Defining “German”
There are several ways of
describing the “origin” of immigrants to Canada. Canadian censuses have used
the following criteria: place of birth, ethnic origin, citizenship
(nationality), and country of last permanent residence. [1]
Clearly, there are overlaps
among these criteria, and especially with the “Germans” there can also be major
differences. For example, a post-World War II immigrant may well have been born
in Russia (birthplace) of German ancestry (ethnic origin), and will have received
German citizenship upon arrival in West Germany (nationality). Even if he did
not actually receive German citizenship, the country of last permanent
residence would have been Germany. Or, a refugee from eastern Europe with other
than German ethnic origin may not have been able to obtain German citizenship,
but if he spent his last few years in Germany before emigration to Canada he
would have been counted as having Germany as the last country of permanent
residence.
The following examples illustrate
this point.
● The wide
geographical dispersion of German mother tongue speakers is shown by example in
the 1936 Census which found 76,856 Albertans with German mother tongue of whom
40,706 had been Canadian-born and 75 British-born. [2]
Among the remaining 36,075 foreign-born Albertans with German mother tongue,
the distribution by birthplace was as follows:
Birthplaces
of foreign-born Albertans having German mother tongue, 1936
Birthplace
|
Foreign-born
Albertans having German mother tongue
|
Austria
|
2,235
|
Belgium
|
28
|
Czechoslovakia
|
415
|
Finland
|
2
|
France
|
41
|
Germany
|
7,267
|
Holland
|
33
|
Hungary
|
366
|
Italy
|
13
|
Poland
|
3,855
|
Romania
|
1,446
|
Russia
|
9,566
|
Scandinavia
|
34
|
Yugoslavia
|
248
|
Other European countries
|
784
|
Arabic countries
|
13
|
United States
|
9,667
|
Other countries
|
52
|
Source: Canadian
Census 1936, Vol. I, Table 62.
● Arriving
in 1966, 10,699 immigrants claimed German origin; 9,263 reported Germany as the
country of last permanent residence, and 7,249 had German citizenship. Of the
latter, 7,151 were of German ethnic origin; another 26 claimed Yugoslav origin,
12 Polish, 8 Jewish, and a few with other ethnic backgrounds, such as Arabic,
Austrian, Czech, Hungarian, and Bosnian. [3]
● For the
year 1996, 2,534 immigrants listed Germany as their last country of permanent
residence, but only 1,683 held German citizenship, and only 1,751 were actually
born in Germany. [4]
So, how many “Austrians,”
“Germans,” or “Swiss” have there been in the Canadian population over the last
two centuries? This would appear to be a relatively simple question to
answer, but it is not. For instance, Hoerder [5]
and Neuwirth and John de Vries [6]
analyzed carefully the issue of the “true” number of Austrian immigrants to
Canada, and discussed in detail the difficulties associated with immigration
and census figures. [7]
This is not the place to evaluate
the validity of census data, and the reader is referred to the above‑mentioned
chapters for details. Among the problems with census data raised by the authors are the following:
1. Canadian
authorities had no clear idea of the multinational character of the Austro‑Hungarian
Empire and therefore did not adequately distinguish between “Austrian” and, for
example, “Bukovinian.” For a while, the census even provided for an Austrian
mother tongue. (It is true, however, that the census authorities realized and
addressed the problems with Central European data and in a number of updates
provided recalculated figures.) Conversely, immigrants from the Austro‑Hungarian
Empire often did not know which country they should give as their “country of
birth,” especially after the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Similar problems of classification arose with the immigration of Germans from
all over Central and Eastern Europe after the end of the Second World War.
2. Census
data are based on self‑identification, and in times of war and its aftermath
respondents tend to be less than entirely truthful about their origin. After Word
War I, many Volksdeutsche [8]
gave “Russian” as their origin (a fact recognized by the Canadian census
authorities), and many Ukrainians who were unsure about the meaning of the
census questions identified themselves as being “Austrian.” After the Second World
War, it is thought that significant numbers of Germans gave “Austrian” or
“Dutch” as their ethnic origin. According to Neuwirth and de Vries, changes in
the self‑identification of Ukrainian immigrants to Canada as “Austrians” or
“Ukrainians” explains very well the wild swings in the numbers of Austrian‑Canadians
in 1921 and 1961.
