History versus historical fiction

This letter is in response to Kenn Harper’s article “February 29, 1920 — Robert Janes’s Last Journey” (Part 4 of 4) appearing in the March 11, 2005 issue of Nunatsiaq News.

Up until now, I have been impressed by Harper’s history articles, which, for the most part, have been accurate. However, Harper’s portrayal of Janes’ death is seriously flawed and should be corrected in the public record.

Harper wrote that Janes saw Nuqallaq and called to him after the first shot, which missed its target. Later, when Janes lay on the ground wounded, Harper described the victim as crying out in agony and then making eye contact with Nuqallaq before the Inuk shot him in the head. The eyewitness statements heard at the Inquest and Preliminary Hearings — 10 or more — and the coroner’s report provide the proof that this is not what happened.

Nuqallaq, the Inuk chosen to kill Robert Janes, was hidden behind a door of an igloo and an overturned qamutiik some 45 feet away from his intended target, when he fired the first two shots. When the second only wounded the white trader, Nuqallaq ran to his igloo to get more cartridges and reload his gun.

During Nuqallaq’s absence from the scene, Janes had fallen after being pushed by Aatitaaq and had called to Ululijanaaq to help him before turning himself on his stomach. According to the Inuit who had gathered around, Janes tried to get up, but ended up partly on his side and leaning on his elbow, when Nuqallaq arrived back on the scene. The witnesses stated they could not see any blood at that time, likely because Janes was lying on the side where the second shot had wounded him — his right side.

At the urging of the only elder present, Nuqallaq, now five feet from the victim, quickly shot him in the head — from above and behind — as indicated by the entry wound on the left side above his ear and the exit wound on the right side below the ear, as described in the coroner’s report. At no time was there ever any eye contact between the killer and his victim. Nor did anyone state that Janes had ever called out to Nuqallaq.

As with many popular historians, Kenn Harper writes a compelling story — but in this case it was inaccurate.

On the other hand, his version of Janes’ death has a familiar ring — as I came across a similar story in oral history transcripts obtained some years ago at either Arctic Bay or Igloolik. Since this story differed so greatly from the statements made by those actually at the crime scene, I discussed the differences with the participating elders in the Pond Inlet History Project. After some discussion the consensus of the group was that those who actually witnessed the crime and the direct descendants of those individuals are the most likely ones to have the accurate facts.

An elder also followed this with the remark that “We Inuit know that the white man doesn’t always tell the truth” — words that would later come back to haunt me, and described in the “Preface” of the revised paperback edition of Arctic Justice due out later this spring.

As well, history should not be confused with “historical fiction,” which too often takes liberty with the facts to dramatize events, leaving readers with a distorted view of what really took place. I strongly encourage Harper to keep writing his “history” articles, but for the sake of the readers of Nunatsiaq News, I urge him to stick to the facts found in original primary sources and confirmed by other sources.

Shelagh D. Grant
Adjunct Faculty
Canadian Studies Program
Trent University, Peterborough