Talk:Coureur des bois

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Coureur de Bois were French fur traders that ventured out to trade with the aboriginal people in different areas; they worked for many large companies.

The Voyageur and the Coureur de Bois are two very different figures and do not belong on the same page. If they must remain on one page together, the voyageur should have prominence, being the more historically important of the two.

Can you help us understand the distinction? Trapper 20:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree. If you were a Voyageur you may eventually decide to be a Coureur des bois and stay out in the wilderness. As I understand it one did not 'come before the other'. Upshot 22 August 2006

I rewrote the original page which was very sketchy and inaccurate. The original title was Coureur des bois but the actual content was about the voyageurs. This confused me since I thought these were actually two different fur trade figures (which they are). I set about trying to clear things up in my own mind, and hopefully, clean up the article. I thought that a new title may be warranted. Rather than retitle, etc. I tried to separate the figures by making the Voyageur section. I did find references that described how the coureur de bois "evolved" from undesirable freelance traders to become the Montreal-based hired-laborer canoemen known as the voyageur. The voyageurs had permits; the coureur de bois were not. The article describes this evolution. Many school textbooks (here in C::anada) also describe the history this way. I don't think the coureur de bois disappeared entirely when the voyageur system started. They most likely overlapped for a while until the efficiency of the voyageur eclipsed the coureur de bois. If there are any expert fur trade historians who could clear this up, please add to this discussion or make changes to the article. My preference would be to separate the coureur de bois and the voyageurs since one is not the other. Obviously, in each article, the other figure would probably need to be alluded to. BrianC 21:55, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I too agree that the subjects should be separated, or else subsumed into another article addressing all aspects of the North American fur trade. Bits and pieces of this are now scattered among several articles. Kablammo 02:57, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

If anyone wants to organize a "north american fur trade" home for all these fragments I'd be glad to help... Again, the latest edit by civilengineer has blended the two figures together. We all seem to agree that a Coureur des bois and a voyageur are different characters. Upshot 6 November 2006

I think your idea has merit. Retitling/reorganizing to North American fur trade would allow for a much better discussion of the NA fur trade rather than being restricted to the Coueur de bois/voyageurs. A good reference, BTW, is Peter C. Newman's book Empire of the Bay (ISBN 014027488X). On page 289 he mentions that "the voyageurs are sometimes confused with coureurs de bois, a description reserved for the itinerant, illicit fur gatherers who flooded into the Superior Country during the late 1600s and 1700s to outrun the Indian middlemen then dominating the trade." "Voyageur" is not an English term for "coureur de bois". BrianC 02:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New page proposal: North American Fur Trade?

Does anyone object to moving this page with its history to a page to be entitled North American Fur Trade? Coureur des bois would redirect to it. The applicable parts of Fur Trade could also be incorporated into it. Kablammo 14:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. That way many other aspects of the fur trade in NA can be explained, not just the coureurs de bois or the voyageurs. I can see discussing the "French" fur trade and the "English" fur trade, company competition, how the fur trade affected settlement etc., etc. BC 16:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I think its a good idea to create an article on the history of North American Fur Trade. But I think that redirecting Coureur des bois to North American Fur Trade would be the equivalent of redirecting Sons of Liberty to American Revolution and that is not a very good idea. -- Mathieugp 21:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I see your point - coureurs de bois and the NA fur trade are not equivalent by any means. But do they have to have the same weight in order for a redirect, or do we just have to ensure the new article has a thorough description of the coureurs de bois (or other things for that matter such as the voyageurs) in order to justify a redirect. A way around this is to have a short description of the coureurs de Bois, voyageurs, HBC, NWC, etc in the new article and link to the original site by using a "main article" link. There are several other fur trade related articles such as the Hudson's Bay Company, NWC, etc. that could be linked to this way. These other articles would be just as fair game for including in the new North American Fur Trade article and if we rolled one up into the new article, we should roll them all up. But I think rolling up every article that has anything to do with the fur trade would make for a rather complex and long new article. Therefore "main article" links may be the way to go and the new article could be an "anchor article" for the other articles. If we did this I think this coureur de bois/voyageur article would need to be rewritten and separated so that the main article links would not be confusing. Mind you I think the two should be separated anyway since a coureur de bois is not a voyageur.BC 22:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

