Undaunted Courage ~ Stephen E. Ambrose ~ 6/98 ~ Hi Export

One of the things about this book that distinguishes it from most of the previous Lewis & Clark bibligraphy is the attention it gives to the setting of the stage by describing with significant information the prevailing social, economic, and political institutions of the day. In fact much of the first 11 chapters are devoted to this purpose, and together paint for the reader a pretty good sketch of America as it existed durirng the first Jefferson administration. Since these are the institutions which defined the need for the expedition, how it should be executed, and contributed to the choice of Lewis (and Clark) as leaders and who should be chosen as members of the force, this material is important for the reader's full understanding of the event.

The second area in which the book excells is its development of character portraits of not only the captains, but also President Jefferson and many of the rank and file members of the expedition including the French-Canadian Indian traders hired as translators and guides and of course the Shoshone Indian woman Sacagawea who was without offical attachment to the group other than being the wife of Toussaint Charabonneau a translator. Another unofficial member was York, Captain Clarks slave who was brought along as a servant but became a "de facto" member of the party making unique contributions to its success. Finally the reader gets to know many of the Indian tribes through which the expedition traveled including a number of their chiefs. Through the accounts of the indian negotiations, the reader in the end probably aquires a better picture of the Indian mind-set than the expedition leaders.

In my view, it is these often over looked details which will assure this book a place on the L & C bookshelf for many years to come.

We begin our first week of discussion of "Dauntless Courage" concentrating of the first 6 chapters, pages 1 - 79. This material contains much of the introduction which I refered to in the first post. Some of the material included the Pre Meriwether history of the Lewis family and its establishment in N. America. This history and its description of the physical and social institutions in which the family lived and developed was of particular interest to me since I have been working with a group which is currently accumulating the family history of an ancestor who came to nearby Maryland during the same time period.

Another interesting event for me is Lewis's education (or lack thereof). So far as formal school study was concern the beginning was long delayed and its duration was for just a few years. Yet Lewis emerged a rather sufficiently well rounded young adult able to function as a junior officer in the post revolution army and move from there to the White House as a principal staff aid of the President of the United States. But lets not forget that this fast track advance was open to Meriwether Lewis by virtue of his family position and particularly because a close neighbor and family friend happened to be, Thomas Jefferson, third President of the United States.

I also noted that we first meet William Clark after "Ensign" Lewis was transfered to Lieutenant Clark's rifle Company after Lewis was acquitted by a Court Martial on charges involving his challenge of a fellow officer to a duel after a drunken Lewis got into a political argument with the other officer. Lieutant Clark, four years older than Lewis, was company commander of Lewis's new company. I note that Clark too enjoyed substantial families connections as the younger brother of General George Roger Clark. But Clark had resigned his commission in 1796, and family ties proved insufficient to officially obtain the promised Capitancy when he was reactivated for the expecition.

Harold, When I first got this book from the library it looked so scholarly and like some really heavy reading. After getting started on it I am finding it so fascinating. The description of life at the time Lewis was growing up and the environment in Virginia at that time really makes it come alive. Ambrose writes in a very informative and interesting style. I am sure I will learn a lot as I read this book.

I am looking forward to a very good discussion here and hope that others will join in as history comes alive and we learn a lot more about what America was like at the beginning of the nation.

Larry

I'm on the waiting list for this book in our library. I hope it comes soon.

For prediscussion commentary, I'd like to note that the maps are good (Not perfect) and very useful throughout the book.

This is a subject I can still remember as it was presented to us in grade school and then later in U.S. History in high school. I remember then, thinking that this was one heck of an adventure story about which I wanted to read and learn more ---- As soon as I got the chance. Well, now--- After 50 years I'm finally getting around to it, and for the first time I realy understand the "Continental divide" and the "Northwest Passage".

This is an adventure well worth the 50 year wait. The book is well written, exciting, revealing, and indeed "Riveting" at times.

Best

This sounds like my kind of book. I especially like the approach which encompasses the entire social fabric. What we are and what we do cannot be separated from where we've been, who we've been, etc. I enjoyed the diaries; another book I read, 50's vintage, followed the trek and showed photos of the places where they'd camped, where rivers joined, colorful landmarks, etc.

Jackie on the subject of 18th century social fabric, consider this event from the book:

A young officer, Captain Lewis' father, is home on leave with his family. At the end of the alloted time he leaves to return to his regiment. A few miles from his home his horse stumbles while crosssing a rain swollen stream and the officer is throughly wet from the cold water. He returns to his home soon to be stricken with a bad cold which turns to pneumonia. In less than a week he is dead. In less than six months the breaved widow is married to another.

Life terminating events such as this one were expected in that day, but life must go on!

And L J it's good to have you aboard. While reading your post I tried to remember if I had any exposure to L & C during high school? On my first scan my answer was negative. After re-thinking the subject, however, I think I do now remember reading a book on the subject one day when I was home sick. But it was much later before I really came to appreciate the event.

And on the subject of maps, wasn't it Clark who is generally recognized with credit for the high quality of the draftsmanship of the maps? But I guess it is Lewis who is considered the the principal geographer/astronmer for the group.

Harold

We have just returned from an Elderhostel in Tennessee where one of the courses dealt with the civil war as seen through the diaries and letters of the people involved.

The instructor, a history prof at Middle Tennessee State University in Murfreesboro, has published several collections of such material and his approach was to trace the political and social attitudes of the era up from the time of the revolutionary war and then on past the civil war to the present, a fascinating way of looking at it.

I found some of the material in these first chapters of Undaunted Courage" to support the instructors theory that there is a continuity of middle South social and political thinking that flows through from the Revolution to the present and one of these is a sense the frontier values of social equality that seems to transcend the more aristocratic plantation system. Although he didn't say so , I think the instructor also felt that attitude was part of the so-called "New South" that the instructor felt a part of.

One of the social tensions, of course, is that ambiguity on the one hand of seeing the north as analogous to The tyranny of English of the revolutionary period and a threat to liberty and independence, and yet buying into the inequalities of the system of Southern aristocracy. These tensions created divisions within families and split the middle south in many ways.

I think Lewis and Jefferson as well represent this same ambiguity as presented in Undaunted Courage, exemplified by the incident of Lewis's challenge to Lt. Elliot . It may well have been a source of some of the internal conflict that plagued Lewis throughout his all too brief life.

Jim, what specific area was the Prof. refering to as "middle south?" It would seem easier to make a case for the middle Chesapeake colonies as the source of the "American sense of frontier values of social justice." This would be the Maryland and the other near by Chesapeake bay colonies. This area is often refered to as the "middle colonies" but geographly, it would be hard to style it "middle south." True the plantation system came on rather strong in early Maryland. True too that some Chesapeake settlers when seeking new lands chose to move south to the new areas in Georga and later Alabama and Missippi. These fell even deeper into the plantation system. But many others choose to move west across the Apalacian mountains to trans-apalacia Virginia (now West Virginia), Western Pennsyvania, Kentucky, and Ohio. These areas were not fertile ground for the plantation system. These peoples would seem to me to exemplify this "American sense of fronteer values and ideals of social Justice."

Chapeter 6, "The Orgins of the Expedition" is in my view significat in this weeks reading. It is here that Ambrose discusses 4 previously proposed expeditions from the United States. Thomos Jefferson was no stranger to the idea of an expedition following the Missouri and Columbia Rivers to the Pacific. He was involved in three of them. But none of these really got started and several to my mind would have been good candidates as the source for 20th cenury comedy.

But there was another expedition that actually made it across the continent to the Pacific in 1793. But this espedition did not involve the United States. It was led by Alexander MacKenzie, a principal of the British Northwest Fur Company. MacKenzie led a party totalling 10 from the westmost Northwest company fort up the Peace River, across the mountains to the Frasier River which proved impassable causing the party to abandon the river in favor of an overland trek to salt water.

The expediton was a commercial venture with the goal of opening a practical route for fur trade. They did not bring back sientific specimens and made only a few latitude/longitude observation. The party returned to their base in the fall having a relatively easy trip because of the advanced base deep in western Canada and the fact that the mountain crossing was shorter and the maximum elevation encountered was only 3,000 feet. MacKenzie kept a Journal which was the source of an 1801 book published in England.

What is significant about this expedition is that it established a strong British claim to the Pacific Northwest. Jefferson read the book during the summer of 1802 and before the end of that year, his competitive spirit aroused, had made-up his mind and advised Lewis he would lead an American expedition to the Pacific by the Missuri/Columbia Rivers route.

There is currently in print the following edition of the McKensie Journal:

MacKenzie, Alexander, "Journal of the Voyage to the Pacific, Edited by Walter Sheppe, Dover Publications, Inc. 1995.

Do any of you WW II/ Korean War veterans who went into the army as an 18 year old kid see any parallel between your experience and the account of Meriwether Lewis's experience when he entered the Virgina Volunteer corp in 1793? (Chapter 3,PP42-44 in the hard cover edition).

In the Lewis case, his status as a "Planter" got him access to Junior Officer treatment even though his rank was that of "buck Private." When I went into the Navy in 1944, it was not that obvious, but I suspect it happened by the simple act of commisions resulting from political pull. I of course lacked any such pretension, but I could not help note that at each new billet, my new division officer (in the Navy, this means Ensign or Lieutent J.G.) early on quized me to determing the existance of any relationship to General H. H. Arnold. I have the same initials. "Oh, yes," I would reply, "You mean, Uncle Hap," hoping to convey a humorous negative while leaving a bit of doubt.

Also I cannot help but notice a similar atmosphere of "just wait around and be quiet until we give an order" leading to a "I don't give a damned" atttude and the tendency to misbehave.

I seem to be a bit behind. There are so many realy great books under discussion at this moment that its difficult to keep track of where the discussions are and to keep up with review and comment on all of them.

Before moving into chapter six, I want to comment on the political situation of the era which is succinctly presented on page 65. This affair (Callender) impressed me when I first read it and will supply "Food for Thought" for me for months and possibly years to come. I couldn't resist a hearty chuckle at the thought of Washington as the "Grand Lama of federal adoration, the immaculate divinity of Mount Vernon" and the characterization of Adams as a "Hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man nor the gentleness and sensability of a woman" (He did bear a physical resemblance to Louis XVI)

The vulnerability of the early United States to spys and traitors wasn't limited to Benedict Arnold (and Aaron Burr) as is emphasized by the Michaux affair which terminated an earlier effort on T.J.'s part to explore the West. On the other hand the ins and outs of the Sedition act were actually an early form of McCarthy-ism. History does indeed repeat itself.

The MacKenzie expedition, little known in the continental United States, would have helped me understand the "Continental Divide" a lot better if I'd heard of it in the U.S. History textbook we had in High School. I'd understand it even better if a map had included it in this text.

One is also impressed with the facility with which a lot of "Red Tape" was descanted over by Jefferson in his peremptory election, assignment and organization of the expedition. Now that's the way to get things done. Imagine the difficulties He'd encounter in today's Federal Bureaucracy.

Best

As I read the first few chapters of the book, the introduction, and the background that Ambrose brings to his work; I am struck by the rather narrow point of view of introductory part of the book.

It is not a "modern" history in the way so-called "revisionists" might see or modern in what is currently labeled 'political correctness; except, perhaps, for some treatment of slavery and the attitudes that Jefferson and Lewis brought to that issue.

I tried to imagine myself as an American Indian intellectual reading the book and noted the lack of any background dealing with the cultures and tribes that occupied the land that was about to be "discovered."

