tenace, l'attitude des colonisateurs francais a l&... more Contrairement a un mythe historiographique tenace, l'attitude des colonisateurs francais a l'egard des amerindiens n'etait en rien empreinte de bienveillance ou de consideration. Les amerindiens etaient regardes comme des "sauvages", socialement, economiquement et culturellement inferieurs aux europeens; comme tels, ils furent d'abord depossedes de leur territoire. L'echec de la politique d'assimilation conduite par les autorites francaises consacra ensuite l'idee d'une nature sauvage immuable que rien ne pouvait reformer. Le recours au prejuge racial pour expliquer et comprendre cet echec favorisa, au XVIIIe siecle, la mise en place de la "naturalisation" des amerindiens pour des raisons politiques. Leur supposee nature fut alors instrumentalisee en vue d'exploitations diverses, dont la premiere etait d'ordre economique et militaire. La defiguration de l'autochtone prit egalement d'autres tournures, en fonction des...
Although it has been commonly thought that in Australia, in contrast to almost all other colonial... more Although it has been commonly thought that in Australia, in contrast to almost all other colonial societies, treaties were spurned and never considered as a serious option in negotiating with indigenous peoples, this chapter shows that, in early colonial Australia, treaties were considered as a serious legal instrument to address the rights of Aboriginal peoples. British authorities had justified their taking of Australia by emphasising the extent of waste lands. Since these waste lands were in need of a taker, the British authorities argued that they could legitimately and legally take them and they consequently based their title on their occupation of the continent. Dispossession amplified British anxieties over the ethics of colonisation. Individuals in Britain and in Australia acknowledged indigenous ownership of the land and they forcefully argued that the rule of law should lead British expansion. Concluding treaties with indigenous peoples was central to the rule of law. These individuals managed to influence public affairs, most notably during the settlement of South Australia where provisions were made to reserve some land for indigenous peoples. Debates held in the 1830s and 1840s about the opportunity to conclude treaties with indigenous peoples did not result in any agreements being formally concluded with Aboriginal peoples. And the only treaty which we know about—the Batman treaty—was a fraudulent document. Although interest in treaties waned by the end of the 1840s, the re-emergence of the idea of treaty in the 1970s shows that the silence which had prevailed earlier did not solve the question of Aboriginal consent to the taking of their land. The treaty debate that has taken place in Australia since then must therefore be placed in the context of a tradition of thinking about treaties that extends back to the early years of the colony of New South Wales
Acknowledgments List of maps and illustrations 1. The Paradox of an Empire by Treaty Saliha Belme... more Acknowledgments List of maps and illustrations 1. The Paradox of an Empire by Treaty Saliha Belmessous 2. 'Love Alone Is Not Enough': Treaties in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Colonial Expansion Arthur Weststeijn 3. To ": Seventeenth-Century Origins of North American Land Cession Treaties Daniel Richter 4. Struggling Over Indians: Territorial Conflict and Alliance-Making in the Heartland of South America (17th-18th Centuries) Tamar Herzog 5. The Acquisition of Aboriginal Land in Canada: The Genealogy of an Ambivalent System (1600-1867) Alain Beaulieu 6. A British Empire by Treaty in Eighteenth Century India Robert Travers 7. Palavers and Treaty-Making in the British Acquisition of the Gold Coast Colony (West Africa) Rebecca Shumway 8. The Tradition of Treaty-Making in Australian History Saliha Belmessous 9. ": M?ori property, settler politics and the M?ori franchise in the 1850s Damen Ward 10. The 'lessons of history': the ideal of treaty in settler colonial societies Paul Patton Contributors Index
Introduction PART I: ASSIMILATION IN EARLY-MODERN FRENCH AMERICA: FROM FRANCISATION TO RACIALISM ... more Introduction PART I: ASSIMILATION IN EARLY-MODERN FRENCH AMERICA: FROM FRANCISATION TO RACIALISM 1. French colonial justifications 2. Francisation as New France's founding project 3. Defining French distinctiveness in seventeenth-century France 4. Implementing francisation 5. The emergence of race in French political imagination 6. Conclusion PART II: ASSIMILATION IN THE NINETEENTH-CENTURY BRITISH EMPIRE: THE RULE OF LAW AS AN ENGINE OF CIVILISATION 1. British colonial justifications 2. The colonial career of Saxe Bannister 3. Bannister's colonial philosophy 4. Bannister's civilising scheme for the Aborigines of the British Empire 5. Introducing the rule of law in the colonies 6. Building an empire by treaty 7. The outcomes of the assimilative project in the second half of the nineteenth century 8. Conclusion PART III: ASSIMILATION AGAINST COLONIALISM: THE STRUGGLE OF THE MUSLIM NATIVES IN FRENCH ALGERIA 1. French conquest of Algeria 2. Assimilation in French political culture 3. Assimilating Algeria to France 4. Assimilating the Muslim natives through the rule of French law 5. Assimilating the natives through education 6. The rise of racial politics 7. Assimilation in post-First World War Algeria 8. Assimilation in Algeria: the indigenous point of view 9. Conclusion CONCLUSION: ASSIMILATION IN POST-COLONIAL SOCIETIES Bibliography