My thought was to start with a general article, with sections on coureur des bois, voyageurs, the competing companies, routes, and history; if the article gets too long then go back to separate articles. But if the separate subjects already justify separate articles then we could just split the present one into two. Clearly a separate treatment of voyageurs is needed, and it is confusing to have a voyageurs link connect to this article. I recently created one article and worked on two others on sites along the border route in Ontario/Minnesota and I had to link to this article. Kablammo 23:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that no matter how we relate the new page to all the other fur trade articles, the idea is a good one and necessary. Things have a habit of eventually falling into place. You could start off by having sections on relevant aspects of the NA fur trade, as you mentioned, with main article links where necessary and see where it goes. My suggestion would be to hold off doing any redirecting until we decide on how to handle existing directly related articles (i.e. start slowly). I'd just go ahead and start the article. BC 00:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea... mostly due to the fact that there is no 'gateway' into the fragments spread all over the place dealing with the tradeupshot 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Voyageurs and Coureurs de Bois

At the time the new licensing system starting in 1681, we see the emergence of the terms voyageurs and engagés for legal participants in the fur trade. From this point on, anyone operating without a contract or congé (and therefore illegally) would be referred to as coureurs de bois (prior to this, all people going into the Pays d'en haut without govenrmental permission were illegal). Voyageurs were wage laborers contracted by licensed merchants. Most often they, through the terms of their contract, would profit from the actual trade of the goods; and many times these voyageurs were themselves traders or invested money into the voyage and trade. Engagés generally did not have vested interest in the canoe or the goods but were simply contracted laborers. It is interesting to note that the term engagé was also used in New France to describe an indentured servant, of whom Governor Frontenac describes as, “a man obliged to go wherever and do whatever his master commanded like a slave during the time of his indentureship” (quoted in Dechêne, Habitants and Merchants p. 27). Engagés most often were contracted to make a trip into the pays d’en haut. and back with goods or supplies, leaving in the spring and returning by the end of the summer. Voyageurs often spent extended periods in the pays d’en haut whereas the engagés were basically seasonal workers. Engagé numbers increase throughout the 18th century and by the period of British controlled trade in the later 18th century, most all workers are engagés but become simply referred to as voyageurs. (Greer, Peasant Lord and Merchant p. 179) It as during this later British controlled period that the distinction between winterers (hivernauts) and pork-eaters (mangeurs du lard) or “Montreal-men” becomes common (Greer p. 182). Also, to note, the licensing that made a coureur de bois illegal during the French regime no longer existed. So there were no coureurs de bois during this later period. Now comes the confusing part. Many of the people that worked illegally one year very well could be legal and licensed the next. Like-wise, amnesty was granted many times to the coureurs de bois when they were needed by the government for their various skills as well as for their numbers. This can be seen as these pardons correlate with major military expeditions (the Fox Wars, The War of Spanish Succession, War of Austrian Succession, and etc.). Often not only was amnesty given to those that surrendered themselves and participated but also trading license were given to them for doing so. In addition to all of this, sometimes the authorities, when complaining about those involved in the fur trade (legal and illegal), referred to everyone involved simply as coureurs de bois. Isac: 64.33.161.42 18:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

My name is Isaac Walters and this is part of an article that I am writing on Coureur de Bois in New France, I hope that this helps explain the differences between the terms voyageur, coureur de bois, etc. IsaacIWfromWI 19:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Will your article be a new WP one replacing this one? You could rewrite this article or change it to incorporate the above information since you seem to have a very good understanding. I would also make sure that references and citations are included. BC 23:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)