Chapter 5: Mi’kmaq Historians ~ Mi’kmaq Social Values and Economy ~ Treaties ~ Royal Proclamation Act of 1763 ~ Indian Act of 1876

Introduction

Continuing with our historical accounts, we now shift to more of a regional perspective — to Mi’kmak’i, the land of the L’nu or Mi’kmaq peoples. I have had the great privilege and honour to have personally met all four of the Mi’kmaq historians who I would like to acknowledge here for their insightful knowledge respecting the Mi’kmaq peoples. There are, no doubt, other Mi’kmaq historians who have made contributions to the field, and I hope that I will be introduced to their works in time.

Mi’kmaq Historians: S. Augustine, P. Augustine, Paul, and Sark

The four Mi’kmaq Elders, historians, and scholars and their prominent historical works from which I have drawn local and regional knowledge are:

Dr. Stephen J. Augustine, Executive Director of the Marshall Institute and the former Associate Vice-President of Indigenous Affairs and Dean at Unama’ki College, Cape Breton University, Nova Scotia.

Dr. Augustine is a Hereditary Chief on the Mi’kmaq Grand Council; previously, he was the Curator of Ethnology for Eastern Maritimes at the Canadian Museum of Civilization in Gatineau/Ottawa. He holds a Masters degree in Canadian Studies from Carleton University, focusing on traditional knowledge curriculum development in the context of the education system; and he holds a Bachelor of Arts in Anthropology and Political Science from St. Thomas University. Stephen was recently appointed to the Order of Canada, C.M., for advancing Mi’kmaq studies and for sharing his scholarly expertise and traditional knowledge with private and public organizations across Canada. In 2022, Stephen was awarded an Honorary doctor of letters from the University of New Brunswick (University of Cape Breton Website, 2024).

I first met Stephen in 2005 at the Canadian Museum of Civilization where he was curator, and later, we, along with another academic colleague, collaborated on a 2017 presentation at the Atlantic Region Philosophy Association Annual Conference in Halifax, N.S. at Saint Mary’s University. I have referenced some of his works in this OER already (see Chapter 1, Sacred Smudging Ceremony, and Chapter 2, Special Topic relating to Life in the Beginning).

Published Works

Augustine, S. J. (2005). Mi’kmaq and Maliseet cultural ancestral material: National collections from the Canadian Museum of Civilization. University of Ottawa Press.

Root, E., Augustine, S., Snow, K., & Doucette, M. (2019). Evidence of Co-Learning through a Relational Pedagogy: Indigenizing the Curriculum through MIKM 2701. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(1), n1.

Dr. Patrick J. Augustine, Assistant Professor (Elder), Faculty of Indigenous Knowledge, Education, Research, and Applied Studies, University of Prince Edward Island.

Dr. Augustine is a Mikmaw from Elsipogtog First Nation. His doctoral research was on the dispossession of the Mi’kmaq from their traditional district of Sikniktuk, often called Chignecto. He wrote about his First Nation’s relationship to their traditional lands as a determinant of health. Patrick’s maternal ancestry — Simon, Levi, and Augustine Families — are from the Sikniktuk district in Southeastern New Brunswick. His paternal ancestry — Augustine, Thomas, Bernard, and Paul Families — are also from Sikniktuk and Epikwitk aq Piktuk districts of Prince Edward Island and the Northern Shore of Nova Scotia.

Dr. Augustine’s academic research centers on the supplementary texts to treaty negotiations, examining the spirit and intent of the Maritime Treaties between the Wabanaki and the British Crown (University of Prince Edward Island).

I have known Patrick for about 20 years, and, although I am much older than him, I consider him my ‘Elder.’ He has taught me so much over the years, and it was a great honour when Patrick and I became colleagues in the newly created Faculty of IKERAS in 2022. There is a wealth of historical information contained in Dr. Augustine’s doctoral and graduate studies dissertations: links are provided for each of his works. I also enjoyed collaborating with Patrick on a number of projects over the years, and, as was always the case, he shared his traditional knowledges with pride. Figure 21 presents two wonderful photos of Patrick and his traditional regalia, which he would wear on special occasions like a Maw’omi, gathering of the people, or Powwow.

