Undaunted Courage (Revisited - 8 Years Later) ~ St Export

Undaunted Courage

by Stephen E. Ambrose

The Lewis & Clark Expedition - A 200th Anniversary Discussion

September 23, 2006, will mark the 200th anniversary of the successful, triumphant return of the Lewis and Clark expedition that had secured the United States' claim to the upper Missouri River Valley, the Rocky Mountain Northwest, and the Columbia River Valley to the Pacific Ocean. Stephen Ambrose wrote this book in 1996 as a biography of Meriwether Lewis. I first became aware of it shortly after its publication when by chance I heard an NPR interview with Ambrose. I immediately bought the book, and in 1998 I offered it as my first discussion as a SeniorNet DL. Click Here for the Archive. Since this book remains today the most popular account of the trans-continental trek of the Corps of Discovery led by the duo Captains, Lewis & Clark, I have obtained special permission to make this repeat offering as a 200th anniversary commemoration of the event. Everyone will be most welcome as participants.

To get to the first post in the actual discussion CLICK HERE

Proposed Discussion Schedule

Week 1. Aug 1 - 7. Why President Jefferson Sent the Expedition; background life of Captains Lewis and Clark; pre-launch planning, preparation, and training. Chapters 1-10, pp 1 - 121

Week 2. Aug 8 - 14. Up the Missouri to the Mandan Village; a typical day's experience during the first summer; the tragic death of Sergeant Floyd; and relations with the Indians Chapters 11 - 15, pp 122 - 190.

Week 3. Aug 15 - 21. The Mandan Winter; relations with the Indians; providing health care for the men and Indians; winter hunting and military excursions. preparing a Report on the expedition's first year for the President; the up-river trek resumes to the Great Falls. Chapters 16 - 21, pp 191 - 250

Week 4. Aug 22 - Aug 28. Navigating the upper Missouri- looking for the Shoshone; across the Rockies, down the Columbia; the Clatsop Winter. Chapters 20 - 25, pp 251 - 331,

Week 5. (A total of 7 days with a 5 day break for the Labor Day weekend holiday) August 29 - 31, following a 5 day break to resume Sept 6 - 9. the return voyage; up the Columbia; the return over still snow bound mountain pass; the split into three separate groups each with its own mission; a firefight with the Blackfeet; a friendly fire incident; and finally down the Missouri to civilization. Chapters 26 - 30, pp332 - 395.

Week 6. Sept 10 - 17. The impact of the expedition on later U.S. History; the post-expedition careers of Capt Lewis, Capt Clark and other non commissioned officers and enlisted personnel. Chapters 31 - 38, pp 396 - 474.

Click here for a Lewis & Clark Bibliography
Web Resources Page

Discussion Leader: Harold Arnold

B&N Bookstore | Books Main Page | Book Discussion Guidelines | Suggest a Book for Discussion
We sometimes excerpt quotes from discussions to display on pages on SeniorNet’s site or in print documents.
If you do NOT wish your words quoted, please Contact Books

I had this discussion on our books drawing board scheduled for discussion in May 2004, billed as a 200th anniversary commemoration of the Lewis and Clark expedition. As it happened I postponed it for another SeniorNet Books project. It is offered now still a 200th anniversary celebration as the 200th year from the Expedition’s successful return completes on September 23rd of this year.

I think this book has remained in the forefront as a popular history of the Lewis and Clark expedition for the same three reasons I cited in the 1998 heading. First this book distinguishes itself from most of its competition by the attention it gives to the setting of the stage through its description of the social, economic, and political institutions of post revolution America. It was these institutions that 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 appreciation of the event.

The second area in which the book excels is its development of character portraits of not only the captains, and President Jefferson, but also many of the rank and file members of the expedition, including the French-Canadian mountain men hired as translators and guides, and of course the Shoshone Indian woman Sacagawea. Another unofficial member was York, Captain Clark's slave, who was brought along as a servant but became a "de facto" member of the party making his own 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 Ambrose accounts of the Indian negotiations, the reader in the end will probably have acquires a better impression of the Indian mind-set than that of the expedition leaders.

Every one is invited to join August 1st for a six week discussion of the event. Just post here NOW a sort message of your intent. The book is now available in an inexpensive paperback and at all libraries and used bookstores. We will need 4 or 5 participants to make this discussion.