Reminds me of the controversy over who discovered the source of the Mississippi. I took a course in Ojibwa culture a few years ago in northern Minnesota. One of the Instructors was a U. of Minn. prof in the Indian studies dept and an activist in Indian affairs in the midwest. He pointed out that the source of the Mississippi was not discovered by any white man; that the tribal people of the area knew it for several centuries before if was "discovered."

I wondered as I read the intro to "Undaunted Courage" how he would react. I'm sure he would have wanted a little more consideration of the background as seen a from tribal perspective on the other side of the Mississippi River.

I realize that may be too much to ask of Ambrose since his book is carefully focused and well developed from the point of view he uses, but I feel that presents a very incomplete picture of the material needed to better understand the expedition from a broader look at the social and cultural fabric of the era.

There are, of course, passages later in the book that could relate to this general topic, but discussion of those seems precluded by the rather rigid chronological organization of the discussion schedule.

Jim, I think your point is well taken, but wouldn't it take one or more entirely different books written from different perspectives (Other than this expedition) to even begin to cover the ground you've suggested?

Do you have any particular works in mind to recommend?

Best

This book is dense; reading it at the rate of six chapters per week will not allow me to savor it, and I particularly wish to do that. The study of American History during my school years was so boringly repetitious that I quit listening early and only memorized enough for the tests. Now I am learning, and I will not rush through it. I do not intend to keep to this pace. Any one else out there with me?

LJ,

I think the accounts of the Lewis and Clark expedition and the Indian perspective before, during and after are represented to some degree by Bernard DeVoto in his two books "Course of Empire"-1951 and "Journals of Lewis and Clark"-1953.

I think Ambrose draws heavily from the latter for some of the material about the tribes Lewis and Clark encounter along the route.

But after a cursory search I could find little that would have set up the reader for the life and culture of the tribes before the expedition met them- and that might have influenced the interaction of the several cultures. I think more research in the area of tribal trade routes, migration routes, hunting party routes would be helpful.

While many of the tribal people met white men (and a black man) for the first time during the expedition, the influenmce of the white culture and trade had affected them for at least a century before.

Several of the tribes had horses when the expedition met them, an acquition from the Spanish that greatly altered the fabric of Indian life, and they were important to the survival of the expedition at key points.

The fur trade had directly reached some of them and the dislocations and tribal wars that came with the trade affected many of them, just as it would affect most of the survivors of the expedition force following the expedition.

One of the things that has struck me about the expedition was the remarkable luck Lewis and Clark had (and probably a great deal of political skill) in avoiding becoming casualties in the many violent and bitter wars being waged between tribal groups in the area.

Devoto's works give some flavor of this.

JIM, As interest in the Native American perspective has increased in recent years, more and more has been published, e.g. Re: The Custer debacle at the Little Big Horn.

I was hoping for recent publications of this sort.

Best

Subject: Discussion Schedule.

Now that we are underway, we might give a bit of consideration to the schedule which I proposed early in the planning phase of this discussion. There have been two posts indicating a longer schedule would be prefered. If we have a consesus in favor of an extended schedule, I have no objection. Aside from a week during mid-July, when I will be out of pocket there is no problem. One approach would simply be to make each of the one week divisions, two weeks instead?

The argument for extension is the fact that it is summer, a time when many are thinking of other things. Over the week end we seem to have started out slow, but with the new week there has been a healthy pick-up. Still as of now we seem limited to four active participants.

L.J. you have past experience with B & L book discussions, experience which I lack. Please feel free to suggest the extension, if you deem it best.

Harold, Its hard to predict. Just play it by ear and give your primary participants time to post or discuss. There are a surprisingly large number of "Lurkers" in these discussions for whom we are "Performing"

Best

LJ,

There are many recent publications that present American History from a tribal person's (in Canada "First Nations") perspective but they tend to all deal with the post Lewis and Clark period.

One of the difficulties is the lack of written sources that historians depend on and the difficulty cultural anthropologists have in dealing with the oral record which constantly changes as legends and myths are under constant revision and change as they are transmitted.

In addition to that we have the ever present tendency to interpret the past from a current political or intellectual trend, and see not what is there but what we would like to see to fit some agenda we have.

One possible interesting example of that is a bit of legend that Jefferson and Lewis had to work on as Ambrose reports them doing their homework in tribal history preparing for the expedition.

They had read the accounts of the "Welsh" Indians. These were presumbably the descendants of the lost expedition of Prince Madoc's expedition to the new world in 1170 which Devoto calls calls, "by far the most widespread legend of pre-Columbian discovery ... and exercized a direct influence on our history."

These Indians were said to be white and to speak a Celtic tongue, and many felt the Mandans were this tribe. Several years ago while we were in Wales on an elderhostel we were told this story as historical truth so the myth persists. It was widespread and believed by many in Jefferson's time.

There are probably many reasons why this myth persists and people to this day believe in a race of "white" Indians.

Lewis was probably most accurately informed about tribal warfare patterns by his reading of Mackenzies account which seems to have presented the most realistic picture of the Blackfeet and tribes associated with them.

I think it is interesting to note that as we read through the book and the encounters the Corps of Discovery had with various tribes that we will tend to see some of them as "good" indians and some as "bad" indians depending on how they affected the expedition and particularly their relationship to Sagagewea, the pre-eminent "good" indian in the story.

Jim, this refers mostly to your posts #13 & 16. I believe you would be favorably impressed with the following L & C history which focuses rather sharply on the interface between the expedition and the Missouri/ Mountain/ Columbia Indian tribes.

Ronda, James P., "Lewis & Clark Among the Indians," Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1984.

This book views the expedition as a diplomatic mission whose goals were to promote U.S. trade and Indian policy. This book gives a better rendition of the position of the Indians. It describes a number of ancient Indian trade patterns which the U.S. policy if accepted would disrupt.

Most of the buffalo hunting plaines tribes had taken to using the horse at least as early as the 18th century as had the Mountain groups such as the Shoshone and Flatheads. The use of the horse must have been every bit as revolutionary so far as the Indian life style was concern as the coming of the automobile was to 20th century Americans. Many tribes came to posess large herds which became a trade item in dealing with other tribes.

I don't view the Ambrose book as anything more or less than what the author said it was, a biography of Meriwether Lewis. It would seem that this purpose require emphasis of the motavative forces moving the principal actor, Meriwether Lewis. I agree Ambrose does not give many words to present alternative Native American positions. Perhaps the purpose of writing a popular book having mass market appeal limited its length.

Jim, concerning your message #20:

These Indians (Welsh Indians) were said to be white and to speak a Celtic tongue, and many felt the Mandans were this tribe. Several years ago while we were in Wales on an elderhostel we were told this story as historical truth so the myth persists. It was widespread and believed by many in Jefferson's time.

And when the expedition wintered among the Mandans, they noted a lighter skinned, lighter, redish hair segment which might support the legend. Yet, I know of no real indication they ever seriously accepted this connection.

I think it is interesting to note that as we read through the book and the encounters the Corps of Discovery had with various tribes that we will tend to see some of them as "good" indians and some as "bad" indians depending on how they affected the expedition and particularly their relationship to Sagagewea, the pre-eminent "good" indian in the story.

Also affecting their classification was the expeditions opinion of how well individual tribes were accepting their message. Thus they had high hopes for the three village farming communities who they visited during the fall and winter of the first year qualifying these tribes for the "good" category and little hope for the Teton Sioux who had threatend the expeditions passage throuh their lands. Did the village farmer lifestyle of the agricultural communities favor the "good Indian" rating?

Harold,

Thanks for the reference. That book should be very helpful as background.

I think the fact that the Sioux were allied with the British made them at least "suspect or difficult" Indians and the agricultural Indians as you note were probably automatically "good" Indians as they posed no threat. I note, however, that agriculture among the tribes was a low priority on the list of things Lewis was told to look for.

I have related several,of my posts about the book to information and experiences I have had while Elderhosteling and it occurred to me that there may be a number of Elderhostels this summer and fall related to the Lewis and Clark Expedition.

I ran a search from the main elderhostel site on the web

http://www.elderhostel.org

and came up with 45 programs. Most of them were concentrated in the west in North Dakota and Montana (interesting none in Washington state), but some in Virginia and Penn, Kansas, Iowa, and Missouri.

The ones in Montana at Bozeman, Great Falls, and Dillon, looked particularly interesting. All of these included trips to historic points on the Lewis and Clark Trail(as did a number of the other ones)

Here is a post relative to the second weeks discussion, Chapters 6 - 12. I suggest that anyone, particularly new people who might be ready to join-in, wanting to make late posts on previous assignments feel free to do so. I think, however, we should try to avoid making posts pertinant to future assignments.

The current frame covers the period from early in 1803 through the actual departure and the beginning of the up-Missouri pull in the spring of 1804. this period included the planning phase including what in modern corporate planning is called the "Project Definition" phase (in the case I am most familar with we called it a "Project Outline"). In the 1803 case it took the form of the President's written orders but the indications are that Capitan Lewis was allowed his in-put. I am impressed by the personal (person to person) interface of the actors as opposed to corporate interface. Capitan Lewis's briefing contacts were individuals such as doctors or leading scientists or the army throught its officers from the Secretary of War to individual officers such as the officers at the Harper's Ferry arsenal. But even with the army the contact officer appeared to be acting more as individuals rather than the army, acting through them.

Another example of impressive informality is the choice of Clark and the negotiation between the two that terminated in Clarks acceptance of the co-command. Lewis knew him from a previous posting in the west. Does the inability to obtain the promised capitancy for Clark even with Presidencial sanction suggest an early army manifestation of administrative gridlock?

In the choice of auxilary personnel, I have often wondered why, in addition to the translators, Lewis did not include a Doctor and an artist. Ambrose tells us, he did consider a doctor but decided against it. Considering the resources of the early 19th centurn profession, I guess I can understand the exclusion. But I am less forgiving about not including an artist. As a result east coast America had to wait another 30 plus years for George Catlin to show them actual pictures of the native people and scenery.

Finally, switching to another subject, we note 3 examples of the attachment to alcohol by early Americans. An estimated 120 gallons of wiskey was on board when they departed, no where near enough to last the trip, but enough to set-up the need for at least one early court martial. And the sentence, "100 lashes on the bare back, well laid on!" Other examples of alcohol use are the alcholic boat builder whose failure to complete the keel boat on schedule delayed the start of the expedition, and the botonist, Lewis thought he had engaged on the trip down the Ohio who did not make an early morning departure. Ambrose notes that he too was known to be addicted and suggests this was the cause of the mind change.

And one final thought for this post, what about the diet at the beginning before reaching the abundant game country? What was the rotation: day 1, Hominy and lard; day 2, salt pork and flour; and day 3, cornmeal and pork? No wonder the men were coming down with boils and other early manifestations of scurvy.

Harold, what an interesting post. That diet for the early part of the trip makes you wonder how they survived. Terrible.

I just checked and find I had finished reading Chapter 5 so will try to get started on the next 6 chapters in the next day or so.

I thought the insights into life at the Capitol during the 2 years that Lewis served as Jefferson's secretary were interesting. Things must have been very informal and with all of the handwriting to be done there must have been many hours of dull drudge type work involved in being a secretary. The compensation had to be the opportunity to be around and knowing so many of the interesting people of his time. Considering the pace of life to which we are accustomed, where everything is controlled by the clock, I really have trouble visualizing what life must have been like. I think Ambrose provided an insight when he described the limitations in transportation and communications.

