Talk:Battle of Seven Oaks

Can you tell me where exactly does this take place please?

Thank you for the information, Lainie

Hmm...I guess that should be in the article! It took place in modern Manitoba, near Winnipeg. Adam Bishop 03:22, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I am from Winnipeg MB and to clarify further Seven Oaks is part of the Greater Winnipeg City.

Took place in Seven Oaks, near the junction of the Red and Assiniboine rivers, in the heart of what is now Winnipeg.

The battle took place in the northern part of the city, near where the Seven Oaks Museum now stands. A large log home was built in the area in 1851-53 by a man named John Inkster. It is now one of the oldest extant residential buildings in Manitoba, and is the home of the museum. It is located at 115 Rupertsland Blvd. A lot of that same neighborhood is known as Seven Oaks, with a number of businesses and an elementary school carrying the name.

The junction of the Red and Assiniboine Rivers (or the Forks) is approximately where Fort Gibralter (the Métis fort) stood, about 2.5 miles south of the battle scene, while Fort Douglas (the Hudson Bay Colony fort) was said to be a short distance north of the battle site, perhaps near Kildonan Park.

Couillaud 21:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

"Irish Paramilitary" and the Métis Perspective

Book is available from the Louis Riel Institute ,103-150 Henry Ave. Winnipeg, MB,Canada. ISBN 9780980991291 Battle of Seven Oaks, 2010 ISBN 9781927531082 Battle of Seven Oaks: A Metis Perspective Second Edition, 2015 also available at scribd.com/lbarkwell — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.71.176.29 (talk) 12:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Mr. Barkwell's book is not readily available, online or in the U.S.A. Its ISBN doesn't come up on any searches. While I do not doubt its existence (I've been looking for it since seeing an announcement on it), it does not enjoy a great circulation. This is why I said in my edit summary "cannot find evidence of book". I didn't mean it did not exist; I meant that I could not find the book to verify its evidence, and I wrote it out badly.

That said, please do not expect others to find your proof for you; it is your responsibility, an obscure source is difficult for others to find and verify, and sources used here should be readily verifiable. Giving me a Manitoba phone number to call does not fulfill that need. I do intend to purchase a copy for my collection, but it still cannot be fairly used to change accepted fact without providing some very convincing evidence.

It is accepted by both Anglophone and Francophone historians, as well as documented in testimony given to William B. Coltman during his investigation and at the trials at York, Upper Canada in 1818 that the HBC consisted of settlers. Calling the group an "Irish Paramilitary force" is (as Barkwell's title indicates) the Métis perspective. It is a legitimate claim unless disproved by historical fact or rejected by peer review, but it is the minority view in any case. We can make his viewpoint known, but it is not the only viewpoint. Let's list both, until or unless one can be shown to be overwhelmingly true. -- Couillaud 15:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Math Doesn't Add Up

In the "Battle" Section of the article, it states that the casualties were 1--21, yet in the summary box it states that the casualty numbers were 2--22. Clarification is needed. MattFromOntario (talk) 00:16, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Made the correction, official sources give 21-1 as the casualty figures. Couldn't find any other source (verifiable or otherwise) that gives 22-2 as the casaulty numbers. Mediatech492 (talk) 02:50, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually, there were two fatalities on the side of the NWC. I will have to look them up, but there are references to a second death, of an unnamed Native American, and I believe it was described as "the Metis" lost only one man", with a peripheral mention of a Native American who may have only been traveling with the company and not actually a member of the NWC. Since I don't have the data handy at this moment, however, I will not argue for change. -- Couillaud 16:01, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Categorization as a "massacre"

Until a few weeks ago this article was categorized in both "Massacres of First Nations" and "Massacres by First Nations". Neither is correct. This conflict was not a "massacre" in the normal sense of that word. Instead it was an confrontation between two armed parties, which escalated to use of those arms by both sides. It was not a slaughter of unarmed parties perpetrated by armed parties. I therefore have removed the remaining categorization, that of "Massacres by First Nations", a category stated to be "for Massacres perpetrated mainly by First Nations, Inuit or Metis peoples". Such a judgment is unsupported by the text here. Kablammo (talk) 14:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Aftermath

This section does a good job of outlining the events that followed after the battle, although it is missing some important details. It fails to mention that the Selkirk settlement, morally defeated from the battle, packed up and left the settlement to go back to the provinces of Canada. This section also fails to mention the implications of the winners of the battle. For the North Westerners, their chief opponent was leaving the area, allowing them to flourish in the fur trade. As for the Metis, this was an early instance of the building of a nation - a bond that surpasses that of a company or family.

Justo Mendoza (talk) 02:23, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

There is no evidence of this, and your point contaisn a number of factual errors. There was no such mass departure from the Selkirk colony. Also the "provinces of Canada" did not exist at that time, they were the colonies of Upper Canada and Lower Canada. They did not become the "Province of Canada" until 1841. Furthermore the Selkirk settlers came from Scotland; therefore they could never have "returned" to the Canadas since they never came from there in the first place. Mediatech492 (talk) 15:14, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

From Gerald Friesen's The Canadian Prairies: A History page 80:

"On the morrow of the clash, the settlers, broken by the loss of family and friends and by the sight of the mutilated bodies, hastened to collect their belongings and depart. Cuthbert Grant, once more a clerk rather than a war captain, took an inventory of the goods left behind, signed the lists of thousands of items for hours on end, and, then, after two days of these last details, he watched the colonists sail northward, leaving his metis once more in command of the forks."

Friesen, Gerald. "Maintaining the Old Order 1805-44." In The Canadian Prairies a History, 80. Student ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987.

I need to edit an article as part of an assignment for my class, so I will be adding this information with the citation. Justo Mendoza (talk) 17:29, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Battle of Seven Oaks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120616121234/http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com:80/articles/seven-oaks-incident to http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/seven-oaks-incident
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120430013310/http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com:80/articles/pemmican-proclamation to http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/pemmican-proclamation
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120920041320/http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com:80/articles/miles-macdonell to http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/miles-macdonell
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120920041326/http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com:80/articles/robert-semple to http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/robert-semple

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:59, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Battle of Seven Oaks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/seven-oaks-incident
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/pemmican-proclamation
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/miles-macdonell
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/robert-semple
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080611064456/http://www.metisresourcecentre.mb.ca/history/oaks.htm to http://www.metisresourcecentre.mb.ca/history/oaks.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:45, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Copyrighted image published?

This image has this tag:

This work is not in the public domain in the United States because its copyright in the U.S. was restored by the URAA as it was still copyrighted in its source country on the URAA date (January 1, 1996 in most cases). It is therefore still copyrighted in the U.S. until 95 years after the year it was initially published (or until 2047 in some circumstances).

---

• If you encounter this tag in conjunction with an otherwise 'free-license' for works from a specfic country, please add an appropriate non-free license and Non-free use rationale.

• If you are the copyright holder of this file, and do not wish to have it hosted on Wikipedia, please contact our designated agent or nominate the file for deletion, explaining the situation.

This is not a valid license; a valid license template must accompany this tag or this file will be deleted. A review of files is currently underway to verify that this template has been applied correctly. Files that are copyrighted in the US and that have not been released under a free license may be deleted, unless an appropriate non-free license and a Non-free use rationale is provided.

Why is it published here? Creuzbourg (talk) 18:26, 14 December 2022 (UTC)