Hope you get many new folks here for this most interesting expedition which make us a country from the Atlantic to the Pacific oceans instead of a country from the Atlantic to the Mississippi. Wouldn't that have been so different for the US to experience! One third the size that we are today. Hmmmm, would we be able to govern it better if the US was smaller?? How different would our lives be today if these brave men had not made this expedition??

I will be here on Aug 1st to travel across what became our country's boundaries.

Hi Harold, I am here. I love the timing of the discussion. I will remember this is the 200th anniversary of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. I loved the Audubon discussion and the 1776 discussion. I am sure this will have just more exciting material. I am packed for our journey over unknown territory.

I'll be lurking- cannot commit to it for a quorum as I now have three other things on for August. But hub has the book, and I'll see if I can kinda keep up.

Perhaps this way I'll get my proverbial feet wet in an historical disussion. I'll be watching!

I'll be lurking, too, and probably chiming in from time to time. I read the book years ago, and we followed the L&C route in 2003. I probably won't be able to be reading the book as we go along, though.

Good Morning,
I will try to participate, although I loaned out my own copy and will not have it.
If I'd known it would be August (May to Aug is a lot to remember at my age) I would have been stingier.

The book is indeed wonderful, and I think using google, etc, I'll be able to chime in from time to time.
Thanks for posting your plans! I have never traveled any of the L & C Route.

Ann, Hats, and Mippy Mwelcome to the Board, cootz, and Mary lurkers are always welcomes. Hopefully if the discusion makes its quorum you will from time to time, make your presense know by posting your comments or opinion.

Since I live in Oregon I can't pass up this discussion. I understand there was a major fire in the old fort not to long ago and much of it was destroyed.

See you all soon.

Ok Scrawler, I look forward to discussing with you again. Regarding the old fort are you speaking of Fort Clatsop where the expedition wintered 1805-06? If that is the fort that burned I think it was a replica, not the original? Again it is good to have you with us.

No lurking for me. I've been looking forward to this discussion! To prepare, I visited some points on the Lewis and Clark trail in the northwest, including the mouth of the Columbia River and Cape Disappointment where their western trip ended. I found my 2005 commemorative Lewis and Clark nickel with the picture of the Pacific Ocean and the words "Ocian in view! O! the joy!" I even have my book! I'm ready!

Marni

--- Click Here For the home page of the Lewis and Clark Trail National Historical Park. As I understand it this park is no more than 2 years old organized to commemorate the 200 anniversary of the event. It consists of many separate sites scattered along the trail. Several of the rangers at our San Antonio Missions National Historical Park transferred and are now serving there.

--- Thank you for your post joining our August L&C discussion!

There is still plenty or room for more. All are Welcome!

I would like to join the group discussing this book. Lewis and Clark and their adventures are unbelievable.

Welcome Evelyn! Thank you for joining us. We hava a great book and a great group is coming together to discuss it.

And everyone, you have probably noticed that the page numbers in the schedule are from my old 1996 hard cover edition. I suspect that many of you are using the paperback that is now available. Though this edition will have different page numbers, the Chapter numbers and Chapater titles should be the same.

"a major fire at the old fort, not too long ago?" When did that happen? We were there in May of 2005 and it was just fine! I hope that fire didn't happen since then. I have some pics of the fort and of a third grade class visit to the fort. And, of course, my hubby sitting in one of the dugouts out by the landing! Beautiful place!

Ann, I think the fort burned just recently. Of course, it was just a replica in any case. When we were there in 2003, we read that they really don't know exactly where the fort was built or the exact lay-out. So they just approximated. Anything that is rebuilt now, will be a replica of a replica.

From a Web site I found the fire occured Oct 3, 2005. Click Here for a Newpaper article dated oct 5. 2005. This article confirms that the destroyed buildings were a replica, and is being rebult. Another site indicated that the rebuilding was begun last December and was scheduled to be completed in June 2006/ If fhe project remained on scheduled the new replica of the old replica is now open for visitors.

A replica of a replica! Hahahaha!

So the replica that we saw in May 2005 has burned but has also been replaced by now? Oh, good!

Harold, I think I read this book some years ago or one similar; however, I just bought a copy online for $7 and will be here to discuss it in August.

On one of our trips we traveled the Natchez Trace where one (can't remember if it was Clark or Lewis) of them is buried. I'll look it up and be back............

