Lount and Matthews Commemoration Salon

      No Comments on Lount and Matthews Commemoration Salon
A 19th-century artist's rendering of the public hangings of Lount and Matthews, Toronto, April 12, 1838 (public domain).

A 19th-century artist’s rendering of the public hangings of Lount and Matthews, Toronto, April 12, 1838 (public domain).

by Ashok Charles and Randall White

This coming Friday, April 12, 2013 will mark the 175th anniversary of the hanging of Samuel Lount and Peter Matthews in what is now downtown Toronto, for their roles in the Upper Canada Rebellion of 1837.

The rebellion was a reaction to the unresponsiveness of the colonial oligarchy of the day to demands for democratic reform (or what the appointed lieutenant governor called “soiling the empire by the introduction of democracy”). The events in Upper Canada or present-day Ontario paralleled a more aggressive rising in predominantly French-speaking Lower Canada, or present-day Quebec.

Government forces were able to suppress the Upper Canada Rebellion. But popular objections to the autocratic rule of the “Family Compact” oligarchy remained. The authorities saw the public execution of Lount and Matthews as a warning and a deterrent to further acts of dissent. The large crowd which assembled on the morning of the hanging was testament to the public stature of Lount and Matthews. One report claimed that a petition seeking clemency for the men bore 30,000 signatures. Continue reading →

Historical Maps of Toronto – a collection of maps to amuse, delight and inform

      8 Comments on Historical Maps of Toronto – a collection of maps to amuse, delight and inform

torontomapwebsiteBy Nathan Ng

I recently launched Historical Maps of Toronto, featuring simple and free access to a selection of notable maps of my fair city.

If you’ve ever wondered what ‘Muddy York’ looked like 200 years ago, and then wanted to trace the city’s development over the following century, this collection ought to pique your interest.

Jim Clifford from ActiveHistory.ca asked me to take a step back and explain why I invested the time and effort to put it all together. What made it so important to share these dusty old maps?

The Simple Answer
The maps deserve our attention. They allow us to imagine the past in vivid detail — and they also provide us with valuable insight into the mind-set of the map-makers themselves. My hope is that, particularly for those of us who aren’t historians or academics, the site will provide a useful and convenient entry point for discovery and further investigation into our city’s humble beginnings and subsequent evolution.

Continue reading →

Concert tonight: “What is Toronto?”

      No Comments on Concert tonight: “What is Toronto?”

april5BHow might historical themes be translated into musical composition? A group of musicians will engage with this question tonight as part of “What is Toronto?” This concert will explore the iconic events, places, and unique qualities that define perceptions of Canada’s largest city, both past and present.

The event is organized by Spectrum, a group of Canadian composers who create and present a contemporary hybrid of jazz and classical music. They strive to create innovative, genre-defying themed concerts which explore intersections between subcultures in Canada.

The performance will feature a pre-concert chat with Artistic Associate and composer Matt Roberts, who conceived the concert, Artistic Director and composer Ben Dietschi, and Jay Young, a historian of Toronto and co-editor of ActiveHistory.ca.   Before each piece, Jay will discuss the inspiration of each piece with its composer and how they went about turning fragments and myths of the past into sound.

The concert will be held tonight at The Al Green Theatre, starting at 7:30pm. For more information on the concert, click here.

“Leveraging the Synergies” or a return to the past?: The decision to do away with CIDA

      No Comments on “Leveraging the Synergies” or a return to the past?: The decision to do away with CIDA
Monument to Canadian Aid Workers. Photograph: Mike Gifford. Wikipedia Commons.

Monument to Canadian Aid Workers. Photograph: Mike Gifford. Wikipedia Commons.

By Jill Campbell-Miller

On March 21st, the Canadian government released the 2013 federal budget and in a paragraph did away with the 45-year-old Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA).  The budget announced that CIDA would be amalgamated with the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) to become the newly-renamed Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development.  The budget justified the decision by stating that “The Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development will leverage the synergies resulting from the amalgamation to maximize the effectiveness of resources available to deliver development and humanitarian assistance.”[i] Despite its significance, however, the announcement failed to make it into the text of finance minister Jim Flaherty’s budget speech.