3. Canadian
census definitions have been changed so many times so that data on ethnic
origin are not readily comparable (see following section). For example, since
the first census, racial or ethnic origin was traced through the lineage of the
father. Before 1870, origin was established by the place of birth of the male
immigrant. From 1871 to 1941, the racial question was asked to distinguish
groups in the population having similar cultural characteristics, based on a
common heritage. Then, from 1951 on, the language spoken by the male ancestor
upon arrival on this continent was used to help determine a person’s origin. In
1986, ethnic origin was redefined substantially in the question: “To which
ethnic or cultural group do you or did your ancestors belong?” by dropping the
phrases “male ancestor” and “on arrival on this continent.” In recognition of
the fact that most Canadians have many different origins in their family tree,
respondents were allowed in 1981 to write in one ethnic origin in addition to
the main origin. In 1986, respondents could list up to three additional
origins. Further changes in the question—intended to reflect more accurately
the multicultural nature of the Canadian population—were made subsequently.
This change in reporting procedures to allow for multiple ethnic origins
increased the number of Canadians who considered themselves to be of Austrian
(or German etc.) descent.
4.
Longitudinal immigration data are difficult to compare because different
criteria were used over time to determine the country of origin. For example,
until 1965, “Austrian ethnic origin” was employed. Between 1966 and 1971, the
data refer to immigrants from “Austria as the country of former residence.”
Application of this criterion resulted in elevated immigration figures. For
example, of the 2,313 persons arriving from Austria in 1966, 633 were of
Austrian ethnic origin, 995 were of Yugoslav origin, 203 had Czech and Slovak
origin, and 323 had Hungarian origin, etc. Following the uprising in
Czechoslovakia in 1968, the number of immigrants from Austria rose to 8,125 of
whom only 657 actually held Austrian citizenship; 6,615 were Czech and 278 were
Yugoslav citizens. As the refugees left Austria, numbers plummeted; by 1971,
360 of the 407 immigrants from Austria as the “country of former residence”
were in fact Austrian citizens. From 1972 on, Canadian immigration statistics
refer to “country of last permanent residence.” In that year, 285 persons of
the 365 emigrants who came from Austria as the country of last permanent
residence were Austrian citizens.
5. Changes
are made regularly to the names, boundaries, and other characteristics of
geographic areas (e.g., census subdivisions may amalgamate, or there may be an
annexation, or change of name or status). Consequently, the boundaries of
geographic areas may change from one census to another. See, for example, the
list of census subdivisions in numerical order (Standard Geographical Classification
1996, http://stds.statcan.ca/english/sgc/
1996/sgc96-search-subdiv.asp.
Accessed on August 29, 2003) which notes the names of census subdivisions
“affected either by change of name, type or code, including amalgamations and
dissolutions since January 2, 1991” or “affected by boundary change or revision
of population counts since January 2, 1991.” These changes usually involved
boundary movements of villages and towns within rural municipalities, as they
expand, or of other localities. Yet, “next to provinces, CDs are the most
stable administrative geographic areas and are therefore often used in
longitudinal analysis.” [9]
In 2001, for example, there were only three incorporations in Manitoba, but
almost 600 such changes were made in Ontario. [10]
Neuwirth and de Vries concluded
their examination of the Austrian data as follows:
In
this paper, we have examined data on Austrians in Canada, both with regards to
the flow of international migrants into the country and with regards to the
periodic inventories taken in the decennial and quinquennial censuses of
population. We have shown that, for most of the period of 1901 through 1991,
these data give an inflated picture of the “true” number of Austrians, that is,
those Canadians who, either through ethnic identification or through their
country of birth, have a connection to the present Republic of Austria. While
the magnitude of inflation has declined since 1961, it is not possible to state
with any degree of certainty whether the most recent figures are still inflated
or whether they are telling the “true” story. [11]
(p. 52)
Similar reservations apply for
immigrants from Germany and Switzerland. For these reasons, the data provided
in the tables on the number of Canadians born in Austria, Germany or
Switzerland and Canadians with Austrian, German, or Swiss ethnic origin should
be viewed only as an approximation of the “true” number of German-speaking Canadians
over the last 120 years.