Natchez Trace

Here is the paragraph describing Meriwether Lewis's death:

"The most well known death along the “Trace” is the 11 October 1809 death of Meriwether Lewis, Governor of the United States Territory of Louisiana. This man, famous as co-leader of the Lewis and Clark expedition, allegedly committed suicide at Griner’s Stand. Lewis’s traveling companion, Major James Neely, arrived at the death scene a few hours after the event. Major Neely wrote this to Thomas Jefferson: “It is with extreme pain that I have to inform you of the death of His Excellency Meriwether Lewis, Governor of Upper Louisiana who died on the morning of the 11th Instant and I am sorry to say by Suicide.” Still, there are many today who question the suicide, believing instead that Lewis was probably "

Ella, it will be great to have you in the discussion. By the way, do you read the N.Y> Times? If so have you (or any one else) seen an article therein on the L&C Expedition?

and started it a while ago. the introduction has to do with the authors devotion to the notes of Lewis and as near as I could tell did not mention a suicide. The book is full of lewis' drawings and maps which are interesting in themselves.

the old pictures are interesting. I have a batch now with my son some of which I can't identify at all others with a family resemblance so we guess. and then there were some relating to a connection with Vaudbvill where my german jewish cousin Leon Harris became an Irishman Lee Harrison. That always ticked me. I stil have the pictures of that group. . . .Claire

OK Winsum, you are in!. and thank you for your words on the home page and Pictures From Our Past. Old family pictures are always interesting. In my case I did not know mine existed until 6 years ago when I had occasion to look through some family archive in my brother's Fredericksburg closet. I did not find the 1940's picture I was looking for but found my grandfather's 1908 - 1918 album with about 600 small black & white pictures. About 100 of these are on the internet. Click Here for the old pictures, or Click Here for the home page.

Hi, Harold,

I started this book shortly after it came out but somehow didn't finish it, very unusual for me. I think I was listening to it as an audio book and decided it needed to be read. I bought the book and have been looking for the right time to read it ever since - guess this is it! I've been watching SeniorNet ever since you proposed the book a couple of years ago, glad the time has finally come to study it! I'll be here...

I see a tiny error in the page numbers on Week 2, which should end with page 190 instead of p 176...

It will be great to have you with us.

I will get pat to change the page number heading in the schedule. I suspect that many of you are using the new paperback edition that will hav different page numbers. The chapter numbers, however, should be the same.

Harold, I have a hardback.

This proposed discussion now has sufficient participants to consider it made for discussion beginning August 1st. This heading will soon be moved one step above to the Coming Book Discussion Menu.

There the board is still open for additional Participants to sign up. While we do not want to open the discussion prior to the official Aug 1st date, all are welcome to post general comment on related subjects or perhaps you might post a link to a favorite L&C web site or other relative web resources.

Following your suggestion, here's a link to the Lewis and Clark site put up by National Geographic:

here

Mippy, thank you.

Mippy: Thanks for the link!

Thank you Mippy for the link. We will compile a Web Resourches Page for Lewis and Clark that will include the National Geographic nominated by Mippie.

Click Here for the beginning Web Pesources. Does anyone else have suggestions?

In case they're not on the list....

Here's a link to the online Volume 1 and Volume 2 of the Nicholas Biddle edition of the expedition journals. Just click on the picture of a journal to see the scanned pages and use the Next button to continue.

Biddle Edition

Here's a link to the online Journals of Lewis and Clark:

http://xroads.virginia.edu/%7EHYPER/JOURNALS/toc.html

Marni

For those interested in other American expeditions of discovery, before I forget about it I thought I'd add a link here to info about the U.S. Exploring Expedition known as the Voyage of Discovery that began in 1838. I think most people don't know anything about this huge expedition which resulted in the beginnings of the Smithsonian Institute.

http://www.sil.si.edu/DigitalCollections/usexex/follow.htm

Marni, thank you very much for the links. I am a beginner here. I will know nothing until Harold and everybody starts sharing information. I am very excited. I might have posted that fact already.

I have added Marni's Nominees to the Web Resources Page.

Marni do you know how your first link edited by a Paul Allen,Esq. became known as the Biddle edition?

Here is pre L&C account of an earler trip over the mountains using Canadian rivers. Jefferson read the Mackenzie Journal in the winter of 1800-01 while waiting to hear the outcome of the 1800 election Click Here.

