century some of the reports of a more general interest were published by the PAC or the Archives of Quebec in their original French (Franquet 1751; La Roque 1752) (the latter also in English translation), while some of those that were published in their day have been re—published as either facsimile editions or on microfiche (Pichon 1760F & 1760E), or as annotated editions with an English translation (Cartier 1534; Champlain 1632; Denys 1672). However, for most of the remaining extracts collected here, this is the first time that their content has been published.

THE RECORDERS

Each of the extracts has to be evaluated in terms of the criteria of historical source criticism (i.e. who wrote it? for whom was it written? and why was it written?). Bias, deception, falsehood, exaggeration and many other factors can affect the interpretation and usefulness of what is recorded. In addition, the value of each record depends upon how well the recorder knew the island. Relevant here is the length of time they spent on the island, as well as how much of the island they were familiar with. Table 1 contains a Summary of relevant information on each recorder including the post they occupied and the nature of their comments on the forest. How these posts fitted into the hierarchy of government is shown diagrammatically in Figure 1 and is also discussed in detail in the next section.

It is evident from Table 1 that there are three descriptions that are much earlier than the others (Cartier 1534; Champlain 1632; Denys 1672). These were all written by early explorers and/or entrepreneurs, either viewing the island from a distance or after the briefest of visits. However, it is especially from 1720, the date of the beginning of permanent European settlement on the island, when lle Saint-Jean acquired a local administration, that the records become more numerous and the comments more localised: between 1719 and 1760 we have sixty-five different documents of relevance to our topic.

It is important to note that for the whole of the French period every one of our extracts was written by a man who was working either directly or indirectly in the service of the king of France. This is because from the time of Cartier’s first

Archives des Colonies may not be in the hand of the original author of the document, but are rather extracts copied at the time by clerks into the record books of the department of the Marine.

voyage to the Gulf of St. Lawrence in 1534, the kings of France had laid a personal hereditary claim to the lands around the Gulf including Prince Edward Island. Thus, even though the three early explorer-entrepreneurs had a greater degree of independence than the later recorders, the basis of their activity in the New World was still either a commission or a seigneurial grant from the king.

By contrast, all of the eighteenth century recorders — apart from Charlevoix (1744)5 and those employed by the two companies given seigneurial grants on the island (Gotteville 1720; Roma 1734, 1750) — were in the employ of the department of the Marine and were thus working in the direct service of the king. Thirteen of these functionaries were working and writing in the New World, nine of whom were career soldiers in the officer class, while four were civilian administrators. Despite the fact that all but one were French—borne, and all but three retired to France at the end of their service7, many had spent lengthy periods (often many years) in the New World. We might thus assume that most should have been knowledgeable about what they were writing, both in terms of their own observations and also in their acquisition of the vocabulary and terminology applicable to New World phenomena. However, it is ironic — though not surprising — that it is some of those for whom the island was a new and brief experience who have left the most useful and interesting records relating to its forests — and especially those who were given specific assignments that included an element of landscape description, such as Louis Franquet and Joseph de La Roque. At the same time, though many had spent a considerable time on the island, there are very few in whom we detect a personal interest in the landscape and forest that goes beyond the line of duty — two in whom this is so are L0uis Franquet and Jean-Pierre Roma.

The comments of all of the recorders can be grouped into four types (Table 1): there are general comments on the state of the forest — these are often brief. More useful are lists of the

5 Charlevoix's Histoire (1744), however, was sponsored by the

government: he was given full access to the archives of the department of the Marine and his Histoire was published with the ‘approbation et privilege du Ror (Hayne 1974).

6 The exception is La Ronde who was born at Quebec.

7 Some, of course, were forced to do so by the loss of Louisbourg, and later Canada, to the British in 1758—1760. The exceptions were Denys, who died in northern Acadia, La Ronde at Quebec and Couange at Louisbourg. Thomas Pichon actually died in Jersey, rather than France, but this was as close as he could get to France after committing treason.