User talk:SULPICIAN

I am concerned by the proportion of the description of the Canadian Sulpicians which is devoted to their land holdings. While this may be factual, it places undue emphasis on this element at the expense of their priestly work, especially the formation of priests. The latter needs more emphasis, as it is the primary apostolate of the Sulpicians. Moreover, it seems to me that the presentation of the Iroquois situation is too negative. The climate of the times included a terror of this tribe/nation. (One Sulpician was killed by them and his body completely eaten by his Iroquois captors. Admittedly, this was sometimes done in the belief by the Indians that they could thus absorb the bravery of the one tortured and killed. However, this still fostered terror among the settlers. Such stories were common talk among the French settlers.) Moreover, land takeover was not uncommon among the whites, even if it was wrong. Moreover, it should be said in defense of the Candian Sulpicians, that one of their number, François Ciquard, an 18th century missionary, encouraged the Maine Indians to avoid selling their land to the whites: advice which they ignored.

I guess what I am saying is that the article seems a bit overly weighted on this matter. Much of the material is taken from Iroquois sources, with no opportunity to hear the other side; and there always is one. The additional source that needs to be weighed is Francis Parkman. Although his name is legendary in regard to his North American history, he is seen by many historians today as somewhat prejudiced and one-sided in regard to the French activities in North America.

In short, while the land activities of the Canadian Sulpicians should not be excluded from this article, they seem to have undue weight.

SULPICIAN (talk) 22:42, 22 March 2012 (UTC)SULPICIAN (PhD in French history/language)