It should also be noted that census
data are subject to “imprecision”: To ensure confidentiality, the
values, including totals, are randomly rounded either up or down to a multiple
of "5" or "10". To understand these data, one must be aware
that each individual value is rounded. As a result, when these data are summed
or grouped, the total value may not match the individual values since totals
and sub-totals are independently rounded. Similarly, percentages, which are
calculated on rounded data, may not necessarily add up to 100%. [12]
But then who are the
“German-Canadians”? Without thinking, most people would be happy to
accept the definition that they are “Canadians of German origin.” But a more
thoughtful person would raise the objection that the global definition cannot
cover all such groups and assign it one identity. Here are some examples of “German-Canadians”:
- Various groups of “Palatines,” “Dutch” and “Swiss” who
settled in Nova Scotia
- The “Hessians” who settled in Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New
Brunswick
- German “United Empire Loyalists” in the Maritimes, Quebec
and Ontario
- The Pennsylvania-German Mennonites in Ontario
- Immigrants from Prussia and Mecklenburg who settled in the
Ottawa Valley
- Emigrants from the Dobrudja (Romania) und the Bukovina who settled
in Saskatchewan
- Danube-Swabians from the Banat
- A few Reichsdeutsche and Austrian-Germans before
World War I
- Immigrants from the Russian Empire (Black Sea Coast, the
Volga and central and southwestern Poland) who settled across the Canadian West
(Mennonites, Hutterites, Catholics, Lutherans and others)
- Settlers from the Austro-Hungarian Empire (esp. Galicia) who
settled in the West
- Immigrants from the Gottschee district of Slovenia (formerly
Krain, Austria) who settled in Ontario
- Immigrants from Weimar Germany between 1918 and 1933
- Refugees from the Sudetenland who settled in
northeastern British Columbia during the WWII
- The few persons persecuted by the Nazis who were permitted
to enter Canada shortly before and during WW II
- Many tens of thousands from across East Central and Eastern
and Southeastern Europe who fled from or were expelled by the Soviets at the
end of the Second World War; Germans from the Baltic countries
- Immigrants from German- and French-speaking areas of
Switzerland
- Immigrants from Federal Republic of Germany in the 1950s and
1960s
- Refugees from the German Democratic Republic from 1949 to
1989
-
Spätaussiedler from Siberia, Tadzhikistan and
other regions in the Soviet Union after its collapse
- Re-immigrant Mennonites from South America who settled
mostly in Ontario and northern Alberta and British Columbia
- And, of course, Germans from Bavaria, the Rhineland,
Prussia, Berlin, Saxony, and Austrians from Vienna and the Tyrol and Carinthia
- Immigrants who were brought into Canada over the centuries
because the were brave soldiers, hard-working adaptable farmers, hard workers
in industry, skilled craftsmen, and excellent professionals
- How many more groups and origins and characteristics?
Can all these groups be made to fit
under the label “German-Canadian”? This is not the place to examine this issue
in detail, and a few references to arguments and points of view will have to
suffice. Hoerder (1996), for example, concludes—after having examined the
multifacetted nature of German-language Canadians—that it would be difficult to
“remember their past without creating an artificial group construct. Identity
is self-determined, whether Canadian, ethnic, or recent newcomer”. [13]
Zimmer (1998) doubts that there is “a distinctive German-Canadian identity. The
different generations of immigrants are separated by their socialization in Germany
and their respective different notions of what it means to be German. They are
separated by the different political and cultural discourses of Germanness far
more than they are united by them. Language is the only common characteristic
that binds them together as German-Canadians. … It is misleading in both theory
and practice to regard German-Canadians as a group with a distinct identity.