This decision is consistent with the direction of the Harper government’s official development assistance (ODA) policy, and is informed by its previous decision in 2006 to merge foreign affairs and trade. That change, in their words, “enhanced policy coherence across our foreign and trade objectives …. There are similar opportunities for synergies with our development assistance.”[ii]  The government sees the absorption of CIDA into DFAIT as a natural progression to bring Canadian foreign, trade, and development policy into line, with the final objective being to strengthen its business orientation.

Aid has always been a political football – a convenient way to express political decisions in a feel-good way. The current government has made no apologies for their approach.  It draws from a conservative philosophy that sees the private sector as a potential resource for innovation in development.  It also stems from a very concrete interest in promoting Canadian business interests in the developing world, particularly in Latin America.   In November 2012, the House of Commons released a report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, “Driving Inclusive Economic Growth: The Role of the Private Sector in International Development.”  In March the minister for CIDA, Julian Fantino, and the World Economic Forum co-hosted a conference entitled “Maximizing the Value of Extractives for Development.” Continue reading →

History Slam Episode Sixteen: Inclusive Histories and Katrina Srigley

      No Comments on History Slam Episode Sixteen: Inclusive Histories and Katrina Srigley

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

By Sean Graham

During the CHA Annual Meeting last year in Waterloo, I went to the book launch for Finding a Way to the Heart: Feminist Writings on Aboriginal and Women’s History in Canada, during which Sylvia Van Kirk addressed the crowd. The one thing that really stuck me was how passionately she spoke of an inclusive history, one that featured the contributions of everyone. This was interesting to me because there is a perception – at least among many of the men who I knew in undergrad (my experience in a women’s history course didn’t exactly challenge that perception) – that women’s history isn’t a welcoming place to men. Unfair as it was, that mindset was common.

In this episode of the History Slam I talk with Katrina Srigley of Nipissing University about the state of women’s history, the legacy of Sylvia Van Kirk, and her own work on women during the Depression. Given my limited background in women’s and gender history, it was really interesting to sit down and discuss the issues and learn about growth of the discipline. We also touch on the perception of women’s history being hostile to men and discuss the pedagogical challenge it presents in a classroom setting.

The interview took place in North Bay on March 22 when I was lucky enough to be back in the city as part of the History Department Lecture Series at Nipissing. It was a thrill to be there and I want to thank Professors Katrina Srigley, Derek Neal, Anne Clendinning, and Robin Gendron for making the trip possible.

Sean Graham is a doctoral candidate at the University of Ottawa where he is currently working on a project that examines the early years of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. He has previously studied at Nipissing University, the University of the West Indies, and the University of Regina and like any red-blooded Canadian his ultimate dream is to be a curling champion while living on a diet of beer and poutine.

A building by any other name: The politics of renaming and commemoration

      2 Comments on A building by any other name: The politics of renaming and commemoration
Lester B. Pearson Building, Ottawa. Photo: “Ottawa Canada May 2010 – Sussex Drive East 21” by Douglas Sprott. Flickr Creative Commons.

Lester B. Pearson Building, Ottawa. Photo: “Ottawa Canada May 2010 – Sussex Drive East 21” by Douglas Sprott. Flickr Creative Commons.

By Kaitlin Wainwright

Recently, I was lamenting the challenges historians face in the form of changing names of various government organizations in Canada: The Canada Food Board, the Health League of Canada, and Board of Broadcast Governors are now the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, the Canadian Public Health Association, and the CRTC respectively. Researching the past often means paying attention to changes in name and in meaning. It is almost like stepping into a foreign country.

