BEHIND THE NAME
Being named after a general who advocated genocide puts Amherstburg in a quandary
Amherstburg Mayor Aldo DiCarlo, in front of a sign at the east end of town Friday, weighs in on a controversy over the town’s namesake, Lord Jeffery Amherst, a general who once supported genocide against Indigenous people.
The bucolic Town of Amherstburg has existed for more than 200 years, though its namesake hasn’t weathered as well.
Gen. Jeffery Amherst, after all, supported genocide against Indigenous people.
Academic research that is generating new discussion points to the commander-in-chief of the British army in North America for advocating the idea of infecting First Nations people with smallpox, not to mention wiping out the population entirely.
Amherst’s most damning letter was part of correspondence with Swiss mercenary Henry Bouquet, who suggested handing out smallpox-laced blankets to “inoculate the Indians.”
Amherst liked the proposal, writing back that, “This is a good idea to spread smallpox just be careful you don’t get it yourself.” He also wrote in 1763: “You will do well to try to inoculate the Indians by means of blankets, as well as to try every other method that can serve to extirpate this execrable race. I should be very glad your scheme for hunting them down by dogs could take effect, but England is at too great a distance to think of that at present.”
Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre last week publicly said, “Goodbye Jeffery Amherst,” when he announced that a street named after the British general would be renamed. Calling the Amherst name “a stain on our history,” he suggested a First Nations word could be used instead.
And there’s more: a debate about changing the name of Port-laJoye—Fort Amherst, a national historic site on P.E.I., is raging. Mi’kmaq representatives have questioned the idea of honouring Amherst. Parks Canada has suggested keeping Amherst but also adding an Indigenous name.
On Wednesday, Amherst, N.S., town council decided not to change its name, but left the door open if enough citizens demand it.
Amherstburg Mayor Aldo DiCarlo said he has only fielded one recent complaint about the town’s name. He understands why it offends some but doesn’t think a name change makes sense right now.
“My first concern is with the Aboriginal people and what it means to them,” DiCarlo told the Star. “Outside of that, it’s rather preliminary. The topic has just come up.”
Changing a town name requires much more than swapping a sign. Plus, there’s all that tradition.
Fort Amherstburg, which later became Fort Malden, was built in 1796 while the first reference to the town of Amherstburg came in 1797.
“Unlike other municipalities that have simply a street or a park with the name, which quite frankly is fairly easy to rename, we have an entire town,” DiCarlo said. “The town of Amherstburg has been the town of Amherstburg for over 200 years now. We don’t want to be insensitive to what the general wanted to do.
“But after 200 years to stop referring to ourselves as Amherstburg, I have trouble seeing that.”
Tory James, a local First Nations activist, thinks changing the name of General Amherst High School might make the most sense — though what he really hopes for is more Indigenous education, on plaques and in textbooks.
“I really don’t want to see Canada erase its racist history because we know those who forget history are doomed to repeat it,” said James, a member of the Oneida Nation of the Iroquois Confederacy. “The name change for me is not that big of an issue. But Canadians should know who Jeffery Amherst was and what he did.”
Besides learning about attacks on Native people, James would like Canadians to learn more about colonization and the terror wrought by residential schools.
“The very least we can do together is start to seriously look at the history of colonization and European contact,” James said. “I don’t think that’s too much to ask. I think it would benefit all Canadians.”
Attacking what are now seen by some as racist relics is becoming more common.
The proposed removal of a statue depicting Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee on horseback in Charlottesville, Va., inspired a Unite the Right rally that turned violent Aug. 12. An anti-racism protester was killed. Calls to remove Confederate monuments across the U.S. even prompted American President Donald Trump to tweet: “Sad to see the history and culture of our great country being ripped apart with the removal of our beautiful statues and monuments,” and “You can’t change history, but you can learn from it.”
The Canadian government recently removed the name of Hector Langevin from a government building on Parliament Hill, after Indigenous groups complained that it honoured a man involved in the residential schools program.
Some in the U.S. have suggested George Washington’s name be removed from public spaces because he was a slave owner. The Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario has called for Sir John A. Macdonald’s name to be stricken from schools “in recognition of his central role as the architect of genocide against Indigenous Peoples.”
Even Kid Rock attracted protesters when he opened Detroit’s Little Caesars Arena on Sept. 12, for his embrace of the Confederate flag.
A century before the Confederate flag was even invented, however, came Lord Jeffery Amherst. The British field marshal conquered the territory of New France during the Seven Years’ War, which ended in 1763. The highly decorated military man also served as governor of Quebec and Crown governor of Virginia.
Yet Amherst looks worse from a modern vantage point.
University of Massachusetts Amherst professor emeritus Peter d’Errico found what he calls “the smoking gun” in the late 1990s when he went through microfilm of Jeffery Amherst’s letters.
Rumours that Amherst advocated infecting Native people with smallpox had circulated for years. So a friend of d’Errico’s, Sioux actor Floyd Westerman, of Dances With Wolves fame, encouraged d’Errico to find out if the disturbing rumours were true.
D’Errico found the letters — though his work on Amherst is only now gaining traction amid a climate of historical questioning.
“Part of what the name-changing is about is that we’re more aware of not just a problematic past but the problematic present that has grown from that,” said d’Errico, who first started focusing on Aboriginal issues after graduating Yale Law School in the late 1960s when he worked in legal services on Navaho land. “If the namechanging is understood not as a whitewashing of history but as a turning point in reassessing where we are now, then it’s extremely significant.”
D’Errico supports more Indigenous education.
The town of Amherst, Mass., where d’Errico taught university courses, will not change its name. But d’Errico considers smaller name-swapping more realistic — such as with a street — and points out that Germany does not have any roads called Hitler Strasse.
“If it marks a genocidal commanding officer, I can’t imagine you wouldn’t want to change the name,” he said.
Some history experts, however, see banishing historical names as misguided.
“I certainly object to the idea of changing names in response to present political correctness,” said Jack Granatstein, a prolific Toronto author who specializes in Canadian political and military history.
“Amherst was a skilful general who used weapons that were common in his time and whose efforts against Aboriginals were not in what is now Canada. They were around the area of Pittsburgh. And as far as I know they didn’t succeed.
“I think changing the name of Amherstburg would be simply silly.”
You will do well to try to inoculate the Indians (with smallpox) by means of blankets, as well as to try every other method that can serve to extirpate this execrable race. I should be very glad your scheme for hunting them down by dogs could take effect. GEN. JEFFERY AMHERST