Figure 21

Elder Patrick Augustine displaying his traditional regalia

Published Works

Augustine, P. (2021). The Dispossession of the Míkmaq Indians from Chignecto to Elsipogtog: A Case Study Analysis of the Health Determinants of the Physical Environment (Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University). https://repository.library.carleton.ca/concern/etds/2j62s5711

Augustine, P. J. (2010). The Significance of Place in Textual and Graphical Representation: The Mi’kmaq on Lennox Island, Prince Edward Island, and the Penobscot on Indian Island, Maine. Charlottetown, PEI: University of Prince Edward Island. https://islandscholar.ca/islandora/object/ir%3A21763/datastream/PDF/view

Dr. Daniel N. Paul

“Daniel N. Paul was born in 1938 on the Indian Brook Reserve, Nova Scotia, and resided in Halifax with his wife, Patricia. Paul, a freelance lecturer and journalist, was an ardent activist for human rights. He was a former justice of the peace and a former member of the NS Police Commission and had served on several other provincial commissions, including the Human Rights Commission and the Nova Scotia Department of Justice’s Court Re-structuring Task Force. He holds, among many awards, honorary degrees from the University of Sainte Anne and Dalhousie University and is a member of both the Order of Canada and the Order of Nova Scotia. Previously, Paul was employed by the Department of Indian Affairs and was the founding executive director of the Confederacy of Mainland Mi’kmaq (CMM). His writing career includes a novel, Chief Lightning Bolt, several booklets, magazine articles, hundreds of newspaper columns, chapters for a dozen or so edited books” (Fernwood Publishing, 2024).

“Born in a log cabin during a raging blizzard on Indian Brook Reserve in 1938, Mi’kmaw elder Daniel N. Paul rose to the top of a Canadian society that denied his people’s civilization.”

When he was named to the Order of Canada, his citation called him a “powerful and passionate advocate for social justice and the eradication of racial discrimination.” His Order of Nova Scotia honour said he “gives a voice to his people by revealing a past that the standard histories have chosen to ignore.”

“But long before the acclaim, there was the Indian Agent denying food to his begging mother. There was the education system that taught him his people were savages. There was the Department of Indian Affairs that frustrated his work to bring justice to his people. His landmark book We Were Not the Savages exposed the brutalities of the collision between European and Native American civilizations from a Mi’kmaq perspective. The book sold tens of thousands of copies around the world and inspired others to learn history from an indigenous point of view” (Tattrie, 2017 from Daniel Paul: Mi’kmaw Elder. Lawrencetown Beach, NS: Pottersfield Press, back cover).

I met Daniel Paul in 2002 when he came to Prince Edward Island to promote his critically acclaimed book, We Were Not the Savages. I still have the signed copy and draw heavily on its detailed content in several of my Indigenous-focused courses including IKE-1040: Indigenous Teachings of Turtle Island. We will review his discussion on Mi’kmaq social values and economy in this chapter. Sadly, Dr. Paul passed into the spirit world in June 2022.

Published Works

Paul, D. N. (2022). We Were Not the Savages, First Nations History: Collision Between European and Native American Civilizations. (4th ed.). Fernwood publishing.

Also see http://www.danielnpaul.com/.

Dr. John Joe Sark

I provide the following special article in relation to John Joe Sark, which highlights not only my personal connection to him, but also the deep loss that the University felt on his passing in January 2023.

“The University community was deeply saddened to learn of the passing of Keptin John Joe Sark, LLD, on January 8. He was the first Mi’kmaq graduate student from the University of Prince Edward Island with a BA in Political Science (1979), and in 2005 was the first Mi’kmaq to be awarded an honorary Doctor of Laws. A spiritual leader and Keptin of the Mi’kmaq Grand Council, Dr. Sark remained committed to UPEI and was involved in many ways over the years.

In a message to students, faculty, and staff, Dr. Greg Keefe, UPEI President and Vice-Chancellor (interim) said, ‘The passing of UPEI alumnus and honorary degree recipient, Keptin John Joe Sark, has touched many in Epekwitk, Mi’kmaki, Turtle Island, and beyond. On behalf of the entire University community, I extend my deepest condolences to his family, friends, and colleagues, especially those here at UPEI.’

The members of the Faculty of Indigenous Knowledge, Education, Research, and Applied Studies (IKERAS) were especially saddened to learn of Dr. Sark’s passing. Interim Dean Dr. Gary Evans indicated that they had been engaged with him very recently on potential initiatives, including discussions about him being a guest lecturer for the faculty.

‘It was with sad hearts that the Faculty of Indigenous Knowledge, Education, Research, and Applied Studies pay tribute to Dr. Sark,’ said Dr. Evans. ‘John Joe had a keen interest in guest lecturing given his breadth of cultural knowledge in many fields. It was his drive and tireless work that defined him. He was a defender of Treaty Rights, social justice activist, and a true ambassador for Truth and Reconciliation long before it was introduced to the Canadian public.’