Between 1540 and 1565, the French unsuccessfully attempted to establish colonial settlements in t... more Between 1540 and 1565, the French unsuccessfully attempted to establish colonial settlements in the New World. In Canada, they were defeated by the harshness of winter and the ravages of scurvy; in Brazil, the France Antarctique was destroyed by the Portuguese; in Florida, the French were massacred by the Spaniards. Reflecting on French colonial failures, the humanist essayist Michel de Montaigne famously commented in 1580: ‘I am afraid our eyes may be greater than our bellies, and that we have more curiosity than capacity.’ Quoting Ecclesiastes, he concluded that ‘We embrace all, but we clench nothing but wind.’ Montaigne’s comment summarizes well the early history of French colonization in America. Like the English, France was a latecomer in the appropriation of the American continent. During the sixteenth century, the French Crown kept its eyes fixed on Europe, and more particularly on Italy and the Mediterranean where it expected to satisfy its political and commercial interests. The Valois dynasty had strong territorial ambitions and the Crown sought to extend the royal domain through matrimonial alliance and military conquest, particularly of the Italian territories. French ambitions were thwarted by Spanish claims to universal monarchy, especially after Charles I became emperor in 1520 (becoming then Charles V), and the French Crown eventually came to believe that the possession of parts of the New World would greatly enhance its glory and power, as it had for the Spanish. Glory and enrichment would remain the aims of the colonial effort but were the French worthy of that glory and those riches? Were they in a moral position to deserve them? Did they even have the capacity to acquire them? The colonization of America was enmeshed in ethical debate in France and French observers and officials explained their nation’s achievements and failures at home and overseas in moral terms. The series of religious and civil wars that tore the country in the sixteenth and the first half of the seventeenth century were allegedly a sign of French moral corruption which commentators contrasted to American virtue. They debated whether colonizing America could restore virtue amongst the French people. Whereas some observers
<p>In the mid-seventeenth century, French colonization of Canada led the monarchy to concei... more <p>In the mid-seventeenth century, French colonization of Canada led the monarchy to conceive an ideology of national identity that would allow it to create a colonial society ideal in its beliefs and practices. Because this identity was difficult to define, the contrast with Amerindian mores helped bring out a few supposedly national characteristics. The parallel policy of assimilating Amerindians permitted a limited miscegenation of both peoples. In the late seventeenth century, relations between the metropolis and colonials deteriorated: the emergence of a colonial community different from official desires led the authorities to condemn colonial behavior. In the eighteenth century, these relations worsened: the French accused the Canadians of having become savages, whereas the latter complained about French arrogance and the French inability to protect colonial interests. More than a question of divergent interests, the tension between the Canadians and the French reveals the confrontation of two distinct identities, national identity and colonial identity. </p><p>Au milieu du dix-septième siècle, la colonisation du Canada conduisit la monarchie française à concevoir une idéologie, l'identité nationale, permettant de créer une société coloniale idéale dans ses croyances et ses pratiques. Cette identité étant difficile à définir, le contraste avec les mœurs amérindiennes permit de dégager quelques caractéristiques supposément nationales. La politique parallèle d'assimilation des Amérindiens favorisa un relatif métissage culturel des deux populations. Dès la fin du dix-septième siècle, les relations entre la métropole et les coloniaux se détériorèrent: l'émergence d'une communauté coloniale assez différente des désirs officiels conduisit les autorités à condamner les comportements coloniaux. Au dix-huitième siècle, ces relations s'envenimèrent: les Français accusaient les Canadiens de s'être ensauvagés alors que ces derniers se plaignaient de la morgue de métropolitains incapables de défendre les intérêts coloniaux. Plus qu'une question d'intérêts divergents, la tension entre Canadiens et Français révèle l'affrontement de deux identités distinctes, l'identité nationale et l'identité coloniale. </p>
This article examines the different ways in which the engagement of Muslim political loyalists is... more This article examines the different ways in which the engagement of Muslim political loyalists is represented in the historiography. Confronted with very few archives available to understand why some Muslim Algerians still supported French colonial rule up to its last days, historians have used a materialist lens, supported by gender conventions, to explain the incomprehensible: while the men were self-interested opportunists, the women were naïve and manipulated middle-class ‘évoluées”. The description of their activity in different locations (the men in newspapers’ current pages and in military documents, the women in people magazines) has confirmed that assessment. This article argues that we should consider more critically the archives produced by the French state and medias of the time in order to understand the multiple ways in which former subjects negotiated the end of colonialism
Contrairement a un mythe historiographique tenace, l'attitude des colonisateurs francais a l&... more Contrairement a un mythe historiographique tenace, l'attitude des colonisateurs francais a l'egard des amerindiens n'etait en rien empreinte de bienveillance ou de consideration. Les amerindiens etaient regardes comme des "sauvages", socialement, economiquement et culturellement inferieurs aux europeens; comme tels, ils furent d'abord depossedes de leur territoire. L'echec de la politique d'assimilation conduite par les autorites francaises consacra ensuite l'idee d'une nature sauvage immuable que rien ne pouvait reformer. Le recours au prejuge racial pour expliquer et comprendre cet echec favorisa, au XVIIIe siecle, la mise en place de la "naturalisation" des amerindiens pour des raisons politiques. Leur supposee nature fut alors instrumentalisee en vue d'exploitations diverses, dont la premiere etait d'ordre economique et militaire. La defiguration de l'autochtone prit egalement d'autres tournures, en fonction des...