“German-Canadians” denotes a group of Canadians with a very broadly defined
commonality in acculturation. … To find a German-Canadian identity may thus be
even more difficult than answering the question “What is German?” [14]
Bassler (1998), on the other hand, has little time for critics who
dismiss the concept of a German-Canadian identity because they disregard its
historical development, and provides evidence for the thesis that there have
been historical, albeit transitory, formations of German-Canadian identity in
the process of adaptation (p. 86). For Bassler, the concept of “identity”—i.e.
the historically observable attributes and behaviour patterns shared by
immigrants of German speaking background—includes the following characteristics:
It defines German-Canadian identity as dynamic, changing
over time and displaying regional variants;
this identity is not a transplanted phenomenon but is
indigenous to Canada;
it is primarily—but not exclusively—exhibited among the
first generation. The identity in question is neither the sole nor the dominant
identity in the hierarchy of multiple identities of a German-speaking immigrant.
German-Canadian identity can be observed in external
patterns of settlement, adaptation, and interaction among groups of the
German-Canadian mosaic or in internal patterns of self-identification and
feelings towards other German-Canadians.
German-Canadian identity is not always self-chosen or
self-created but also affected by ascription: it can be imposed by others. [15]
Notes
[1] For
various attempts at defining “German,” see, for example, Manfred Richter, “Who
are the German-Canadians?” in Peter Liddell (ed.), German-Canadian Studies: Critical Approaches (Vancouver: CAUTG,
1983), pp. 42-48. In addition to discussing the difficulties involved in
interpreting census statistics, Richter reviewed various approaches to defining
an ethnic group. Leo Driedger (“In Search of Cultural Identity Factors: A
Comparison of Ethnic Students,” The
Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 12, 1975, 150-162) identified six cultural components in the
definition of a cultural group, viz. language use, endogamy, choice of friends,
religious denomination, parochial schools, and voluntary organizations. Alan B.
Anderson and James S. Frideres (Ethnicity
in Canada: Theoretical Perspectives, Toronto: Butterworths, 1981, p. 40)
maintained that cultural groups can be defined by ethnic origin,
ethnic-oriented religion, and folkways, i.e., the practice of certain customs
unique to the group. David Artiss (“Who Are the German-Canadians—One Ethnic
Group or Several?” In Peter Liddell (ed.), German-Canadian
Studies: Critical Approaches, Vancouver: CAUTG Publications, 1983, pp. 49-55) struggled with the difficulties in defining what is “German.” He
suggested four tests of “German-ness”: historical, linguistic, cultural, and
geographic. In relation to Lunenburg’s history, Artiss would have us ask this
question: “Has this piece of land been owned and occupied by German settlers
and their descendants uninterruptedly from the first days of colonization until
now? If the answer is yes, may we not describe the present occupiers as
German-Canadian, whether they speak German or not?” (p. 55). The difficulties
inherent in dealing with immigration statistics and in defining “German” were
also discussed at length by Gerhard P. Bassler, “German Overseas Migration to
North America in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries: Recent Research from a
Canadian Perspective,” in Hartmut Froeschle, ed. German-Canadian Yearbook, Vol. VII (Toronto: Historical Society of
Mecklenburg Upper Canada Inc., 1983), pp. 8-21.
[2] CC 1936, Vol. I, Table 62.
[3] Department of Manpower and Immigration,
“Immigration Statistics 1966,” Tables 2, 5, 7, 8.
[4] Citizenship and Immigration Statistics
1996, Tables IM4, IM12, IM13.
[5] Dirk Hoerder, “German‑speaking
immigrants of many backgrounds and the 1990s Canadian identity,” pp. 11‑31. In
Franz A.J. Szabo, Austrian
Immigration to Canada. Selected Essays (Carleton University Press, 1996).
[6] Gertrud Neuwirth and John de Vries, “Demographic patterns of
Austrian Canadians, 1900‑ 1991,” pp. 33‑54. In Franz A.J. Szabo, Austrian Immigration to Canada. Selected
Essays (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1996).