Larry

Some random thoughts about the preparation for the journey:

Lewis was given questions to answer by many of those who helped prepare him for the journey. Dr. Rush asked him many things about Indian health he wanted explored and Ambrose says some of these questions were " right on the mark" and others silly.

I wonder which Ambrose felt were silly? I found most of them to be on the mark. One of particular interest to me was the one dealing with how long they suckled their children. The answer, of course, is that they continued to suckle children far beyond the time normally allowed in modern American practice. This has been and still is a source of some prejudice against the indians as being uncouth and uncivilized- the long suckling period used as an example. It did, however, have many medical benefits both for the mothers and the children, not the least of which was that it acted as a natural birth control.

Jefferson wanted Lewis to take some small pox vaccine (actually cow pox) but it seems Lewis was not able to maintain a virile supply and he knew how to test its virility. This was perhaps fortunate in a way as the tribes Lewis met in Mandan and Hidasta territory had just and were and would be suffering greatly from small pox. They had no natural resistance to the disease and it proved almost 100% fatal. I can't find anywhere later in the book any evidence that lewis had used the vaccine on the Indians. I imagine the reference was to the possible use of it on the members of the Corps of Discovery although jefferson had in mind the Settlements and the Indians.

Had he used it on the Indians it may have resulted in disaster for the expedition as they may not have been resistant to cow pox and in any case they would have identified the treatment or preventative measures with the cause (as happened to the Whitmans later)

I doubt that the expedition could afford many specialists along and Lewis and Clark were both widely skilled in many of the areas needed for survival on the frontier and complemented each other very well in areas where one or the other was lacking.

This was true also of the men they selected as besides being physically capable and having military skills they represented a broad range of other skills that not only came in handy but were essential to the expedition. In that first winter at Camp Mandan the blacksmithing skills of one of the privates produced trade goods that were traded for Mandan corn that allowed the expedition to survive that winter.

An artist would have been a good addition and probably there were frontier artists such as Catlin later who not only had the artistic ability to record the journey but the more practical skills to assist in the journey as well. Lewis seems to have had some skill as an illustrator of his natural science objects but again he may not have had the time nor the inclination to do more than that.

A complete linguist would have been very helpful but given the wide range of Indian languages (and European as far as that goes) encountered that would have been impossible. They were fortunate (and is some cases unfortunate in the choices made) in being able to meet and enroll the help of many people along the way to help in translations. To their credit they recognized this lack especially after the first near disastrous encounter with the Souix and recognized the value Sacajawea would add later.

It would have been very valuable to them to have some light easily transportable trade goods to use with the Indians. Beads had their limitations here as did tobacco. Whiskey was the standard product used on the frontier for this purpose, but they hardly had enough for their own needs, and as Ambrose points out later it was an essential ingredient of any military operation of the time. The indians wanted guns and ammunition more than anything else, but that would have been counter productive and Lewis and Clark had enough sense not to arm the Indians when their goal was partly at least to bring about tribal peace compacts..

In some respects the instructions Jefferson gave were to later cause great hardship and imperil the expedition. His insistence on following the Missouri to its headwaters and thereby finding a accessible water route to the Pacific coast was to prove impractical and was based of very imperfect geographical knowledege. In hindsight it would have been much wiser to give Lewis more leeway in determining the route to the coast with some sort of provision for charting the Missouri as well as finding the most advantagious route. Clark later with his meticulous work with the Indians at Fort Mandan knew the Yellowstone route well and charted it (but did not use it until later on the return trip). On the other hand Jefferson probably knew Lewis well and felt he needed the precise instructions to prevent his going off on a tangent (as he was tempted to do in his planned but not implemented digression on the Santa Fe Trail).

The instructions regarding the use of caution and avoidance of confrontation with the Indians proved to be important. Lewis found them difficult to follow and in one case later his inability to follw this order was to prove a basis for enmity between the Blackfeet and the Americans for years to follow.

On the subject of careing for their babies, I understand the plains tribes carried their babies on cradle boards for the first 18 months to 2 years. Such a long time surely delayed their early mobility. Yet they were safer straped to the mother's back than crawling around the prairie.

Smallpox I understand essentially had wiped out the Mandans by the Mid 1830's. Their villages were the places where traders gathered bring smallpox with them. The prairie hunters out on the prairie were less exposed but they too suffered.

Of the men the trade of Sargent Gass, the carpenter, was particularly valueable. He had the opportunity to exercise this trade in the preparation of two winter quarters.

But Jefferson's method of operation included the habit of writing his own letters. At least he used this as an argument to convience Lewis he would not become a mere copyist if he accepted the offered position.

Actually, Jefferson invented (or made major improvements upon) a machine that made copies of his letters automatically as he was writing them.

I agree that the expedition had as good a physician as was available in the person of Lewis. The consultations with Benjamin Rush were interesting. Rush, was well known in his day and his autobiography is well worth reading, but Medicine at that time was very primitive.

The Harper's Ferry references were also interesting. I once owned a Harper's Ferry "Cap and Ball" but a Flintlock is somewhat more primitive, and frankly, having also owned and fired a blunderbuss, I would prefer the latter in an emergency although not for accuracy. There are local Clubs today that build and use Kentucky Long Rifles. Some of them are truly beautiful.

Bismuth, Arsenic and Mercury remained the treatment of choice for Syphillis until the advernt of Pennicillin in about 1944-5. Just imagine that, only 55 years ago.

Along the lines of Rush's questions, one wonders whether the native Indians smoked Marajuana.

Best

LJ, a trivial comment, but I noticed in last night's "Jefferson" (Ken Burns on PBS) that he was said to have brought his copying machine home from his Paris assignment.

Did anyone watch this first installment? I thought it leaned heavily on the viewpoint demonstrated by Joseph Ellis in our recent selection American Sphinx: that we need to understand and assimilate the contradictions of Jefferson's personality and beliefs -- and also that we need to have a more adult attitude toward our "heroes." Certainly the current selection, though displaying perhaps more than the average biographer's admiration of his subject, is frank about the fallibility of Lewis. Ambrose makes the explorers and the whole party far more real than the cardboard figures I recall from history classes.

Ros

L.J., That must have been some machine. What was it, some sort of mechanical device linked to the writers hand moving a copy pen in the same pattern as the original? Could be rather complicated!

On the subject of medicine, I'm inclind to agree that a professional doctor could not have saved Sargent Floyd. Would Floyd have had a chance to survive a bad appendix even in Philidelphia?

Would the Bismuth, arsenic, Mercury routine actually cure syphillis? I've never heard of marajuana use by plains Indians. Yet the ceremonial pipe was certainaly a part of every ritual. The early writers never say anything that has made me suspect Marajuana. In the Southwest though certain tribes used much harder stuf.

Roslyn, Welcome to the group. I, too thought the Ken Burns special last November was really great. The WWW site is still active . There is an interactive link to it from this page. The site includes many excerpts from the several original L & C journals.

I'd like to return to the "Good Indian/Bad Indian" thread and use the first encounter with the Sioux (Lakota/Dakota) tribes to illustrate a number of speculations about Lewis, the expedition, and the Indian policies of the period. This is the first time we encounter Lewis's standard "Indian Speech" and it can serve as a focal point, although I am apt to digress as befits my age.

My main observations are that the incident can be made to illustrate that the Sioux were perhaps in many ways "good" Indians, that Lewis in spite of his many admirable qualities was ill equipped to handle Indian diplomacy, and finally that what little (but vital) success the party in dealing with the Indians was due more to the diplomacy and wisdom of the Indian chiefs and elders, (what the expedition sorely lacked was a wise old man) and later to Indian women than to anything else.

These are not particularly original with me but reflect the general observations made by Bernard DeVoto (as dated as they might be) and shared to some extent by Ambrose (informed by Ronda) as I read him. This then will be the first of several comments trying to develop and support these speculations.

A look at the immeadiate past history of the tribe will help understand the position the Sioux (Ojibway word for enemy or sometimes translated "sneaky serpent" according to one of my Ojibway friends who still harbors a grudge*1.) At the time they encountered Lewis All of the tribes encountered (except perhaps the Nez Perce) had recently undergone traumatic periods of stress and rapid change in culture and fortune. For some like the Mandan it was the decimation of their ranks with small pox and other diseases brought to them.

For the Sioux it was mainly the problem that they bore the brunt of the westward movement of tribes as the tribes east of them were pushed westward by the whites. The Sioux were displaced from one area after another by tribes from the east and northeast, always being outgunned as the approaching tribes were better armed, having had a head start in the fur trade. The Sioux were now running up against some of the more western tribes such as the Crow who were pushing them the other way.

In order to compete and retain their basic and evolving culture they needed to develop trade and get modern arms. They were in a manner of speaking caught between a rock and a hard place. From an Indian culture point of view they managed admirably, doing what they had to do to survive and developing leaders like Red Cloud who were later to write brilliant chapters in the history of Indian resistance to the white flood that was overtaking them.

They were to do this later by adapting their style of warfare to the new situation, developing such exceptional military tacticians and leaders as Crazy Horse (just ask Custer and Fetterman) and by gaining skill in forming alliances, adapting to new conditions, and continuing to develop trade. Their culture and will to resist was only destroyed in the end by the destruction of the Bison and resulting starvation that drove them to reservations, absolute dependence on their "white fathers," and decay of a proud culture; one of the sorriest chapters in American history epitomized by the images of the dead at Wounded Knee, the ultimate outcome of the outrageous "Indian Speech" that Lewis gave throughout the journey.

Their leaders and their elders with memories of the tribal past knew what had to be done- namely to develop trade, to arm themselves and to anticipate the push yet to come. This had to be done with some degree of caution and forbearance, assessing the possibilities presented by the newcomers and developing strategies in a very through, deliberative manner. This was not a particular trait of the young high testosterone*2 warrior on either side but very characteristic of the traditional tribal decision making process. At the end of the confronataion the older and wiser strategies prevailed at least on the Indian side of the encounter.

It is remarkable that they endured the insulting and ignorant speech and ensuing parley with its patronizing "white father" approach, and its lack of understanding of basic Sioux governance and needs, awaiting the pragmatic punch line in terms of what they could expect in turn for the impossible demands made of them; and then when that line fell far short of satisfying their needs they still choose to wait and see if something better might develop.

In the next post I hope to look at Lewis in light of this incident, the speech itself, his strong points of character and his glaring weaknesses.

1. The current heated controversy involving Interior Secretary Babbit resulting in yet another special prosecutor evolves from a dispute over gambling rights between a Sioux tribe in Minnesota with their tribal allies of various ilk fighting a coalition of Wisconsin Ojibway tribes, now battling in the lobby lane and courtroom.

2 Actually, for the plains Indian warrior the ability to withstand sexual temptatation was a prime virtue and the higher the level of arousal the more credit for chastity (especially before battle). I can imagine the scene in the campfires before Little Big Horn with the 7th cavalrymen bragging of their sexual prowess in the houses of pleasure across the river from Fort Abrahanm Linclon, and the warriors on the other side bragging of their restraint (probabaly both sides telling lies about this aspect of manhood as soldiers are wont to do.)

JIM, that's a stellar post. I'm anxious to hear more. I gather that the Sioux ranged from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. Can you tell us about the significance of "Red Stick" (hence "Baton Rouge").