Although it has been commonly thought that in Australia, in contrast to almost all other colonial... more Although it has been commonly thought that in Australia, in contrast to almost all other colonial societies, treaties were spurned and never considered as a serious option in negotiating with indigenous peoples, this chapter shows that, in early colonial Australia, treaties were considered as a serious legal instrument to address the rights of Aboriginal peoples. British authorities had justified their taking of Australia by emphasising the extent of waste lands. Since these waste lands were in need of a taker, the British authorities argued that they could legitimately and legally take them and they consequently based their title on their occupation of the continent. Dispossession amplified British anxieties over the ethics of colonisation. Individuals in Britain and in Australia acknowledged indigenous ownership of the land and they forcefully argued that the rule of law should lead British expansion. Concluding treaties with indigenous peoples was central to the rule of law. These individuals managed to influence public affairs, most notably during the settlement of South Australia where provisions were made to reserve some land for indigenous peoples. Debates held in the 1830s and 1840s about the opportunity to conclude treaties with indigenous peoples did not result in any agreements being formally concluded with Aboriginal peoples. And the only treaty which we know about—the Batman treaty—was a fraudulent document. Although interest in treaties waned by the end of the 1840s, the re-emergence of the idea of treaty in the 1970s shows that the silence which had prevailed earlier did not solve the question of Aboriginal consent to the taking of their land. The treaty debate that has taken place in Australia since then must therefore be placed in the context of a tradition of thinking about treaties that extends back to the early years of the colony of New South Wales
Acknowledgments List of maps and illustrations 1. The Paradox of an Empire by Treaty Saliha Belme... more Acknowledgments List of maps and illustrations 1. The Paradox of an Empire by Treaty Saliha Belmessous 2. 'Love Alone Is Not Enough': Treaties in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Colonial Expansion Arthur Weststeijn 3. To ": Seventeenth-Century Origins of North American Land Cession Treaties Daniel Richter 4. Struggling Over Indians: Territorial Conflict and Alliance-Making in the Heartland of South America (17th-18th Centuries) Tamar Herzog 5. The Acquisition of Aboriginal Land in Canada: The Genealogy of an Ambivalent System (1600-1867) Alain Beaulieu 6. A British Empire by Treaty in Eighteenth Century India Robert Travers 7. Palavers and Treaty-Making in the British Acquisition of the Gold Coast Colony (West Africa) Rebecca Shumway 8. The Tradition of Treaty-Making in Australian History Saliha Belmessous 9. ": M?ori property, settler politics and the M?ori franchise in the 1850s Damen Ward 10. The 'lessons of history': the ideal of treaty in settler colonial societies Paul Patton Contributors Index
Introduction PART I: ASSIMILATION IN EARLY-MODERN FRENCH AMERICA: FROM FRANCISATION TO RACIALISM ... more Introduction PART I: ASSIMILATION IN EARLY-MODERN FRENCH AMERICA: FROM FRANCISATION TO RACIALISM 1. French colonial justifications 2. Francisation as New France's founding project 3. Defining French distinctiveness in seventeenth-century France 4. Implementing francisation 5. The emergence of race in French political imagination 6. Conclusion PART II: ASSIMILATION IN THE NINETEENTH-CENTURY BRITISH EMPIRE: THE RULE OF LAW AS AN ENGINE OF CIVILISATION 1. British colonial justifications 2. The colonial career of Saxe Bannister 3. Bannister's colonial philosophy 4. Bannister's civilising scheme for the Aborigines of the British Empire 5. Introducing the rule of law in the colonies 6. Building an empire by treaty 7. The outcomes of the assimilative project in the second half of the nineteenth century 8. Conclusion PART III: ASSIMILATION AGAINST COLONIALISM: THE STRUGGLE OF THE MUSLIM NATIVES IN FRENCH ALGERIA 1. French conquest of Algeria 2. Assimilation in French political culture 3. Assimilating Algeria to France 4. Assimilating the Muslim natives through the rule of French law 5. Assimilating the natives through education 6. The rise of racial politics 7. Assimilation in post-First World War Algeria 8. Assimilation in Algeria: the indigenous point of view 9. Conclusion CONCLUSION: ASSIMILATION IN POST-COLONIAL SOCIETIES Bibliography