I have also added this site to the Web Resources Page.

ai have added five additional Web site Links to the Web Resources Page relative to the life, Writings of Stephen Ambrose, and our previous discussions of his book.

Does anyone else wish to add sites?

I've started -- otherwise I'll never be able to keep up. . .claire

Oh, good! I can't wait to read about Mackenzie. Thanks, Harold.

Harold: Re "Marni do you know how your first link edited by a Paul Allen,Esq. became known as the Biddle edition?"

If I recall correctly, Nicholas Biddle, a Philadelphia banker, took great interest in the Lewis and Clark expedition. Their official report had never been published and Lewis was dead in 1809. Biddle worked closely with Clark to collect all of the journals written by members of the expedition. Biddle spent several years editing everything and pulled together the 2-volume report which was to be published. However, it took so long due to publishing delays that he had to turn the project over to Paul Allen who supervised its publication. Biddle, a businessman and politician, had other things to take care of. So Allen officially published what became the official report of the expedition. Biddle's name did not appear for credit in the publication. But Biddle had done most of the writing based on the journals. So it's called the Biddle edition.

Here's info about Biddle:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Biddle_(1786-1844)

Here's a wonderful link for our collection. It has lots of photos of artifacts, tools, guns, clothes, letters, and maps related to the Lewis and Clark expedition. Most of the photos and maps can be enlarged.

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/lewisandclark/lewis-landc.html

I got one of those Sierra Club requests in the mail today with postcards, etc. Have you seen those? There was one postcard with a photo of a grizzly bear. It said on the back that when Lewis and Clark went on their expedition there were at least 100,000 grizzly bears in that territory. Now there are perhaps 1,000.

Along the way how many Native American tribes would Lewis and Clark meet? Which tribe was the smallest?

The links are so very helpful. I have never seen a Pipe tomahawk. I have always heard of tomahawks. The Pipe tomahawk is interesting because it had a two fold purpose.

I have never heard of the Jefferson Peace Medal either. I feel that wearing the Jefferson Peace Medal would cause trouble for the Native American wearing it. If that Indian met another tribal member and they didn't like the white man, wouldn't that cause conflict?

Should we not talk or ask questions yet? Is this alright for a prediscussion?

Marni, I started with your links. For some reason I decided to work backward. Maybe I should work from the beginning and come back. I think Harold mentioned a web resource. Maybe I should go there.

Marni That's amazing about the change in numbers of grizzly bears.

Mippy, the National Geographic site looks great!!

Marni; thank you for the link to the Biddle site that explains his connection to the early edition of the memoirs. I have added it and the Indian artifice site to the Web Resources page.

Hats I am not surprised at the relative small number of surviving grizzlies. I suspect that the large majority of these are in Alaska and Canada. Because of their nature they cannot come back as the Buffalo has. Last year a Dept of agriculture report estimated there were 600.000 head on buffalo ranches in the U.S. and Canada. So long as the economics holds, its future is bright.

It really did not seem very practial to me.

We use to have a pipe Tomahawk with the artifices at our ITC Indian display. It was sort of strange with a small bowel at the top of the cast iron head and a hollow shaft through which the user would draw the smoke. The cavity for the tobacco was quite small but all that was necessity for the Indian tobacco that was a much stronger drug than its modern counterpart.

Let us not kick off our discussion of the book and its comprehensive subject prior to the scheduled August 1st. To date I think we have been ok with our preparation. Casual comments such as the role of Biddle, the selection of Web sites, and casual comment on the content of the Web sites seems ok so long as it don’t lapse into the subject pf the book. So far it seems ok to me, but lets be careful not to preview the book.

Right now my life was suddenly complicated by the discovery of a major water leak at the Guadalupe county place. I had not been there for two weeks and got quite a surprise Tuesday when I found the leak. I will have a $500 plus water bill. I now have it dried out but further clean up and repairs must follow. In addition I am trying to permanently erase my work files from an old but still usable computer for a friend in need of one. This has proved a much slower job than I first thought.

Oh, that's too bad about the water leak, Harold. I am feeling very sympathetic right now. We had a huge water leak from all the rain here in the East. My fireplace chimney leaked down into 2 bedroom ceilings on the 2nd story. Part of my plaster bedroom ceiling fell down! We have a big job on our hands now starting with chimney repairs.