ROS/HAROLD. You're right about the copier. T.J.'s encounter with this mechanical device in France is described in AMERICAN SPHINX, but Dumas Malone in his BIG Biography of T.J. says that it was dramatically altered and improved upon while T.J. was in office as president.

HAROLD: Whether of not Syphillis was EVER cured is debatable (As is almost everything about that disease), but I personally doubt that there were any complete "Cures". Even today there are those who think of it as something a bit like Tuberculosis where the disease is ususlly/often arrested (Encapsulated) thus conferring immunity to re-infection without actual cure.(This is admittedly oversimplification)

Best

Jim, L.J. is right when he referred to your post #31, as “a stellar post”. I certainly agree. I knew the Sioux had undergone a major cultural revolution some 50 years before the time of the L & C passage following a military defeat by an ancient rival. Was it by the Ojibways? At the time they were resident in the northern Minnesota lake region. This set them migrating south and west. giving up the canoe and wild rice for the horse and buffalo.

This migration has some of the earmarks of a similar migration by the Kickapoos who in the late 18 th century began a move South from their ancestral lands along the lake in what is now Eastern Wisconsin down the Mississipp ending in the 1830 with the Kickapoo living along the Rio Grande River in Texas and Mexico. In the Sioux case as I understand it one group moved south to what is now the Iowa area west of the Missippi River; other groups moved west to the Dakotas again becoming relatively prosperous as horse owners and buffalo hunters

Regarding the U.S. Indian policy no better example of it’s disregard for the Indians exists than in Texas. Most all Texas tribes were moved by the United States beginning in the 1850’s to Indian Territory, now better known as Oklahoma. Today there are only three Indian communities resident in Texas, all three 18 th or 19 th century immigrants from other states. In addition to the Kickapoo from Wisconsin, there are the Alabama Coushatta from East of the Missippi ariving in Texas in the 1830’s, and the Tigua now near El Paso who migrated from New Mexico during the Spanish period.

L.J., I've never known of the Sioux being resident in Texas. So far as the plains buffalo culture was concern the Comanche were one strong buffer having a wide range of territory from Kansas through Oklahoma to central Texas. I'll defer to Jim for his thoughts on your "Baton Rouge" question.

JC,

I can't help you with the "red stick" concept. I don't think,it involves the Sioux. I can give a better picture of their range thanks to George Hyde and the University of Oklahoma Press for "Red Clouds Folk," and some courses I have taken at Custer, SD, and other reading. The Sioux at the time of Lewis and Clark were expanding their territory westward across the plains but not as extensively north and south.

Imagine that you are a young Sioux warrior who has just gone to the spiritual heartland of your nation in the Black Hills area and undergone a vision quest. After several days of fasting you have a vision of a White Buffalo and the medicine man interprets that to mean that you should spend as many moons as it takes to go on a sacred search for the Great White Buffalo. You would be then in a similar position to a knight of the Round table seeking the Holy Grail. You will travel from your spiritual center to the perimeter of your tribe's and associated tribes's territory in your quest. If you follow your sacred path with diligence and devout care, you may even be visited by White Buffalo Woman, the founder of your race. She may give you a message and assure you that your tribe will continue to have success in war and in hunting the buffalo.

The medicine man has arranged a Sun Dance to start you off properly. With young men of the tribe and support from non-dancers of the tribe (excluding,of course, any menstruating women) you will dance around the Sun Dance Pole from sunrise to sunset for five days, resting for about 15 minutes every hour and fasting for this period again. At a key point in the ceremony you will pierce your breast with two Eagle talons attached to a rawhide rope tied high on the pole. Then you will rush backward tearing the talons through your flesh.*2

This sacrifice of your flesh and the prayers of the supporting tribal members arranged in a circular shelter of Pine boughs around the pole will assist you in achieving your spiritual contribution to the tribe.*1

If your journey takes you around the perimeter of the tribal territory you will visit northern Iowa and Northern Nebraska in the south. If you venture further south the Pawnee may scalp you. Along the east you will travel up the Mississippi River from the Iowa border to what is now the twin cites of Minneapolis and St. Paul and follow the Minnesota River northwest toward the Dakotas. You will not go north along the Mississippi or you will met your deadly enemy the Chippewa (Ojibwa.) At the Missouri you may go north as far as you can without being captured by the Mandan and Arakira but since they have just suffered heavy losses from small pox that danger may not be so great.

On the western edge of your territory along the Powder River and the Little Big Horn you may meet a party of Crow warriors. If you decide to do battle with them you may decide that this is "a good day to die" and challenge them with that information, sing your death song and battle unto death. Maybe not. They may decide only to approach and touch you, counting coup and wait for another day for the deadly encounter.

North of the Yellowstone will be the Blackfeet and you probably will not wish to tangle with them at this time. As you return to the Black Hills you will travel by two more sacred spots that you share with the Cheynene, Devils Tower in Wyoming and Bear Butte nearby in SD. Your journey has taken you to several sacred spots and you have returned to the most sacred one.

Good luck in your quest for the White Buffalo. May you have the same extraordinary good fortune that Captain Lewis had in his journey.

Whatever the outcome you will have prepared yourself for your "good day to die" and your death song will vibrate with spiritual richness as a result of your journey as Lewis's did not.

1. At one time several years ago as members of an elderhostel group my wife and I took part as supporters of such a dance-- now non-tribal members are not allowed to give support and the elderhostelers no longer have this experience nor that of the sweat lodge.

2. A form of flesh sacrifice for women is to have the medicine man cut strips of flesh from their arms, and an alternate for men is to tie the rawhide rope to a Buffalo skull dragged across the ground until the talons tear the skin loose.

LJ,

I can't help you with the "red stick" concept. I don't think,it involves the Sioux. I can give a better picture of their range thanks to George Hyde and the University of Oklahoma Press for "Red Clouds Folk," and some courses I have taken at Custer, SD, and other reading. The Sioux at the time of Lewis and Clark were expanding their territory westward across the plains but not as extensively north and south.

Imagine that you are a young Sioux warrior who has just gone to the spiritual heartland of your nation in the Black Hills area and undergone a vision quest. After several days of fasting you have a vision of a White Buffalo and the medicine man interprets that to mean that you should spend as many moons as it takes to go on a sacred search for the Great White Buffalo. You would be then in a similar position to a knight of the Round table seeking the Holy Grail. You will travel from your spiritual center to the perimeter of your tribe's and associated tribes's territory in your quest. If you follow your sacred path with diligence and devout care, you may even be visited by White Buffalo Woman, the founder of your race. She may give you a message and assure you that your tribe will continue to have success in war and in hunting the buffalo.

The medicine man has arranged a Sun Dance to start you off properly. With young men of the tribe and support from non-dancers of the tribe (excluding,of course, any menstruating women) you will dance around the Sun Dance Pole from sunrise to sunset for five days, resting for about 15 minutes every hour and fasting for this period again. At a key point in the ceremony you will pierce your breast with two Eagle talons attached to a rawhide rope tied high on the pole. Then you will rush backward tearing the talons through your flesh.*2

This sacrifice of your flesh and the prayers of the supporting tribal members arranged in a circular shelter of Pine boughs around the pole will assist you in achieving your spiritual contribution to the tribe.*1

If your journey takes you around the perimeter of the tribal territory you will visit northern Iowa and Northern Nebraska in the south. If you venture further south the Pawnee may scalp you. Along the east you will travel up the Mississippi River from the Iowa border to what is now the twin cites of Minneapolis and St. Paul and follow the Minnesota River northwest toward the Dakotas. You will not go north along the Mississippi or you will met your deadly enemy the Chippewa (Ojibwa.) At the Missouri you may go north as far as you can without being captured by the Mandan and Arakira but since they have just suffered heavy losses from small pox that danger may not be so great.

On the western edge of your territory along the Powder River and the Little Big Horn you may meet a party of Crow warriors. If you decide to do battle with them you may decide that this is "a good day to die" and challenge them with that information, sing your death song and battle unto death. Maybe not. They may decide only to approach and touch you, counting coup and wait for another day for the deadly encounter.

North of the Yellowstone will be the Blackfeet and you probably will not wish to tangle with them at this time. As you return to the Black Hills you will travel by two more sacred spots that you share with the Cheynene, Devils Tower in Wyoming and Bear Butte nearby in SD. Your journey has taken you to several sacred spots and you have returned to the most sacred one.

Good luck in your quest for the White Buffalo. May you have the same extraordinary good fortune that Captain Lewis had in his journey.

Whatever the outcome you will have prepared yourself for your "good day to die" and your death song will vibrate with spiritual richness as a result of your journey as Lewis's did not.

Jim, George Catlin writes of the details of a similar ceremony among the Mandans that he witnessed during his 1833 visit. Gory but fascinatingly interesting!

In August the expedition entered the Indian Country and, prior to the arrival at the Mandan Village where they spent the winter, they held four significant conferences with Native peoples. These included the Otos, the Yankton Sioux, the Teton Sioux, and the Arikara. These conferences represented the expedition's opportunity to sell American policy to the Tribes.

The conference with the Otos went well enough and because of the presence of a resident trader who proved a competent translator, the Otos probably got a pretty good understanding of the message. The Indians were not impressed with the gifts, particularly the printed certificates, but there was a small success in the promise of a chief, Little Thief, to go to Washington the following spring.

The next conference with the Yankton Sioux was less successful. There was no effective capability to translate the message into the Sioux language. The listeners simply did not understand what the Captains were saying and again they were unimpressed by the gifts. They wanted powder, shot and firearms, not trinkets and certificates. The Yankton meeting at least did not end in military confrontation as did the conference a few days later, with the Teton Sioux.

I consider the conference with the Teton Sioux the most critical event encountered during the entire trip. A defeat at this point would have terminated the expedition without results. In contrast the firefight with the Blackfeet two years later involved only Lewis and 3 companions. Most personnel and records were elsewhere. From the record of the Captains handling of the Sioux confrontation, I am left with the impression that Jefferson was right in his fear that in such a situation, Lewis might err on the rash side. The expedition got through, but I have the feeling "a lots of luck" was with them.

The last of the fall conferences was with the Arikara. These people followed a village farming culture similar to the Mandans further up the river. They had a trade relation with the Sioux. trading their corn, squash, and beans for Sioux buffalo hides and meat, and horses. They were frequently at war with the Mandans. The Captains fresh off their meeting with the Teton Sioux emphasized new trade patterns involving peace with the Mandans and an alliance against the Sioux. American traders would supply new goods. Again the Arikara were not impressed with the gifts and despite what ever contrary conclusion the Captains may have believed, the fact is, the Arikara had no intention of disrupting their Sioux trade connection, at least not until American traders demonstrated the availability of goods more substantial than the Captain’s gifts.

I've just read in the AAA Tour Guides that Baton Rouge is supposedly named after a stripped Cypress tree which marked the boundary between two Indian tribes. However I recall reading a simplified biography of one of our presidents (Andrew Jackson as I remember) in which "Baton Rouge" was a term describing the southern componant of a loose affiliation of Indian tribes. The more Northern componant was named either White or "Black-Stick". These tribes were (As I recall) essentially Sioux in origin or administration.

Not being a sufficient historian myself, I'll have to trust to those of you who are more intimately informed on these Native American points of history.

Best

The most admirable aspect of the Jefferson/Lewis Indian policy as reflected in Lewis's standard Indian speech was the desire to have the tribes at peace with one another.