David Varis, IKERAS assistant professor, recalls meeting Dr. Sark. ‘I remember well the first time getting to know Dr. Sark. It was when I took my summer Aboriginal Contemporary Issues and Perspectives class to his home in Johnston’s River to experience a sacred sharing circle. John Joe, as he was known, welcomed us warmly and we just chatted. It was a nice way to begin as any apprehensiveness students may have had melted away instantaneously as John Joe simply put them at ease. We then went onto his well-cared property, which overlooked the river. He talked about the traditions as we walked toward his sweat lodge, and then the birchbark wigwam (Mi’kmaq structure used for shelter and living), where he conducted a sacred sharing circle for the class. For quite a few summers I took students there, and no one was disappointed. We all got to know John Joe well, and that infectious laugh, sharp wit, and the teachings remain as vivid today as they did many years ago.’

Varis also recounted fondly going to the ceremony in 2005 when John Joe received his honorary Doctor of Laws degree. He was with family that day, his own and the University community; he remained committed to both right up until his passing, stated Varis. ‘He personified commitment to his peoples, principles of justice, and teaching others. His spirit will be with us forever through his lifelong work’” (University of Prince Edward Island, 2023).

I will always remember John Joe and the teachings he gave my students when visiting him at his home (see Figure 22).

Figure 22

John Joe Sark and UPEI Summer Class

Published Works

Sark, J. J. (1988). Micmac Legends of Prince Edward Island. Lennox Island Band Council/Ragweed, Prince Edward Island.

Sark, J. J., Barash, R. L., Marlor, C. P., & Christmas, D. (Eds.). (2000). Mi’kmaq and the Crown: understanding treaties in Maritime Canadian history: with special reference to Prince Edward Island (First edition-June 2000.). Sark.

Sark, J. J. (2022). Epekwitk: Stories and Histories of the Mi’kmaq Nation. Charlottetown, PEI: Island Studies Press.

Dr. Sark’s work around Treaties is well-documented, and it will be examined after we look first at Daniel N. Paul’s work and what life was like for the Mi’kmaq peoples prior to European contact.

Mi’kmaq Social Values and Economy

What did you take away from the chapter reading, “Mi’kmaq Social Values and Economy,” by Daniel N. Paul (2000)?

• Where did they live? Were they nomadic, semi-nomadic, or anchored to one place?
• What characterized their lifestyle?
• Did they know poverty, starvation, or unhealthy ways?
• What did they eat? What was daily life like?
• How did they treat their Elderly?

The answers can be found on page 23 of Paul’s chapter. Throughout this chapter, the author’s descriptions present a society that is the complete opposite to the term ‘savages’ that had been falsely applied to these First Peoples and most Amerindians by past historians, clergy, authorities, and settlers. The Mi’kmaq are highly evolved in terms of social values and relationships.

Respecting gender roles, Paul writes,

“…both genders were involved in setting the agenda and dispersing responsibilities for the orderly conduct of the Nation’s livelihood. The men were responsible for providing food for their communities by hunting and fishing and for carrying out chores involving heavy work. The women and older children were responsible for such chores as the limited farming the community indulged in, and for collecting, cleaning and preserving produce, game and fish. No demeaning connotations were associated with the assignment of different community responsibilities to each gender. The division of duties was pragmatically based on which gender was most suitable to the requirements of each job” (Paul, 2002, p. 24).

Paul (2000) also explained on the importance of education:

“The involvement of older children in survival duties was an educational regime that began at an early age at the knees of their parents, grandparents and Elders. This education was designed to instill in them a desire to grow into caring and honourable adults. The Keepers taught the children the Nation’s history and its legends. All adult members of the community participated in teaching the basic skills and knowledge deemed necessary to ensure the Nation’s survival” (pp. 24-25).

There are other important features of Mi’kmaq society on which Paul wrote, including advanced child-rearing practices, socially beneficial laws, protocols and practices, inclusive social activities and functions, constant attention to recreational and entertainment needs, progressive health care, forward-thinking trade and commerce, and enacted values that are foundational to any sophisticated civilization. On the latter, as an example, Paul stated,

“Civility and generosity were so engrained in Mi’kmaq society that to be rude or mean was unthinkable. If pressed to the contrary, they would respond: “How could one refuse to treat all people with kindness and not share with them the bounties of Mother Earth?” A modified version of this trait still survives in many Mi’kmaq homes today” (p. 29).

What points can be made after reading Paul’s chapter?

For me, the one thing that emanates from Paul’s writing, particularly on Epekwitk (Prince Edward Island), are recent attempts by Mi’kmaq leadership and citizenry to reclaim, reimagine, and reintroduce their proud culture to the rest of us who may not really understand or appreciate the life and practices of the Mi’kmaq peoples.

