On several occasions, Gérard Bouchard underlined the fragility of the Quebec founding myths inherited from the past. One case seems to be an exception, that of the founding of Montreal.
The anecdotal and religious history of the first moments of the Catholic mission of Ville-Marie under the leadership of Paul Chomedey Sieur de Maisonneuve and Jeanne Mance has resisted the erosion of other historical accounts from the French-Canadian past. It took shape in the 19thand century, based on a few facts summarily reported in the 17and century by the Jesuit Relations, the Sulpician Dollier de Casson and the hospitaller Marie Morin. In the XXand century, the more substantial or critical works of Marie-Claire Daveluy, Marcel Trudel, Louise Dechêne, Rémi Savard and other experts have made it possible to update and contextualize this image of historic Épinal without losing all its evocation.
How to explain that the “founding myth” of Montreal has been able to stand the test of time? First asset: from its birth, this story took the form of a “little story” full of characters, details of daily life, adventures, dramas and gestures of bravery easy to represent, to tell, and to mark the memory of Monsieur and Madame Tout-le-Monde.
Second advantage: most of the writings and portraits of the protagonists of this adventure have not survived time, apart from a few notarial deeds. As evidenced by the appointment of Jeanne Mance as co-founder by the City of Montreal in 2012, this relative vagueness has allowed each era to portray them according to its values, without having the impression of betraying them.
Third advantage: unlike many founding myths born in the violence of colonial projects, conquests, wars and national independence, the beginnings of this saga seem to have been driven by generous intentions and an unfailing determination which will be successful despite the obstacles. Very early on, as demonstrated by the participation of English-speaking personalities in the first official commemoration of the founding in May 1917, this earned him the support of groups who might otherwise have felt excluded.
Fourth advantage: thanks to the diversity of the actors taking part in this story, there have always been people, religious communities, historical societies, historians, museums and the media, without forgetting the City itself, to recall, or commemorate, an aspect or a character.
Fifth advantage: the story of the foundation took place in a well-defined and “walkable” territory, close to those it must reach. Urban archeology has made its veracity visible during the 350and and 375and anniversaries of Montreal by installing a history and archeology museum on the site of the foundation, Pointe-à-Callière, then an interpretation site showcasing the remains of Fort Ville-Marie .
Founding myths often give a very partial, if not biased, picture of history. We must however recognize that their avowed or unconscious objective is first of all to gather a community around collective representations. In our very polarized era, it is healthy to question ourselves, as Gérard Bouchard does, about the need to identify with a few shared founding “myths”.
In this sense, the story of the founding of Montreal may not have had its last word. Reinterpreted for more than a century by various means — commemorations, monuments, toponymy, research, museology, fictions — it still offers the potential to reintegrate into our collective representations its anonymous, indigenous and European actors, long confined to the role of extras. quiet. Without waiting for the 400and anniversary of our multicultural metropolis, why not launch a project, this time in a democratic and participatory way, to renew the founding story of Montreal without however demonizing its star actors a posteriori? This laboratory would be an excellent opportunity to see how a plural society like that of Quebec could today identify with the image presented to it of its past and feel like celebrating it.