One of the wrong assumptions behind the implementation of this policy was that the United States or the European powers had any great credibility on the subject of war and peace especially as it pertained to Indians. Although it was beginning to have the sheer power to force its will on the tribes, that was a little premature at the time Lewis gave his speech.

The history of warfare between tribes since Colombus had been one of interference and instigation by the European Powers and later by the United States. They brought their wars with them and involved the tribes in all of them- just as the tribes on their part attempted to get them involved with inter-tribal disputes.

The extent to which the tribes might have enjoyed more or less peaceful co-existence without interference from the fur trade, the European wars that spilled over into North America, and introduction of new deadly war technology is very debatable and it would be an oversimplification to claim as some of the modern tribal intellectuals do that all the major confrontations and tribal wars were the result of white influence. But there are some historical ironies here when we look at the record.

Here we have Lewis telling the Indians to be at peace with one another when the colonies had engaged with England and France in a bloody conflict with each developing tribal allies where the majority of casualties were Indians. The United States had pushed westward partly by promoting and exploiting already existing tribal rivalries and having the tribes annihilate each other, then in almost all instances turning on their tribal allies and displacing them westward (sometimes eastward in terms of NW Tribes). This was a pattern followed before and after the time of Lewis and Clark.

Perhaps, the most glaring irony was that the United States and England would soon become emeshed in the war of 1812, another war that would see Indians enlisted on both sides. The tribes, including even the fierce Sioux and the Blackfeet had leaders among them who were peace makers on their own account and one wonders if Lewis might better have listened to their counsel about war and peace and learned from it.

But these peacemakers were old (as one of the young warriors pointed out) and the path to leadership in the tribes was through exploits in war so there was always pressure from the young braves to go on a raid, to provoke a confrontation, to prove themselves. It is not inappropriate that the Boston Tea Party participants dressed as young Indian braves.

Lewis did not understand that he could not simply appoint one person chief and expect that person to have the power to implement peace. Tribal leadership was multiple and involved. It was never as the old western movies portray that there was a chief who had absolute power and authority and could with a wave of his hand determine policy. Our presidents have noted the very severe restrictions on presidential power- just so or even more so the various chiefs (and tribes did not have a single authority figure like our president) could not dictate to their followers. Actions and policies came only after long consultations with practically everyone having the opportunity to speak at some length without interruption or rebuttal.

Interestingly, this pattern of gathering input for decision making was followed by Lewis and Clark on several occasions during the expedition with even York (who was always considered a slave by Lewis and Clark) involved. Maybe this is just a frontier value they brought with them or it may have been something they picked up from the Indians- at any rate the frontier may have picked it up from the Indians just as some tribal governemtal practices are purported by some to have made their way into our constitution.

L.J.: I did Alta Vista search on the string, “red stick.” There were many hits most having no connection to Indian history. A few appeared to have some connection including the following:

<http://orion.jscc.cc.tn.us/~lgundy/us1ppt2/tsld142.htm>

This page is described as “Slide 142 of 303.” A copy in its entirety appears below:

Red Stick Confederacy

Tecumseh and the Prophet lead an Indian revival

preached abstinence (Tenskwatawa)

concerned about white encroachment

tried to unify Muskhogeans w/ Algonquins

Other slides relate to other late 16th/ early 19th century historical events. I don’t think there is more on Red Stick among the other slides posted here.. Taken as a whole these slides seem intended as pictoral aids supporting an oral lecture.

The do provide us a clue associating the “Red Stick" event to an early 19th Century, Southeastern U.S. Indian confrontation. And there may be other sites on the rather large and diverse Alta Vist hit list. I don't think either of the two Indian Nations mentoned here are connected to the Sioux?

Harold

Thank you Harold,

On the subject of the "Standard" Indian speech, It seemed to be straightforward, self-serving propaganda on the part of the U.S.

Nothing surprising or particularly bad about that.

Best

In spite of all the excellent preparations that Lewis made for the expedition, I think this section of the book begins to reveal some of the shortcomings in that area and just how lucky the expedition was to survive in spite of them.

To his credit, I think he had the basics down pat- the training of the men to use new rifles and to become expert in their use. When one is up to one's eyevrows in grizzly bears that is pretty important.

I sometimes wonder how Little Big Horn might have come out with a Lewis and Clark as officers instead of Custer and Reno. Some of Custer's men had never fired their weapons before the fight and evidence suggests many malfunctions. Custer was indifferent to training them. But then with the penchant for Lewis and Clark to parley there may not even have been a battle- The Indians encamped on the Little Big Horn fully expected a parly when Reno's first charge came dispelling that notion- and after that it was too late and as they say Custer became history.

But I can't understand why Lewis, knowing it would be a treacherous river journey, did not make an effort to train the men to swim.

The absolute depencence on the rifle for food is another area of problem when there were so many other ways to secure game that Indians used- .A few plains bows with their tremndous power might have helped as a back-up. Of course, even the Indians knew enough not to tempt a grizzly whatever the weapon at hand and there were many close calls. Some sections of the book might well be renamed "Undaunted Foolhardiness."

Here are a few comments on recent posts:

The standard “Peace Message”. As Ambrose pointed out there was a marked contrast between the peace message and the role of arms merchant when during the Mandan winter the expedition used their blacksmith forge to manufacture battle-axes to the Indian’s specifications. The Indians found it hard to understand how they could sell them axes and yet deny them the permission to use the axes against their enemy. The ax incidentally was very popular and over a year later in the Rocky Mountains, the expedition encountered an Indian in possession of one of their Fort Mandan trade axes.

Indian PeaceMakers. I think the Teton Sioux chief Black Buffalo deserves most of the credit for the avoidance of bloodshed during the October council with the Tetons. It was he who at a critical moment moved toward peace after another chief, the Partisan, had excited the many Sioux wariors to battle and after both captains were committed to fight.

Decision Making by the Expedition/ by the Indians. Our author, Stephen Ambros later cites the popular vote to decide the location of the winter quarters on the Pacific coast in December 1805 as the first time in an American election, an Afro-American and an Indian woman was allowed to vote. Another example of a vote among the men was the Captains allowed the men to vote to fill the vacant sergeant’s position after the death of Floyd. Patrick Gass was elected. I can’t think of any other elections; generaly the captains made the decisions in the usual manner.

I don’t think an Indian Council is a good example of a democratic town meeting in the New-England sense. True there was plenty of free discussion, and that is an example of democracy. But I have never heard of the matter being decided by a vote. Decision was more a matter of consensus. The mid19th century traveler, Francis Parkman after attending a Council to decide alternate moves the group should make did not know the outcome until the next day when the Chief directed his wives to take down the tepee and pack for the trail. Others observing the goings on, simply followed suite.

Training Deficiencies. I agree taking the party up an unknown river, with a substantial number being unable to swim seems the height of negligence. During the second summer on at least one occasion it almost brought disaster. Sacagawea saved the records. Curiously, however, this obvious precaution was generally overlooked by pre20th century navies and merchant sailors. Personal life preservers or other handy floatation devises were virtually unknown. When emergency came, if the whale boat could not be launched it was grab on to a floating plank or what ever other wreckage might be handy.

Wherever soldiers go they leave a genetic trail behind them and the Lewis and Clark expedition was obviously no exception although Ambrose doesn't detail that aspect of the sexual encounters between the tribes and the expedition.

Many of the tribes today as they examine their tribal government patterns and set standards fo determining just who is an Indian- and particularly a tribal member worthy of voting in tribal elections, sharing casino profits etc. have set up elaborate checks to determine ancesory but that was not a concern of most of the tribes at the time of the expedition.

If one was raised in the tribe one belonged to the tribe regardless of parentage so white children taken in raids on settlements became tribal members and I'm sure the children engendered by the expedition did as well.

Still Clark seemed concerned that Pomp (who was only half Indian genetically) be raised as a "civilized" white person.

I think Ambrose hints that Lewis but not Clark may have engaged in the sexual encountrers along the trail.

I wonder if there are some Lewis genes still represented in the Indian populations in the U.S.

We have the expedition safely across the country now and on the Pacific coast. It was a harrowing adventure, successful because of some incredible luck, some good Indian friends( especially among some women), exceptional leadership skills, because of some very wise decisions, and in spite of some very bad decisions. And, of course, mainly because as Ambrose suggests of "Undaunted Courage."

I can't help but think as we review the trip so far that most of the wiser decisions belong to Clark and not to Lewis. I think this was partly so because Clark was the one more deeply involved in the practical aspects of navigation, of learning what he could from the Indians- rather than Lewis's deeper concern with teaching them and enlisting them in the new empire the U.S was building.

I can think of several examples to illustrate this but probably none better than the fiasco of the iron boat. Lewis was very Jeffersonian in his desire to meet the challenge of the journey with this new concept he had developed (at great expense in terms of precious time lost before, and during the expedition) and in the end it all came to naught, and it was left to Clark to find the suitable trees needed for the canoes that replaced it and to learn the Indian way of burning out the canoes to fashion them.

What a perfect match Lewis and Clark were. Sometimes Ambrose is specific in pointing this out- sometimes he only hints. I get the impression that one of his hints relates to differences in the personal habits of the two men. In a way one could use the metaphor that Clark was the "designated driver" on the expedition- probably in more ways that one.

I think if the men had been invited to a northwest coastal indian "Potlatch" ceremony they might have better understood the tribes fairly complex attitude reward personal property. The Potlach is a very sacred traditional ceremony that is initiated by some tribal leader who has accumulated considerable "property" as well as prestige and leadership status.

It ends with the sponsor of the Potlatch giving away all of his property to the guests, the more he gives, and the higher the value, the more prestige he has. Of course, the guests in turn are expected to hold their own potlatches at a later date and what goes around comes around.

There is a similar giving of goods that culminates the plains tribe's Sun Dance and many of the Hopi and other Pueblo Indian's sacred Kachina dances feature this ridding oneself of worldly goods.

When the Indians of various tribes gave gifts to Lewis and Clark they expected this same kind of reciprocation and were unhappy when it didn't always happen.

I'm sure the tribes had a concept of private property *1. and "stealing" that coexisted with their various concepts of communal property (stealing from another tribe was always not only moral but was expected and honored. The Crows had the reputation as the most skillful horse thieves of all the western tribes and they treasured this reputation- almost to the point where there was more honor in stealing a horse and counting coup than there was in killing the enemy.) But this concept was certainly not the same as the concept of "stealing" that Lewis and Clark had.

Their concepts led them on the one hand to too much trust at times in "friendly" tribes, not enough vigilance at all times in preventing theft, and a too severe attitude toward punishing theft.

1. Some of the "civilized" eastern tribes had concepts of private property much more like that of the white settlers even to the point that a number of wealthy Cherokee landowners owned black slaves that worked their plantations in Georgia. And even after they had been removed to Oklahoma Territory one faction of Cherokees joined with the confederacy and fought for the right to keep slaves.

I think that Ambrose does a superb job as a scholar throughout the book, but it is in the sections dealing with the Rockies and the journey through Montana that I most appreciate his skill as a writer because it is here that he is a real story teller- here in his own native area in the Montana and Idaho mountain areas. This is an area that Ambrose was very familiar with having retraced Lewis's trail personally a number of times and to some extent knowing the flora and fauna and the tribes of the area .

