From: The Encyclopedia of Canada's Peoples/Aboriginals: Algonquians/ Eastern Woodlands/Janet E Chute
In the past each Algonquian-speaking group maintained its ethnic boundaries by upholding and preserving cultural markers distinct to its own people. Seasonal rituals and various religious rites enabled such markers to retain a high profile over time within the native community.
Traditionally, stable relations obtained among neighbouring native entities as long as alliances and common interests bound groups together. While most general history texts present the Iroquois as the enemies of the Algonquian-speakers, the picture is actually much more complex. The Ojibwa and Ottawa fought as frequently with the Dakota Sioux to the west of them and with the Iroquois to the east. Over time, wars occurred in the northeast among many different linguistic groups; even as late as the mid-eighteenth century, conflicts among neighbouring Algonquian-speaking groups were fairly common. And entities that regarded each other as enemies one year might, through a new series of alliances, become comrades the next, regardless of either group’s relations with external European interests. In the Saco War of 1607, the Mi’kmaq and Malecite fought together against Algonquian-speaking groups along the northern New England coast. Around 1755, however, the Mi’kmaq and Malecite were at war with one another, even though both nations were allies of France.
Two things are clear: similar dealings with the same European power did not necessarily foster a strong community of interest among native groups so engaged, and disagreements within groups concerning which European power to support at any given time did not cause irreparable damage to long-term group cohesiveness. Most of the Algonquian-speakers remained attached to the French during the era of the colonial wars, although this was not true for the Penobscot of Maine, who wavered in their loyalty to France. By the 1750s, Penobscot vacillation, as well as reversals in French fortunes in general, had also undermined Mi’kmaq confidence in their French allies. In consequence, several Mi’kmaq groups along the southwestern shore of Nova Scotia came to favour the British, and one Mi’kmaq chief in particular, Penall Argomartin of Gold River, is even said to have guided British troops to Quebec.
Events during the American Revolution and the War of 1812 indicated a much changed state of affairs, however, as many Ojibwa, Ottawa, and Potawatomi sided with the British against the Americans, while many Mi’kmaq and Malecite, still distrustful of the British, chose to remain neutral. In instances where the Mi’kmaq favoured active support over neutrality, as occurred around Pictou and Chignecto in Nova Scotia, bands upheld the American cause.
Before the mid-nineteenth century, certain members of native and non-native communities might interact together in the fur trade, in warfare, and in matters especially involving guiding and other related bush skills. Afterwards, however, racism became a potent force guiding both public and private relationships between natives and non-natives. It was not until the 1960s that native organizations grew strong enough to raise the awareness of all sectors of mainstream society to the insidious consequences of systemic racism on interracial relations. And, despite such efforts, a legacy of racism and paternalism still lingers.
To eradicate what were viewed as the worst abuses of paternalism, the criteria governing band membership, as noted above, were amended by Bill C-31 to include large numbers of women who formerly had lost their Indian status through marriage to non-natives. Yet such a decision has not been without its consequences. In the wake of Bill C-31, the population of many reserve communities has expanded rapidly; moreover, the native population as a whole is quite young and expected to grow as families have children. In response, band governments and regional organizations have redoubled efforts to prepare for the future by settling land-claims issues and matters regarding resource rights and management, as well as by encouraging economic development. Yet band councils also retain principal control over band enrolment and have been known to obstruct participation of a “Bill-C-31 person” in a community, even if the individual concerned has kin living on the reserve.
Where powerful families become self-sustaining politically over time, by gaining votes from their numerous kin in band council elections, they essentially become “family compacts.” Even where councils work hard for programs to benefit their people, when caught between pressing community demands and what often seems a lethargic government bureaucracy, temptation arises for leadership to settle for what benefits they can get for their relatives. Concerns over the evils of nepotism has raised fears in some communities that devolution of too much power too quickly to band councils in the name of native self-determination may raise more problems on reserves than it solves. Alternative arguments hold that the federal government must wait until indigenous political leaders make substantial changes at the regional and national levels before burdening local governments with responsibilities they may not be able to handle either effectively or fairly. As these broader reforms occur, communities may not be so faction-ridden as many are at present.
Aside from personal commitment through kin ties and cultural roots, Eastern Woodland Algonquian youth evince a greater common awareness than in years past of treaty and aboriginal rights, as well as losses incurred through mainstream society’s negligence in recognizing and protecting such rights. Resentment, however, is tempered by hope for the rectification of these wrongs. Ambivalence towards Indian identity is beginning to fade as communities display pride in their cultural past and come to the realization that their social, economic, and political problems, while still extremely serious, are being addressed by their own people. Individuals of all ages and both sexes are acting together to present mainstream society with a range of diverse images to counter romantic, outmoded, or negative stereotypes. In response, broader Canadian society is beginning to learn that all natives, whatever their differences, not only have much in common culturally but share the same goals and aspirations for the future.