[7] See John de Vries, “On coming to our
census: A layman’s guide to demolinguistics,” Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development, 1990, 11, 1-2, 57-76, for a detailed explanation
of the terms used in a census and the difficulties in interpretation of census
data. Nevertheless, John de De Vries and Gerda de Vries (“Demolinguistic
aspects of language maintenance” in Jetske Klatter-Folmer and Sjaak Kroon,
eds., Dutch overseas. Studies in maintenance and loss of Dutch as an immigrant
language. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press, 1997, pp. 121-137) performed a
very successful demolinguistic analysis of language maintenance and shift among
Dutch-Canadians, using ratios between ethnic origin and mother tongue as well
as between mother tongue and home language. They found that net ancestral
language by Dutch-Canadians amounted to 17.4%—considerably lower than, for
example, among the Italian (55%), the Ukrainian (29%), the Greek (73%), and the
Chinese (65%) ethnic groups. Similarly, Anne Vermeer (“Language maintenance and
the Dutch Heritage Language School in Ottawa” in Klatter and Kroon, pp.
131-151) used the ratio between ethnic origin and home language to determine
language shift. She computed a ratio of .03 for student in the Dutch language
school, compared to .10 for German, .30 for Finnish, .17 for Ukrainian, and .30
for Finnish origin students. However, she also found that the percentage of
students who used Dutch as their home language and were enrolled in the
language school was higher at .27 than for the Germans (.11), for example (p.
143).
[8]
Volksdeutsche refers to Germans who lived outside the eastern boundaries
of the German Reich, Reichs-deutsche to Germans living within the
boundaries of the German Reich before 1938.
The author is very well of the fact
that usage of the terms volksdeutsch and reichsdeutsch is
objectionable to most people because of their etiology during National
Socialism. The Nazis had popularized
the term Volksdeutsche and exploited this group for their own
purposes. For this reason, other designations are preferable, for example,
names that more closely associate them with their earlier place of residence
(such as Wolgadeutsche, the ethnic Germans living in the Volga basin
in Russia). In the context of the present study, the repeated use use of
phrases such as “Wolhyniendeutsche, Wolgadeutsche, Deutsche aus Bessarabien,
etc.” as a generic term for “Germans from outside the borders of the German
Empire” is impractical and unwieldy. But sincere apologies are offered to
anyone who feels offended by these terms.
Definitional problems plague the word
“German” itself, and for this reason this study uses words such as “German
speakers,” “German-speaking community,” “Canadians of German origin,” etc. to
reflect the complexity of the term. Clearly, Austrians are not “Germans”, and
neither are the Swiss. A brief discussion of the difficulties associated with
the term “German” may be found in the introductory chapter (Section 2.0).
For present purposes, an “ethnic German” is someone
who considers himself, or is considered by others, to be German. Among the
criteria for referring to someone as being of German origin include having a
connection with German culture, speaking the German language, or having
ancestors who lived in Germany or an area which at that time was part of
Germany or was otherwise considered German.
[9] CC 2001 Census Dictionary, Print Version,
92-378-XPE, p. 210.
[10] CC 2001 Census Dictionary, Print Version,
92-378-XPE, p. 229.
[11] Neuwirth and DeVries, p. 52.
[12] CC 2001, Internet version, “Understanding
the 2001 data.”
[13] Dirk Hoerder (1996), p.
27.
[14] Matthias Zimmer, “Deconstructing
German-Canadian identity,” in Angelika E. Sauer and Matthias Zimmer (eds.), A
chorus of different voices. German-Canadian identities. New York: Peter Lang,
1998, p. 32, 33, 34.
[15] Gerhard P. Bassler, “German-Canadian
identity in historical perspective,” in Angelika E. Sauer and Matthias Zimmer
(eds.), A chorus of different voices. German-Canadian identities. New York: Peter Lang, 1998,
p. 86.
Adapted from: Manfred
Prokop and Gerhard Bassler, German Language Maintenance Across Canada: A
Handbook (Edmonton: 2004).
Return to the Overview of the immigration history of
Alberta's German-speaking communities: Part 1: 1880s-1918
|