When he is in the East or the Pacific coast I don't get the same sense of reality from the book as I do in this area. Maybe it is me as I am also most familiar with this area having crossed the various passes mentioned (by auto, of course) and visited some of the sites- Lolo Pass before the time of the pressurized automotive cooling systems was one I always dreaded. With three little kids in the back of the station wagon, clawing at each other, the car straining, camping gear on top blowing in the wind, the radiator would enevitably heat up and boil over somewhere during the trip through Lolo Pass and we would have to stop and use some of our camping water supply to cool it off. Not on a par with the problems faced by the expedition, but enough to illustrate the difficulty of this route over others he might have used.

But it was worth it as the camping sites in the Bitteroots are the best on the route and on a clear night camping beside the Clearwater River we could reach up and touch the stars and there was a sense of peace in the camp not felt on the road.

There were easier ways to cross the mountain ranges involved. but then Lewis and Clark were guided by Indians whose experience in the Rockies was mainly east and west and not north and south, the routes they would have needed to know to find the easiest (but not necessarily safest passes in terms of enemy attacks.)

To me the book comes to life in these mountains and I can feel the cold as they fight the snows, and sense the danger as they battle grizzlies.

I wonder if Pomp, safe and snug in his cradle board ever gave a thought to the dangers and pains of the passage.

I think of Chief Joesph who later led his people out that way on his flight toward Canada before he vowed to "fight no more forever."

We haven’t quite got the expedition to the Pacific yet, but with a little luck we should be getting them there by the end of the week. But first we have the Great Falls, the upper Missouri including at least one perplexing junction requiring near two weeks to figure which choice was the true course. Then there is the matter of finding the Shoshone to obtain horses and guides for the trek through the peaks, and finally there is the matter of building new canoes for the voyage down the Columbia

One of the events happening on the trip up the Missouri was a canoe up set that could have resulted in disaster. But luck was with the men and all were rescued. Sacagawee saved not only her baby, but is also credited with saving records. During the last week segment we read the Ambrose case supporting the argument that Lewis really wrote more journal entries during the first year than are presently available. This accident could be the explanation for the loss of part of that journal. I though Ambrose voiced a rather strong argument supporting the case that some of Lewis’s journal was lost.

The Marias River indecision illustrates how. Much the Captains did not know about the country they were crossing. They had to send parties to explore short distances up each option. The Captains made the right decision.

It was in this period that the expedition first felt the hardship of short supplies. As they got into the real mountains they left the buffalo behind and deer and other game was hard to come by. Then the Shoshone were elusive and it took a protracted search before contact was established, time they could ill afford to waste considering the pending fall and winter. But the Shoshone came through with the necessary horses and guides. The crossing was hard and took longer than expected. The men must have really been hungry and the portable soup was use. After getting to the other side there was still the shortage of supplies. Salmon, was the buffalo of the Columbia, but it didn’t agree with the men who were use to red meat. Also I suspect the matter of the imperfect curing by drying that must have resulted in some really upset GI tracts. The other food item that they got from the Indians was root which also were not a favorite of the men. I’m told by a friend, who lives in the Columbia area that this root has the characteristics of a large onion like vegetable. Is it any wonder that these meat eaters preferred horse meat or fat dogs obtained from the Indiians?

On the Columbia the expedition encountered tribes that they judged the most honest of Indians and others that they considered the worst thieves of the entire trip. Needless to say who were marked good and who bad. The most honest award went to the tribe who returned some relatively insignificant items of property even though crossing the Columbia and a trip of many miles was involved.

And they made it to the Pacific albeit late in November in time for a ten day rain spell that kept them wet just about all of the time. Strange there was not at least one fatal case of pneumonia. Finally a popular vote was held to select the site of the winter quarters and wonder of wonders a Black slave and an Indian woman was allowed to vote.

What chapters are we now doing ??

When the text says that the men ate an average of 9 pounds of meat a day, is that "On the hoof" weight? I appreciate your descriptions of these areas as they appear today.

Best

L.J., According to the schedule this week it's Chapters 20 - 24. In the 1996 hard copy edition this is pages 241 to 312. My thought are that any one who wants to bring up past happenings, go ahead and do it.

The Ambrose estimate of 9 lbs of meat per man has bothered me too. Ambrose does not elaborate on how he arrived at this estimate.

I have often thought that an interesting experiment would be to read several of the journals and keep a count of the different animals baged. Partick Gass which is the only enlisted Journal that I am real familar which seems to keep pretty close tab on the daily kill. Based on the excerps I have read from Ordway, Whitehouse, and even the Captains they too seem prone to report the daily count. It would be interesting to compare totals from several Journals.

I suspect this is how Ambrose arrived at his 9 pound estimate. How else could he make such an estimate?

I read this book before we started,but with eight texts presently under discussion, I seem to have gotten woefully behind in the review.

Do any of you have any additional commentary about the missing or unrecorded segments of Lewis' journal? Is the timeing such that he and clark were alternating the job of record keeping?

Best

L.J., In my post yesterday, I mentioned the Ambrose argument supporting the case for Lewis Journal entries that were lost or are otherwise missing from the archives. Ambrose makes his argument in several short paragraphs in Chapter 14, "Encounter With the Sioux." They appear on pages 166 and 167 of my 1966 edition.

Ambrose begins his argument with three available entries written between Sept 14 and 17th, 1804. They constitute almost all his known journal writing for the entire year, Ambrose points out that the way they are written indicates that he almost had to be writing regularly. There is no introduction, no apology for not writing. He simply picks-up apparently where he left off the preceeding evening.

Amprose voices a strong conviction that he believes there once existed many more Lewis journal entries that may still exist. In my post yesterday I refered to a single incident where journal pages might have been lost. I am sure there were other incidences including many during the several years after the return when Lewis' life was in full downhill slide. I find it difficult to phantom how entries could be lost and yet still exist. Where would they be, Lost in the archives? it would seem to me that what with the open nature of US archives and the great interest in the expedition finding lost material at this late date is unlikely.

What's a "Willet"? p223

In many places it seems that the expedition almost chose to deliberately select the most difficult routes.

Have there been any more recent theories about the cannonlike noises described on p247?

I was taken by the species of things now so familiar to even easterners that were first described here. e.g. Cutthroat trout and Jerusalem artichoke.

Have any of you actually seen theses isolated and primitive areas described in the text? What did you think of the chauvinism of the expedition leaders in not utilizing the knowledge of a "Squaw"?

Was there ever a "Movie" about the reunion of Sacagawea with her tribe and family?

On p285 there is a description of the social structure of Shoshone women. Sounds like the middle-east.

Does anybody know more about the origins of the "Salish"

This segment concludes with one of the great ironies of American foreign policy in the disposition of chief Joseph and the Nez Perce.

Best

L.J. My Bookshelf Dictionary defines 'Willet' as follows;

willet (wîl´ît) noun A large grayish shore bird (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus) of North America, having black wings with a broad white stripe.

Regarding the big booms heard by both of the officers and several of the men, I was intending to say a few words about this the other night, but ran out of time. I was sort of surprised that Ambrose left this an open mystery. It would seem he could have referenced more expert opinion from weather professionals, either positive or negative. And I believe I have heard of other reports of a dry lightening/thunder coming out of near cloudless skys under summer conditions. The condition is certainly quite rare.

I've never heard the sound of a 6 pounder fired 3 miles away, but I suspect it would be rather faint. I guess also, I suspect there is a rational weather related answer. It appears to me that Ambrose purposely chose to leave this a Mystery for dramatic effect.

Jim, I agree with the sentiments expressed in your recent post contrasting the leadership characteristics of the two captains. This may well be a major factor contributing to the success of the expedition.

I think one could use the word, "symbiontic" to describe the relationship of the two co-commanders as leaders of the group. Each had his own area of expertise in which he functioned best and was supreme. Each captain supported the other by providing expert skills where the other was weak. Lewis was the scholar and the scientist, the strategist; Clark was the day to day field commander moving the company forward. He was the tactician of the group.

Let me say I cannot help but be impressed by your great knowledge of Native Americans, particularly of their traditions and spiritual aspects. You have mentioned the Senior Hostell Program as a source of this information, but that must have been supplemented by at the least much reading on the subject. I must confess a weakness in Indian traditions since most of my reading has been reports through European eyes. Do continue to give us the benefit of your expertise in this area.

You also made a post this week indicating traveling and camping in the upper Missouri, L & C area. Again this is an area wherein I am without actual experience, having never been west of Chicago and Kansas City or North of San Francisco and Las Vegas.

The mention of the word "squaw" made me think a little about the language Ambrose uses in the book. As a Montana man who is at home in the mountains and speaks the language of both the cultivated scholar and the language one might hear around a western campfire along the Lewis and Clark trail, I noted his description of how Lewis was "shot in the ass" in the apparent hunting accident. Having been wounded in a similar manner in the Korean War I had full sympathy with Lewis.

I wondered if this was a language choice Ambrose made that an editor felt free to leave in the text as not offensive to any readers and if there may have been other language that a sensitive editor or perhaps Ambrose himself muight have edited out.

I don't think he uses the term "squaw" at all but talks of Indian wives and Indian women. The term is very controversial at the present time and if you happen to be in Phoenix, Arizona, you may note the controversy over one of the landmarks in the area named "Squaw Peak." Apparently the term is considered highly derogatory in the same way that another term referring to female genitals is sometimes contemptuously used by soldiers when they speak of women. I'm sure Ambrose would be aware of both terms and their connotations.

In the same vein he never refers to York with any term but a "black" man and a "slave"(which he certainly was).

A Jeruselum Artichoke is a tall native plant of the sunflower family that grows in the Missouri River area in the Dakotas and has a very tasty and edible tuber. They are great raw in salads and I used to grow some in my garden.

At one time recently they were being promoted as a farm crop with especial use as animal feed, but that project seems to have failed.

The Camus that Lewis speaks of in the far west is another story. It also is a tuberous plant and the tribes used it as a staple food.

But one has to be very careful as some varieties are very poisonous and all must be carefully prepared (as the Indians knew) and not eaten raw as the Jeuselum Aritchokes can be.

I think I recall at one point in the book on the way back when they were low on food, Ambrose wonders why they did not dig some roots. They may not have been equipped to prepare them properly and it was probably a good thing that they didn't dig them.

Lewis had been schooled by his mother in the use of herbs for healing just as the Indians also had some knowledge and I suspect some of the plants he used were the same that grew back east.

It is interesting to note that the early settlers both east and west shared herbal knowledge with the tribes and the tribes learned in some cases as much from the settlers as they learned from them.

I found in doing some research in a book on Indian herbal cures that some of the plants the author touted as Indian remedies were in fact plants of European origin imported by settlers who had used them as herbal remedies in Europe. The Indians found them useful along with the iron kettles and hatchets etc.

I digress.

Jim, I too tried growing Jeruselum Artichokes here near Seguin, TX a few years back. They are a cinch to grow. I just bought a package in the supermarket and planted them. I liked them best sort of stir fried with onion and green pepper. If I was real hungry I think they would make a real good meal. But so long as potatoes are around, I won't be using many jeruselum artichoke.

Another important indian plant that I have here is the Bois d' arc tree (Osage Orange not usually found this far south). Of course this was not a food; their fruit is ineatablle. But this tree was the prefered wood for bows. The buffalo hunters used a short bow no more than 42 inches long hunting from horse back. But several of the early writers tell of seeing arrows passing completely through the animal. They also tell how the indian hunter, guiding the running horse with his knees could shoot 15 plus arrows a minute in an animal at 10 to 20 foot range. This certainly beat the capability of a white hunter with a muzzle loding musket.

