(Vol. vii., pp. 380. 504.)
My former Note on the origin of this name suggests a question, which, if
you think it worthy of a place in "N. & Q.," may interest many besides
myself, viz. At what period and by whom was that part of North America
called Canada?
To the French it appears always to have been known as "La Nouvelle France."
La Hontan, who quitted the country 1690, I think, calls it Canada. Lajitan
certainly does, as well as many other old authors.
In a map of North America, date 1769, the tract bordering on the St.
Lawrence, lately called Upper and Lower Canada, is designated "The Province
of Quebec;" whilst the region to the northward, lying between it and
Hudson's Bay, has the word Canada in much larger letters, as if a general
name of the whole. That the name is slightly altered from an Indian word is
probable, but not so that it was used by the Indians themselves, who, in
the first place, were not in the habit of imposing general names on large
districts, although they had significant ones for almost every locality;
the former were usually denominated the land of the Iroquois, of the
Hurons, &c., _i. e._ of the people dwelling, on, and in possession of it.
Even allowing that the Indians may have had a general name for the country,
it is very unlikely that one so unmeaning as "Kanata" would have been
imposed upon it by a people whose nomenclature in every other case is so
full of meaning.
Moreover, although the Mic-macs of Gaspe may have called themselves
Canadians according to Lescarbot, yet we are told by Volney, that--
"The Canadian savages call themselves 'Metoktheniakes' (born of the
sun), without allowing themselves to be persuaded of the contrary by
the Black Robes," &c.--Vol. ii. p. 438.
The following, to the same purpose, is from the _Quarterly Review_, vol.
iv. p. 463.:
"'Tapoy,' which we understand from good authority to be the generic
appellation by which the North American tribes distinguish themselves
from the whites," &c.
{602}
Now I should imagine both Lescarbot and Champlain, knowing nothing of the
language, and probably having very bad interpreters, must have made a great
mistake in supposing the Gaspesiens called themselves Canadians, for I have
questioned several intelligent Mic-Macs on the subject, and they have
invariably told me that they call themselves "Ulnookh" or "Elnouiek,"
"_Ninen elnouiek!--We are Men._" But Mic-mac? "O, Mic-mac all same as
Ulnookh." The latter word strictly means Indian-man, and cannot be applied
to a white. Mic-mac is the name of their tribe, and, they insist upon it,
always has been. Again, Kanata is said to be an Iroquois word, and,
consequently, not likely to have been in use amongst a tribe of the Lenape
family, which the Mic-macs are. It does not appear that we have any
authority for supposing the country was ever called Canada by the Indians
themselves.
It is curious enough that as Canada was said to derive from an exclamation,
"Aca nada!" so the capital has been made to take its name from another;
"Quel bec!" cried one of Champlain's Norman followers, on beholding Cape
Diamond. As in the former case, however, so in this, we have evidence of
more probable sources of the name, which I will enumerate as briefly as
possible. The first, and a very probable one, is the fact, that the strait
between Quebec and St. Levi side of the river, was called in the Algonquin
language "Quebeio," _i. e._ a narrowing,--a most descriptive appellation,
for in ascending the river its breadth suddenly diminishes here from about
two miles to fourteen or fifteen hundred yards from shore to shore.
The little river St. Charles, which flows into the St. Lawrence on the
northern side of the promontory, is called in the Indian language
(Algonquin?) Kabir or Koubac, significant of its tortuous course, and it is
from this, according to La Potherie, that the city derives its name of
Quebec.
Mr. Hawkins, in his _Picture of Quebec, &c., 1834_, denies the Indian
origin of the word, since, as he says, there is no analogous sound to it in
any of their languages; and he assumes a Norman origin for it on the
strength of "Bec" being always used by the Normans to designate a
promontory in the first place; and secondly, because the word Quebec is
actually found upon a seal of the Earl of Suffolk, of historical celebrity
temp. Hen. V. and VI., which Mr. Hawkins supposes to have been the name of
some town, castle, or barony in Normandy.
Such are the pros and cons, upon which I do not presume to offer any
opinion; only I would observe, that if there are no analogous sounds in the
Indian languages, whence come Kennebec and other similar names?