I introduced you to L’nuey already, and in navigating their website, one will instantly see the efforts that the organization has made to bring all aspects of the Mi’kmaq peoples to mainstream Prince Edward Island. A couple of years ago, I discovered a highly impactful video called Pituamkek – A Mi’kmaq Heritage Landscape.

I know the non-Indigenous Film Director, John Hopkins, whose critically acclaimed works are simply outstanding (e.g.: Bluefin). With a highly professional and culturally-based approach, this 2021 documentary production is a must-watch, as it details both the historic and contemporary worlds of the Mi’kmaq. Please take time to view this, and afterward, let’s discuss the main points of the documentary.

• What were the main points made in Pituamkek – A Mi’kmaq Heritage Landscape?
• How do these correspond to what you read in Daniel N. Paul’s chapter on Mi’kmaq Social Values and Economy?
• Do you have a better understanding of the Mi’kmaq peoples in Prince Edward Island as a result?

Treaties and the Royal Proclamation Act of 1763

Before we discuss treaties, let us take a minute to reflect on land acknowledgements, which we often hear. Those giving the acknowledgement say something along the following lines: “We wish to first acknowledge we are on Epekwitk, part of the ancestral, unceded, and unsurrendered territory of the Mi’kmaw Nation, and on which this institution stands. This territory is covered by the Treaties of Peace and Friendship, which recognize Mi’kmaw title and establish the ongoing relationship between the Mi’kmaw Nation and the Crown. We are all treaty people.” As can be gleaned from the acknowledgement, there is direct mention to treaties.

In his historical review titled Mi’kmaq and the Crown: understanding treaties in Maritime Canadian history: with special reference to Prince Edward Island, Mi’kmaq Historian Keptin John Joe Sark traces the foundations of the Treaties in Part III of his 2000 publication. Keptin Sark highlighted several key treaties and legal documents which have a direct impact on the Mi’kmaq; they include:

• The First Wabanaki Treaty with the Crown, 1725
• The Treaty of Halifax, 1752
• Governor Belcher’s Guarantees to the Mi’kmaq, 1761
• Royal Instructions to British Governors, 1761
• Royal Proclamation of 1763

In addition to the works of John J. Sark, the Treaty Education information prepared by L’nuey provides a good foundation. L’nuey is an Indigenous organizational “initiative that focuses on the advancement, implementation, and protection of the constitutionally entrenched rights of the Epekwitnewaq Mi’kmaq” (Mi’kmaq of PEI). They state, “Prior to European contact, it is thought that the Mi’kmaq engaged in agreements and treaties with other First Nations. Mi’kmaq oral history mentions treaties of friendship and treaties involving hunting areas prior to the coming of the Europeans to this region.” The Mi’kmaq relationship with the French and the Acadians, starting when they first arrived on these shores, was one of mutual respect and military alliance — not one defined by formalized treaties. The military alliance was believed to be necessary because of the long-standing pattern of peace and conflict between their French allies and the British. Contrary to the Mi’kmaq alliance with the French, the British viewed their relationship with the Mi’kmaq as one that needed a more formal approach. Beginning in 1725, a series of Peace and Friendship Treaties were signed between the British and the Mi’kmaq. They are referred to as ‘Peace and Friendship’ Treaties, as that was the cornerstone of the agreements.

These early Treaties (signed 1725-26, 1749, and 1752) were to ensure the Mi’kmaq would cease hostilities towards British settlers. Additionally, the Indians “shall not be molested by any of His Majesties subjects or their Dependents” (Treaty of 1725). The British would not interfere with Mi’kmaq hunting, fishing, and harvesting throughout Mi’kma’ki. “. . . It is agreed that the said Tribe of Indians shall not be hindered from, but have free liberty of Hunting and Fishing as usual . . .” (Treaty of 1752).

Besides referencing the few places where British settlers were living, the surrendering of land by the Mi’kmaq was not mentioned; the focus was on maintaining peace between the two nations. The Mi’kmaq, as did other First Nations, had, and continue to have, an intertwined connection to the land and its resources.

But the peace alluded to in the early Treaties was short-lived, as conflict between the French and the British and their Indigenous allies continued until 1760 with the loss of Québec and other key French areas to the British, and the beginning of the end of the Seven Years’ War. This also meant the role of France as a military power in this region was coming to an end. Acadian settlers and Indigenous leaders began trickling into British held Forts, including Fort Cumberland, to declare their submissions for peace.

The Peace and Friendship Treaties signed in 1760-61 guaranteed Mi’kmaq the right to hunt, fish, gather, and earn a reasonable living without British interference.