The power of such wood bows were increased by a strip of sinew glued the length on the face of the bow.

I have maybe 1/2 dozen of these trees. They have vicious thorns. Some of my trees are maybe 35 feet tall having been planted from seedlings about 1980. The branches tend to curve too much to make good bows. Also the wood tends to split during the drying period. I read an artical that indicated the wood should be harvested during the coldest part of winter. Perhaps it don't get cold enough here? in South Texas.

Is the camus the root the expedition obtained along the Columbia? Is my friend correct in describing it as an onion like vegetable?

I hope both of you will continue to digress extensively.

I've used Jerusulem Artichoke "chipped", in Tabouli. It makes for a much nicer crispness to the preparation.

I apologise for use of a "Bad" word, but some words are deceptive in that area, e.g. "Pickney", which I would never use here in the states, would quite properly refer to MY (caucasian) children, in the Caribbean.

Best

LJ,

Let's not worry anout being "politically correct". Life has enough problems as it is without looking for more. I was just noting how Ambrose (or his editor) seemed bent on being PC.

I would love to sit with Ambrose around a campfire along the Clark Fork or the Clearwater (not the Yellowstone or Missouri- too many mosquitoes) and have him tell tales of the expedition as an unfettered Monatana outdoorsman would. I'll bet he would have some good ones about the Mountain Men who shortly followed Lewis and Clark.

I would also have loved to be in the circle around the Lewis and Clark campfires and evesdrop- something Ambrose doesn't really let us do.

I'm just beginning to realize, my schedule for this discussion was a rather quick one, I suspect it would have been preferable if I had taken it a bit slower. Well we learn.

This week we go through the Clatsop Winter and make the entire return to St Louis. I thought I would make this first post on the subject of the menu while at Fort Clatsop. So far as red meat was concern it was principally elk supplemented by deer. Sargent Gass in his journal on March 20, 1806 gives the count between Dec 1, 1805 and March 20, 1806 as 131 elk and 20 deer.

Hey L.J. at 250 lbs per elk and 100 lbs per deer that comes out about 34,500 lbs of meat for 33 persons for 110 days. That comes out 9 lbs per day.

But how much do elk weigh? I grabed the 250 lb average out of the air. Likewise I suspect Northwest country deer may go a bit more than 100 lbs? Anybody got comment?

Other food items were blubber from the beached whale, a little fish which they first got from Indians but later caught on their own. Glass really liked them but he don't say how they were cooked. They seized the opportunity to make salt from seawater and ended up with 4 bussels plus of the item.

Lewis was quite active as a journalist during this period. He was at his best and had many unknown Pacific northwest flora, fauna etc to describe. On the subject of food there are the following remarks:

On Jan 29th. "Nothing worthy of notice occured today" (curiously the same words George III wrote in his journal, July 4, 1776), but continuing with Lewis, "our fare is the flesh of lean elk boiled with pure water and a little salt. The whale blubber which we have used very sparingly is now exhausted. On this food I do not feel strong."

Question? How did it happen that they were so resistant to disease (except for VD) during this period? This was a terribly incomplete diet.

But on Feb 7th Lewis was more satisfied with the meal when he wrote,"This evening we had an exellent supper. It consisted of a marrowbone a piece and a brisket of boiled elk that had the appearence of a little fat on it. This for Fort Clatsop, is living in high stile."

And on the 24th of April on the return up the Columbia Clark wrote,"We purchased three dogs which were pore, but the fatest we could procure, and cooked them with straw and dry willow. (I think the straw and willows were fuel for the cooking fire not part of the recipe.)

If you ever happen to be travelling the Interstate from Bismark to Seattle, there are several Lewis and Clark sites of interest and easy access.

One that we often stop at is Pompey's Pillar located just 30 miles or so east of Billings and just a mile or so off the road.

It is an unusual rock formation along the Yellowstone that the Clark portion of the expedition stopped at on the return trip.

Clark named it after Pomp, Sagagawewa's baby.

You can climb to the top and see what the expediton saw, with the Little Big Horn River off to the south.

If it is summer you will know what Lewis and Clark were talking about with the the hordes of mosquitoes along the river (no wonder Clark climbed the Pillar).

Along the side in a now glassed in frame you can see the initials that Clark carved into the rock.

It is now a national monument but was preserved earlier by a local citizens group devoted to keeping it available to the public. Many of them now serve as docents at the monument.

Beyond Bozeman a ways you will come to the three forks of the Missouri and a state park some distance off the route.

Jim, I'm thinking that I have heard the Clark name carved in the Pompey's Pillar formation is the only known physical evidence of the expedition in route in existence today. Is this true?

Some 5 years back I bought a L & C book in the Minniapolis airport that traced the L & C route for modern travelers in terms of appropriate modern highways. (Ops, I goofed the other day when i remarked I have never been West of chicago. Minniapolis is west of Chicago, and I've been there

And here is a thread you might find interesting. On February 13, 1806 while still an Fort Clatsop, Lewis wrote:

"These people have informed us that one Captain More who sometimes touches at this place and trades with the natives of this coast, had on board his vessel three Cows, and that when he left them he continued his course along the N.W. coast. I think this strong circumstantial proof that there is a stettlement of white persons at Nootka Sound or some point to the N.W. of us on this coast."

Of course Lewis was wrong, there was no Nootka Sound settlement, but unknown to Lewis, between March, 1803 and July 1805 there had been at Nootka Sound a surviving seaman from the ship Boston which was boarded by the Indians after their chief became dissatisfied with a musket the Captain had give him as a gift. The suviver, John Jewitt was held as a slave until another trade ship was successful in obtaining his release just five months before the arrival of L & C at the mouth of the Columbia.

The Journal kept by Jewitt was published in the 19 th century. A few years back I purchased a 1988 re-print by Ye Galleon Press, Fairfield, Washington. The title of the journal is "A Journal Kept an Nootka Sound," by John Rogers Jewitt, ISBN 0-87770-447-3. This gives anouther good account of these N.W. Indians.

IFound it enlightening to realize as the were going down the Columbia, that this was territory claimed not only by the U.S., Spain, and England; but also Russia.

Lewis' depressions and comparisons with Clark are, I think, best (yet only superficially) described in this segment, as well as T.J.'s attitude toward Indians compared with his racist assumptions toward Blacks.

While on the West Coast, one wonders Why they didn't fish for themselves rather than depending entirely on the natives.

That Hawaii was a trading base for the coastal indians was also a new concept for me.

Spying amongst government officials was apparantly rampant in those days. Is there a good biography of Gen. James Wilkinson extant?

We now find thatthey are up to 12# of meat per day, and we never did hear much about all that dried vegetable soup they took along. Perhapsd it was what prevented scurvy??

Best

L.J.

While on the West Coast, one wonders Why they didn't fish for >themselves rather than depending entirely on the natives.

The only mention is after they got what they described as the little fish from the Indians. One of the entries in the edited selections from several Journals which I have, refers to forming a fishing party to obtain more. I think this was in the Lewis Journal. Lewis was quite active during this winter on the Pacific. Some of his descriptions of N.W. items are real gems.

Also everybody wanted to see the beached whale (Sacagawea too) and they gathered some of the blubber which they used as fat in connection with the lean elk fare.

Other than these incidences, you are right, they do seem to have neglected this resource.

We now find thatthey are up to 12# of meat per day, and we never did >hear much about all that dried vegetable soup they took along. >Perhapsd it was what prevented scurvy??

It is metioned several times as being used during the mountain crossing. After that time I know of no other mention. I guess I have the impression that they use the entire supply during that period.

That Hawaii was a trading base for the coastal indians was also a >new concept for me.

I missed that, I had no idea of such trade. Is this from tha Ambrose book?

Pg 340 for the Hawaii reference.

I'm still anxious to hear/know more about the Salish indians.(P 290)

Best

Where'd everybody go ??

Best

In the last few chapters of the book we see more of the dark side of Lewis as evidenced by his petty conflicts with the other expedition members who are writing journals, his own inability to finish his editing of the journals, his really unexplained failure to make any meaningful connections with a prospective wife, his failed attempt to single handedly write US western policy, and culminating in his suicide.

He was clearly a man whose grasp exceeded his reach in many ways.

Ambrose faults Jefferson's lack of foresight for the administrative appointment in St. Louis for which Lewis proved unqualified, a lack Jefferson might have been aware of.

I wonder, however, if Jefferson would have been happy with Lewis back in the east. He certainly knew of the shortcomings and may just have shipped Lewis west to get rid of him. If so the strategy worked only too well. One could say if that is a correct surmise that he survived being shot in the ass as Ambrose puts it but not being kicked there.

Perhaps his problem was that he was such a complete person for purposes of the expedition, not an expert in any one aspect of the skills needed for leading the expedition, but with enough of everything combined with the courage and ambition to make the expedition a success.

Back home he lacked the science skill and knowledge of the editor who was to work on that aspect of his journals, he lacked the political skill for his adminstrative job, the literay skill of a Jefferson for writing the journals, the social graces with the ladies that Clark had. I don't think he was satisfied to be "adequate" in any field but needed to excel.

Jim, Thanks for that succinct and thorough analysis. I noted in the margins of my book that I felt the excitement of the return to civilization almost as though I were there. I think that the most frustrating part of the whole stort was the failure to edit the journals, but I wonder if this was not a manifestation of Lewis' melancholia which in itself can result in an intellectual inertia.

The Coulter Expedition to which the text refers is an adventure story of merit in itself. Apparantly this one was also fairly well documented or do I mis-remember hearing many references to it in the IMAX production about Yellowstone?

Would you agree that in terms of of today's concepts that there realy IS no "Northwest Passage" ??

Best

To me one of the more significant events of the return trip down the Missouri, particurally down stream from the Mandan village, was the frequency of the meetings with traders making their way up stream with trade goods. Ambrose remarked that such meetings were almost a daily occurance. And this was late August and even September. Yet with winter looming they were still setting out for the Indian country.

Of course being heading downstream, contact with upward bound parties was a certainity, whereas in 1804 they would be running parallel with any other upstream directed parties. Even so I have the sense that the traffic had picked up considerably in the two and a half years that had passed since the previous passage through the area. This marked the beginning of considerable privately financed exploration following the L & C expedition by private entreprenurs engaged in the opening of the fur trade.

The Captains discharged Private John Colter about August 10, 1806 to allow him to accompany the Joseph Dickson/Forrest Hancock party back to the Yellowstone. Colter over the next few years became a well know mountain man. In fact Ambrose (and others) have titled him America's first mountain man. His accomplishments are mentioned in the Bernard DeVoto classic, "Across the Wide Missouri" and in many other histories of the trans misssippi, Northwest.

LJ., my responce to your question, "is there a Northwest passage?" Only through the iron rails which since the 1870's have connected Asia and all of the Pacific region with the East cost Atlantic (and the other way too). So it might be argued that technology finally corrected nature's error made at the creation of the continent.

Also there is now a "Southern Passage" created in 1914 with the completion of the canal across Panama.

LJ,

The Salish Indians are mentioned in the Devoto book that Harold referenced in his last post. While the book is mainly about the fur trade and traders it does deal with the desire of the Salish groups- Nez Perz and so-called Flatheads to secure white "medicine ie power" in terms of requesting missionaries, a request made to Clark in St. Louis.