Between 1540 and 1565, the French unsuccessfully attempted to establish colonial settlements in t... more Between 1540 and 1565, the French unsuccessfully attempted to establish colonial settlements in the New World. In Canada, they were defeated by the harshness of winter and the ravages of scurvy; in Brazil, the France Antarctique was destroyed by the Portuguese; in Florida, the French were massacred by the Spaniards. Reflecting on French colonial failures, the humanist essayist Michel de Montaigne famously commented in 1580: ‘I am afraid our eyes may be greater than our bellies, and that we have more curiosity than capacity.’ Quoting Ecclesiastes, he concluded that ‘We embrace all, but we clench nothing but wind.’ Montaigne’s comment summarizes well the early history of French colonization in America. Like the English, France was a latecomer in the appropriation of the American continent. During the sixteenth century, the French Crown kept its eyes fixed on Europe, and more particularly on Italy and the Mediterranean where it expected to satisfy its political and commercial interests. The Valois dynasty had strong territorial ambitions and the Crown sought to extend the royal domain through matrimonial alliance and military conquest, particularly of the Italian territories. French ambitions were thwarted by Spanish claims to universal monarchy, especially after Charles I became emperor in 1520 (becoming then Charles V), and the French Crown eventually came to believe that the possession of parts of the New World would greatly enhance its glory and power, as it had for the Spanish. Glory and enrichment would remain the aims of the colonial effort but were the French worthy of that glory and those riches? Were they in a moral position to deserve them? Did they even have the capacity to acquire them? The colonization of America was enmeshed in ethical debate in France and French observers and officials explained their nation’s achievements and failures at home and overseas in moral terms. The series of religious and civil wars that tore the country in the sixteenth and the first half of the seventeenth century were allegedly a sign of French moral corruption which commentators contrasted to American virtue. They debated whether colonizing America could restore virtue amongst the French people. Whereas some observers
<p>In the mid-seventeenth century, French colonization of Canada led the monarchy to concei... more <p>In the mid-seventeenth century, French colonization of Canada led the monarchy to conceive an ideology of national identity that would allow it to create a colonial society ideal in its beliefs and practices. Because this identity was difficult to define, the contrast with Amerindian mores helped bring out a few supposedly national characteristics. The parallel policy of assimilating Amerindians permitted a limited miscegenation of both peoples. In the late seventeenth century, relations between the metropolis and colonials deteriorated: the emergence of a colonial community different from official desires led the authorities to condemn colonial behavior. In the eighteenth century, these relations worsened: the French accused the Canadians of having become savages, whereas the latter complained about French arrogance and the French inability to protect colonial interests. More than a question of divergent interests, the tension between the Canadians and the French reveals the confrontation of two distinct identities, national identity and colonial identity. </p><p>Au milieu du dix-septième siècle, la colonisation du Canada conduisit la monarchie française à concevoir une idéologie, l'identité nationale, permettant de créer une société coloniale idéale dans ses croyances et ses pratiques. Cette identité étant difficile à définir, le contraste avec les mœurs amérindiennes permit de dégager quelques caractéristiques supposément nationales. La politique parallèle d'assimilation des Amérindiens favorisa un relatif métissage culturel des deux populations. Dès la fin du dix-septième siècle, les relations entre la métropole et les coloniaux se détériorèrent: l'émergence d'une communauté coloniale assez différente des désirs officiels conduisit les autorités à condamner les comportements coloniaux. Au dix-huitième siècle, ces relations s'envenimèrent: les Français accusaient les Canadiens de s'être ensauvagés alors que ces derniers se plaignaient de la morgue de métropolitains incapables de défendre les intérêts coloniaux. Plus qu'une question d'intérêts divergents, la tension entre Canadiens et Français révèle l'affrontement de deux identités distinctes, l'identité nationale et l'identité coloniale. </p>
Uploads