Renaming government organizations and buildings to fulfill a change in mandate – be it political or administrative – is not a new trend, though the current government seems to be doing more of it with less resistance from Canadians. The Toronto Star recently published an article discussing the Government of Canada’s decision to rename various government offices in Ontario and Quebec as part of the efforts to commemorate the bicentennial of the War of 1812. Continue reading →

Canada and the Right to Food

      No Comments on Canada and the Right to Food
Olivier de Schutter

Olivier de Schutter

By David Webster

“More lies from Amnesty International!” screamed a headline in a Kenyan newspaper, back in the 1990s. When assailed for their human rights records, the unimaginative response of many governments has been to attack the messenger. If Amnesty International criticizes a repressive regime, the regime tends to shout back that Amnesty is being unfair, dishonest, and even imperialist.

That’s a pattern now being followed by a regime that doesn’t like to think of itself as repressive: the government of Canada.

Ottawa failed in its bid to win a UN Security Council seat in 2010, mostly through its own poor planning and clumsy lurches away from rights-promoting policies. Ever since then, the Harper government has taken a perverse pleasure in attacking the United Nations as a dictators’ club at worst, a gang of dictator-coddlers at best.

So it was odd to see the vitriol hurled at the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Olivier de Schutter, when he visited Canada last year as part of his normal duties. On March 4, de Schutter released his report on Canada as part of this year’s UN Human Rights Council preparations. The Canadian government response, once again, was to attack the messenger and deny that Canada had anything to learn on human rights. In other words, the response was much the same as the response normally given by repressive regimes, from Syria to Cuba. Continue reading →

The 300th Anniversary of the Treaty of Utrecht and the Generosity of Governments

      1 Comment on The 300th Anniversary of the Treaty of Utrecht and the Generosity of Governments

By Gregory Kennedy

I know what you are thinking.  Not another commemoration of some dusty old treaty or some gruesome colonial war!  Still, since both Thomas Mulcair and Thomas Peace called our attention to the 250th Anniversary of the Royal Proclamation of 1763 , it seems only fair that the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713 should get its due.  Continue reading →

Strangely ahistoric sensibilities at the American Museum of Natural History

      3 Comments on Strangely ahistoric sensibilities at the American Museum of Natural History

Design of the American Museum of Natural history, 1911

By Jon Weier

When you visit New York City in late January you find yourself avoiding some of the activities that would characterize a spring or summer visit.  Strolls in Central Park, though beautiful, lose some of their allure on a windy and cold afternoon.  Walking from Midtown to the Lower East Side for dinner is no longer worth the effort.  And visiting the Saturday morning farmer’s market at Union Square takes commitment.  What a cold Saturday afternoon does lend itself to, especially for historians like myself, is visiting the American Museum of Natural History.  Lucky for me, my wife agreed to go with me.

My favourite museums had always been ones which were willing to use different materials and tools, and draw from a broad variety of disciplines to tell the history of a country, a region, a people, or a theme.  Three museums that come to mind are the Manitoba Museum in Winnipeg, the Royal British Columbia Museum in Victoria and the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa, all of which tell interesting and complicated histories well, while respecting those whose history they explore.  While I wasn’t expecting that exact experience at the American Museum of Natural History, I was expecting something more than the very simplistic, exploitative and static history that we encountered. Continue reading →

History Wars: Terms of debate

      7 Comments on History Wars: Terms of debate

By Thomas Peace

Last month, Terry Glavin wrote a syndicated op-ed piece that appeared in The Ottawa Citizen and Vancouver’s The Province, delivering a strongly worded dismissal of the historical profession in Canada. Historians and others have responded elsewhere to his indictment of the profession (see here, here and here). Today, I want to respond to the broader ideas that inform his argument.

Glavin’s essay mostly parrots a series of arguments that have been lobbed at historians since the profession began to change its focus in the 1970s and 1980s. These ideas are quite resilient. Despite their regular application (mostly in the media), his accusations are neither fair nor reflective of current historical practice and broader professional interpretations of Canada’s past. More importantly, their use is a distraction from the key issues at stake. Continue reading →