The result led eventuallly to the Whitman Mission in late 1830's (which missed the mark a little) and the eventual establishemnt of the Oregon trail that followed to some extent the Lewis and Clark trail (once it crossed the divide.)

As Harold points out it really was the railroads that opened up the west to settlement with some help from the steamboats that came up the Missouri and Mississippi not very long after the Lewis and Clark expedition.

I live here in Eau Claire, Wisconsin in an apartment house on the banks of the Chippewa River, a tributary of the Mississippi.The earliest settlers in this region, and just to the south of us arrived by very shallow draft steamers coming up the river: not the Northwest Passage- but maybe one could say "the Midwest Passage."

Other communities like the Twin Cities of St.Paul and Minneapolis got their start this way as well and settlers pushed west from there by rail when it opened up the west. .

We have an old walnut bed that came here up the river. We bought it from an older local resident a number of years ago.

I wonder about the history just north of us in Canada where the Canadians plains must have been opened up in a similar manner but I am very weak on western Canadian history and geography for that matter.

One of the interesing points that Devoto makes is that some of those traders Lewis and Clark met on their way back could very well have been adventerous Indians from some of the eastern tribes who were also "Mountain Men" coming to the west with their skills in Beaver trapping and trading. Wouldn't it have been interesting if one of them had been a member of the expedition?

A number of the men in the expedition like Colter became involved in the fur trade and died pursuing it, including Pomp as he grew up.

Just as a passing note, I think for the sake of his honored place in our history it may have been just as well that Lewis died at a young age, for unlike Clark who continued to play a role in the destiny of the west, it is doubtful that Lewis would have. It may have been all downhill (from an historic perspective) from the expedition on for Lewis.

Wow, that's fascinating. Around here the Clark family is much better known, in fact I'm related to the Southern Indiana Clarks on my Mother's side. Further west, Paducah Ky is an outgrowth of early "Clark" enterprise.

I was surprised at the "Sour Grapes" of the political opposition (Probably shouldn't be) and was disappointed in Adams' vitriol. These days we'd spend several million dollars dissecting the sex lixes of Jefferson, Lewis, and Clark but not much else has changed.

Best

The first steam boat to make the trip up the Missouri was the American Fur company's new steam boat named, "The Yellowstone." It made its maiden voyage in the spring of 1833. It took three months to make it to the Fur Company's post at the mouth of the Yellowstone, Fort Union. How long did it take L & C? More than the one season, probably something like 8 months of slow beating against the current of the river.

George Catlin was aboard during the maiden voyage. He made many pictures and notes. The notes were published in the form of 31 letters as Vol 1 of his work entitled,"Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs, and Conditions of the North American Indians." This account described the trip and centered on the Indians. I particulary enjoyed the description of the American Fur Co operation at Fort Union including the tradeing operation with the many diverse Indian cultures. Most of the Indians generally observed a truce with their long time enemies while at the post. Also there is a good description of a buffalo chase and many observations of Indian customs and traditions. Though these accounts project the Indians through European-American eyes they do as good of job of representing the Indian spirit as was ever done until very recent times.

There are an number of current reprints of the book including the Dover paper back edition. Some of the reading is a bit heavy with material of little current meaning, but taken as a whole this is a great book which is highly recommended.

Catlin's paintings are principally portraits of indians. There are many of them. I have seen a dozen or so on display at the Smithsonian in D.C. I understand there are quite a few others at the Gillcreast Museum in Olkahoma. A few of his paintings could be considered Indian action paintings. I have a print of a buffalo chase, another made a few years later in Olkahoma or North Texas of a Comanche attempting to quite a wild horse that he has roped, and a third of Mandan wariors in a dance in the winter snow. I consider these and others to be deserving of high marks as American Art.

There have also been a number of modern Indian artists who've followed the Catlin style. Two that come to mind are Woody Crumbo and H. Begay.

Best

Here are a few further comments expanding a bit on Jim's recent post on the declining mental state of Captain Lewis between his return in the fall of 1806 and his suicide in 1809.

First his inability to find a wife was certainly a factor. Lewis must have been by all 19th century standards, the most elgible of batchelors. He was a well to do planter, a member of an old, well known, and respected, aristocratic family, and an officer just returned from command of a successful mission. How could he fail? But he did! I think this failure tells a great deal about the effect his state of mind was having on his ability to function socially. Perhaps also this failure tells us something about the ability of early 18th century women to judge the potential of prospective mates.

Would Jefferson have been happy with Lewis if he had appointed him to a position in the East? The way I see it, I doubt it! Lewis simply lacked the personality traits that would have made him a great politican. Do we not see this weakness manifest throughout his short service as territorial governor? There is nothing in my view that would make him more politically capable in the East.

Also the practice of land spectulation figures in the decline. Land spectulating had been very common in new areas of the country since the early days of the colonies. (Sort of like mutual fund investing today). But to be successful a participant needed considerable knowledge and understanding of land and land values. Lewis had been away for near 5 years on the expedition or engaged in its preparation or as Jefferson's Secretary. It is not surprising he was not successful. He simply did not have the land savvey necessary to make the right decisions. And growing depression reduced his ability to concentrate and choose the right course to follow. Business failure, then as now, is often a factor contributing to mental depression.

Incidently, I do not view his successful pre-expedition service as Jefferson's secretary as a gague to measure his ability as a territorial governor or other independent high political office. In the secetary's position, he spoke for the president. His acts were really the President's acting through his secretary. As govenor his actions were his own.

On the subject of organizing and editing the journal notes, I tend to sympathize with Lewis. What a complete change of pace this must have been. From the everyday activities of a field command to the library at a cluttered table with piles of paper of illegible hand written notes, a depressive environment to one use to the outdoors.

And finally there is the question of genetics. Jeferson had observed symptons of what he called "being subject to hypocondriac affections a constitutional disposition of all the nearer branches the family." Jeffersion goes on to say that he had observed the condition in Lewis when they lived and worked together in the Whitehouse saying, "I observed at times sensible depression of mind, but knowing their constitutional sources, I estimated their course by what I had seen in the family."

Would Lewis with the known history of mental imperfection cited above be chosen for a modern space command?

I have enjoyed the book and the discussion.

Like all good history books it has provided some new insights into the complexities of history, this one of the American West and the development of the nation, one of my favorite topics. At the same time it has raised interesting new questions that will only be resolved when new scholarship and new sources come into play.

I look forward to discussions yet to come dealing particularly with American history and led by someone as astute as Harold Arnold.

Next time I get to Texas I will have to visit his hangout at the museum where he is a docent.

Meanwhile this fall as we travel far from Texas to Puget Sound for an elderhostel in the San Juan Islands, we will stop at Fort Mandan for another Lewis and Clark (and all the others) fix and maybe even climb Pompey's Pillar one more time.

HAROLD. This has been the most informative discussion and book that we've read in the past year. Your leadership has been exceptional and we've all been fortunate to have Jim in the midst of things.

I'm looking forward to another one of this calibre.

When you think everybody has finished posting Harold, either drop larry a note or look in on the discussion leaders folder to tell him so. Then he will archive the folder.

Best

LJ, I certainly echo your comment about this being a very interesting discussion. I had the book and read a few chapters and then had to pass on it, not because it wasn't interesting reading, because I just didn't set aside the time to get it read. I have read every posting and think that Harold has indeed done an outstanding job in organizing and directing the discussion. As always, I appreciated all of the postings. The quality was excellent and the information imparted informative. Thanks to all that particpated.

Larry

Here is a question for L.J., again digressing a bit from Ambrose and his L & C book.

About 1838, give or take a year or two, George Catlin traveled from Fort Gibson in Arkansas west accross Oklahoma into Texas with an under strength regiment of U.S. dragoons. The mission was to negotiate with the Comanches. The leadership included the big names, Gen. Levenworth, and Cols. Kearney and Dodge. The probe did meet the Commanche in North Texas and held peaceful negotiations with them.

Yet fewer than 2/3 of the 450 officers and men returned to Fort Gibson. The principal enemy was not the indians, but a fever disease which Catlin called "billous fever." Its symptons were high continuing fever most often terminating in death after several days or a week of lingering illness. Question, what disease was this?

I suppose it could have been from the water which often was drawn from buffalo wallows, or mesquitos inhabiting the same source.

Catlin was fortunate in that he did not become ill untill late in the trip. After joging along for several days in a baggage wagon he reached Fort Gibson still alive. After a spell in the Fort hospital he recovered. Could it have been yellow fever?

I have enjoyed the discussion of this book. We have had a small, but a very well informed and articulate group. I think we all agree that this is a great book not only for fun reading but deserving of a permanent place on the L & C bookshelf.

Jim, L.J., Larry, etc when next you make it to San Antonio, do plan to visit the Institute. Let me know by e-mail, and if it is in anyway possible, I will be there to meet you and guide your tour.

I will now raise the possibility of an extention of our L & C discussion by back tracking to review the earlier trek to the Pacific by Alexander Mackenzie (1794) The annotated Journal of Mckenzie entitled "Journal of the Voyage to the Pacific" is available (Dover Publications, Inc., 1995, Edited by Walter Sheppe, 366 pages, $10.95, ISBN 0-486-28894-3.)

I browsed this book with out really reading it last March after running across it at a local Barnes & Noble super store. On the negative side,this Journal is not as easy to read or as interesting and entertaining as the Ambrose book. It is after all an 18th century journal. Also since it preceded L & C it is sort of anti-climax to us who have completed our discussion of the main event.

On the positive side this early journey to the Pacific is an important event in the history of North American exploration. It was probably the most important single event triggering the sending of the American expedition. The passage was no doubt easier because of the advanced bases of the North American Fur Co. in Western Canada and because the mountain were not as high or as difficult. Our discussion might center on the contrasts between the experience of the two parties.

Jim if you and L J. are interested in the Mackensie Journal it might be scheduled this fall or winter at a time convienent to all of us. Post your comments here. Like I said there are pluses and minuses to this proposal!

A rapidly fatal, febrile illness with predelliction for the Liver. Yellow Fever is a possibility but, although I don't know, I'd think it unlikely in the arid north texas area. I think Cholera was common out west in those days (Last reported case in this country before the late 50's was in 1909). Of course a fulminant Hepatitis epidemic would also be a ppossibility. What do the historians say???

I'm certainly interested in continuing with related books.

BEST

I see on the Barnes and Noble Site a biography of macKenzie published in 1997:

First across the Continent: Sir Alexander MacKenzie, Vol. 14

ISBM 0806130024 Pub U of Oklahoma Press

Are there any reviews of it around??

Best

L.J. There are 2 short reviews totaling about 400 words on the B&N on line store site. Go to the B&N site and search on the title, "First Across the Continent" or key word "Sir Alexander Mackenzie." Choose the "more info" option. The two short reviews will be at the bottom of the page.

I am reading the Journal. Like I said as a typical 18th century journal it is not the most interesting of reading. One really has to strugle to place the entries geographically. It does, however, include some short blurbs of happenings among Canadian Indians.

I am not real anxious to lead another review this fall as I am presently editing my late parent's Wells family research notes for distribution to a family research mailing list. Also I sort of plan a low key particapation on the "May I please the Court" discusion.

I think I will order the Mackenzie biography which is written by a Barry Glough. From the review it appears to be a very readable biography. While I really dont belive it would attract much general interest among the group as a whole, if there are 2 or 3 others interested, we might discuss it as a after xmas project.