Talk:French and Iroquois Wars

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Additional information and associated task forces:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
	Canadian military history task force
	French military history task force
Associated task forces (periods and conflicts):
	Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500–c. 1792)

	This article is part of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which collaborates on Native American, First Nations, Inuit, Métis and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet been rated on the assessment scale.
Suggested article edit guidelines: To help us prioritise our workload, and in readiness for Wikipedia:1.0, we need to assess our articles for Quality. If this article is Unassessed, please assess it. See the Article Classification for instructions. If you disagree with a rating, you can change it or discuss it at Article Classification. Before assessing this article, be sure to check the existing Archive of assessments made under the previous system (used until July 2006), and feel free to help in migrating the existing comments besides from adding your own evaluation. After assessing this article's quality, please make sure it to add it to the Lists at Article Classification, following the grading scheme detailed there.
Please rate this article and leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

[edit] 1

I've rewritten/expanded the article a bit. I actually wrote an entire article on the "Beaver Wars" before realizing this article existed, and have attempted to splice them together. The existing article was in great depth about the French-Canadian theater of the conflict but did not mention the larger context of Iroquois expansion, nor did it mention the fur trade at all, which was at the root of much of the conflict. It could still use some more rounding out about the direct conflict between the Iroquois and Algonquins in the west. -- Decumanus 18:47, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Go ahead and incorporate all that you know. If you have more precise dates, include them. I found only two issues after reading over quickly: we should be saying Algonquian speaking peoples not algonquin and the Hurons spoke an Iroquoian language, not an Algonquian language. -- Mathieugp 21:46, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Oh, yes you're right. I've been linking to Algonquin language anyway, without knowing it redirected "Algonquian". A more accurate term, of course. I didn't realize that about the Hurons, but I see you're right. Like the Erie, then were Iroquoian-speaking but not part of the Confederation. -- Decumanus 23:28, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Title

I don't want to nitpick, but doesn't the title oversell the French involvement in these conflicts at the expense of the Huron, Algonkin, and other allies--not to mention the Mahican or Lenape. I know "French and Iroquois Wars" is more fashionable than Beaver Wars among scholars of Iroquois history these days, but the Iroquois were certainly not the only Native nation involved. Leo1410 01:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

"Beaver Wars" also gets about 18,800 ghits, while "French and Iroquois Wars" gets 3,710, many of them evidently Wikipedia mirrors. It's also the name I've always seen when reading about Anishinaabe/Ojibwe history. I wasn't aware the term "French and Iroqois Wars" was preferred among scholars of Iroquois history, but if it's a relatively recent term, and "Beaver Wars" is more common, and writings not by Iroquoian historians use "Beaver Wars", it seems to me that's probably the better term for the article. --Miskwito 23:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Are the "French and Iroquois War" and the "Beaver War" the same war? While there is a huge overlap, they may not be identical. For example, Jennings says that the "Beaver Wars" began in 1638 and that the Champlain's attacks in the 1610's are not part of the Beaver Wars. BradMajors (talk) 23:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Still, it's hard to justify the title unless it has a narrow focus on battles between French and Iroquois forces. I'm not sure such an article would be worthwhile taken out of the context of the larger series of conflicts involving the Cree, Innu, Lenape, Mahican, Susquahannock, Algonkin, Odawa, Nipissing, Potawatomi, Ojibwe, Fox, Sauk, Kickapoo, Miami, Illinois, Shawnee, Huron, Tobacco, Neutral, Erie, Dutch, and British nations to name some (but not all of the parties involved). Currently, the title mentions New France (one nation) and Iroquois (5 later 6 nations) and leaves out all the rest. Granted, some of those are small nations, but some aren't. The Anishinabek are a larger group than the 6 Nations. It's hard to leave the Huron-Petun Confederacy out too given their significant role in the story. I've seen the argument that "French" and "Iroquois" are categories that include all the other nations. I don' buy it. Can you really say that the Odawa, Fox, and Illinois were part of some monolithic entity called "French." Yes, the colonial governor may have wished he could call all the shots from Quebec, but the truth is the French role was largely limited and that of a mediator mostly against the shared threat. The bottom line is, when Champlain and his tiny group of men went out in 1610, they did not control the mission and were taking part in a war that had already been goin for 30+ years. The alliances were shifting and were not centrally controlled. Nations attacked or were attacked during these wars with little or no French involvement. "Beaver Wars" has its problems (they weren't all about beavers), but it's still a more NPOV title. Leo1410 (talk) 07:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

What is the scope of this article? Is it wars which somehow involve the French and/or Iroquois before 1701? Does it include wars between Iroquois and Huron before 1601? Does it include wars between Huron and Iroquois which had no French involvement? Does it include wars between the Mohawk and Mahican? etc. BradMajors (talk) 08:18, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Beaver Wars" outdated?

Dr. Jose Brandao presents a very thorough argument against the common conception of the French Iroquois Wars as motivated exclusively or primarily by the fur trade: "Your Fyre Shall Burn No More": Iroquois Policy Towards New France and Its Native Allies to 1701 (University of Nebraska Press, 1997; Paperback edition, 2000). There is good reason to believe, instead, that Iroquois hostility was a reaction to the encroaching French culture. Their attempt to stamp out the "fyre" of expanding French influence involved not only attacks against the French, but also against those Indian groups allied with the French.

The Beaver Wars interpretation was originally inspired by an ethnocentric view of Indian policy which assumed that savage greed motivated any Indian policy. The title of "Beaver Wars" is both inaccurate and disparaging.

I just wanted to put this out there.

71.120.130.214 04:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Part of the problem is giving a single name for multiple wars over one hundred years between multiple parties which sometimes involved beavers and sometimes not. BradMajors (talk) 05:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)