To solidify our knowledge around the importance of the Treaties of Peace and Friendship, two videos are presented. The first is produced in conjunction with Treaty Education and highlights the Mi’kmaq in Nova Scotia.

The next video, Treaties of Peace and Friendship, was produced by L’nuey and captures the key milestones leading up to its signing.

Sark (2000) wrote of the Royal Proclamation of 1763,

“The Treaty of Paris (1763) between France and Great Britain ended their power struggle in North America, leaving Britain in full control of Acadia and Quebec. Like the Treaty of Utrecht, however, the treaty of Paris reserved all of the rights that France’s ‘Indian allies’ had enjoyed previously. British governors were accordingly instructed to make or renew treaties with Indian nations, and to protect the Indians ‘connected’ with the British Crown from encroachment on their lands” (p. 38).

Sark further added,

“The 1763 Royal Proclamation forbid British Governors from granting the right to survey or settle any lands which has not already been sold to the Crown, or might be sold by treaty in the future. It also ordered British subjects to give up any Indian lands they had settled without proper authority. The 1725 Boston Tea Party had allowed Englishmen to keep the lands in New England and Nova Scotia they had already settled; after 1725, no more Mi’kmaq lands were ever sold by treaty” (p. 38).

Another important source of information on the Royal Proclamation of 1763 can be gleaned from the following site under the title, Royal Proclamation of 1763: Relationships, Rights and Treaties.

Treaties Today

Treaties have been cited in numerous challenges and legal cases. Several petitions and complaints, both written and in person around the time of Confederation, also mentioned the Treaties’ and Confederation’s suspected impact on them (L’nuey, 2024).

The Sylliboy court case, R. v. Sylliboy (1928), is believed to be the first to use the 1752 Treaty of Peace and Friendship to argue that the right to hunt on traditional territories was covered by the treaty. While the case was lost, Sylliboy received a posthumous pardon and apology from the government of Nova Scotia in 2017. In 1999, in what is now known as the Marshall Decision, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized and affirmed a treaty right to hunt, fish, and gather in pursuit of a ‘moderate livelihood,’ arising from the 1760-61 Treaty of Peace and Friendship. In his trial, Donald Marshall Jr. used the Treaty to argue that he was catching and trading fish, just as the Mi’kmaq had done since the Europeans first appeared in the region. In Epekwitk Mi’kmaq oral stories and in other parts of Mi’kma’ki, we are told that parents and Elders, while passing down traditional resource gathering methods, also shared their knowledge of the Treaties. This was, and is, a way to ensure the Peace and Friendship Treaties and their importance in the protection of Mi’kmaq rights is never forgotten in Mi’kma’ki. One final note: it must be remembered that while these Peace and Friendship Treaties were entered into, the Mi’kmaq were never conquered, never surrendered, and never gave up or ceded their land. Mi’kma’ki is still Mi’kmaq territory, and the Peace and Friendship Treaties serve as a foundation for the relationship of the Mi’kmaq and all citizens of the region.

The Indian Act

As a final part of this chapter, we will focus attention on a legal document, alluded to earlier, that has had a profound impact and lasting impact on the lives of Indigenous peoples — that being the Indian Act. Let us take a minute to understand this from a broad perspective before examining it in more depth as part of the Chapter 6 – Colonization, Assimilation Policies, and Genocide.

The Indian Act: A Summary

• What did you know about the Indian Act prior to viewing this video?
• What did you learn from this short video?
• What were some of the aspects of the Indian Act that you found profound, disturbing, or not fully understood?
• Are you aware of any other type of legislation that has such widespread impacts on a group of people?
• Why do you think there has been no movement toward repealing the Indian Act, although it has been heavily criticized for many years?
• How would you describe the Indian Act if someone asked you to explain it?

Here is an excerpt regarding the Indian Act:

“The Indian Act is the primary law the federal government uses to administer Indian status, local First Nations governments, and the management of reserve land. It also outlines governmental obligations to First Nations peoples. The Indian Act pertains to people with Indian Status; it does not directly reference non-status First Nations people, the Métis or Inuit. First introduced in 1876, the Act subsumed a number of colonial laws that aimed to eliminate First Nations culture in favour of assimilation into Euro-Canadian society. A new version of the Act was passed in 1951, and since then, has been amended several times, most significantly in 1985, with changes mainly focusing on the removal of discriminatory sections. It is an evolving, paradoxical document that has enabled trauma, human rights violations and social and cultural disruption for generations of Indigenous peoples” (Indian Act, 2022).

As stated, we will examine the Indian Act in more depth along with other aspects of governmental control over the lives of Indigenous peoples in Canada.