We have an old Indian tomahawk and an old war club that my husband's grandfather received when he lived on a reservation in Arizona. I should take pictures - even though that's not the Louisiana Territory. The tomahawk is small - maybe a child's. The club is wicked looking. It's carved out of 1 piece of wood with spikes sticking out of the large round club end. I wonder how many heads were bashed in with it!

Oh gross!!

I ordered this book today. Lewis and Clark Among the Indians : James P. Ronda. My library did not own it. I hope it arrives in time for the discussion.

I am soooo excited! My library does not have the journals unless my eyes deceived me. Now I see the journal is online and listed in the heading. Thank you!

My book came today - I haven't opened it yet as I am involved in so many books that I am neglecting the burdens of daily life - one could linger here quite awhile and I just must not. I have other things on the agenda, but, HAROLD, that MacKenzie site is spectacular. What gorgeous pictures. I didn't read it all, but raised my eyebrows in amazement, if not disbelief, at the following:

"Their vessel was a 26 foot birch bark canoe with a four foot nine inch beam. Into the canoe three thousand pounds of provisions, arms, ammunition and trade goods were loaded. The bark craft was only paper thin but it carried ten men and three thousand pounds of gear."

10 people in that canoe! A paper thin craft!

I'll be here come August lst.

Harold: Oh, boy, I came across this neat interactive web site about the L&C journey for our list. It's from the National Park Service. It looks like it's set up for teachers to use with their classes.

http://www.nps.gov/jeff/LewisClark2/HomePage/HomePage.htm

And here is a wonderful web Lewis and Clark Trail site that I've visited a number of times where you can "Re-live the Adventure." It has a virtual tour of the L&C trail and includes TONS of information about L&C-related events and tours taking place in various locations along the trail:

http://www.lewisandclarktrail.com

Marni

Ella, that is amazing. "Paper thin." Wow!

Marni, thank you for more websites. It's almost time to start out on our journey.

Marni, I discovered information about York on your website.

York

Marni: I guess I had not realized your rains had resulted in the problems at your home. In comparison mine pale into insignificance. The house here has dried out better than I had expected. In fact the strange moldy smell was scarcely noticeable yesterday. My loss now seems limited to the linoleum tile floor covering that had to be removed and the maybe $500.00 water bill. At least you did not have to pay for the water causing the damage.

Thank you for the additional Web sites that I will add to our Web Resources page. Regarding your antique Indian War club do take a picture to show here.

Hats, you will enjoy the Rhoda book, “Lewis and Clark Among the Indians.” It tells the expedition story from an unique perspective, treating the expedition as a diplomatic mission that in a sense it was. Of course in another, perhaps overriding sense, it was in no way a diplomatic mission. Overridingly it was an initial inspection of a newly acquired piece of real estate that had just been purchased sight unseen,. Also its purpose was to advise the tenants (the Indians) of the fact that they had a new landlord.

I certainly considered using the Rhoda Book as the basis for this discussion, but concluded the Ambrose title was in fact the more complete story of the Expedition and its results.

Also thank you Hats, for the York site that I am adding to the list. The most shocking revelation of the Ambrose book is the story of the miserable treatment accorded York after the expedition returned.

Ella I am glad you enjoyed the Mackenzie site. I urge all to read it since it will come up early in our discussions. Mackenzie had several largely geographic advantages over L&C. For one thing he could start from a farther west fur company base west of the Great lakes, and the pass through the Rocky Mountains was not so high and difficult. This enabled him to complete his trip in a single season. His crew of 10 was English-French-Indian Canadians. The 26 ft canoe limited the amount of trade goods and the inclusion of scientific instruments and return of specimens.

Hats: I was glad to read that York was finally freed. Unfortunately, Clarke waited until 1811 to free him.

Is it Clark or Clarke? I'm seeing both spellings.

I'm so excited that there are a bunch of us so interested in the Lewis and Clarke expedition! I visited the northwest last September where we saw Cape Disappointment from a distance and saw areas of the L&C trail along the coast. I tried to pursuade the other couple we were traveling with to drive on the trail to the cape, but they weren't interested and they were driving. One of them said to me, "Who in the world is interested in Lewis and Clarke?" He was serious. I was X@!#$% mad! I did have my picture taken in front of a L&C statue, though. It was in a town on the Pacific and on the southern border of the Columbia River, but now I forget the name of the town. Rats!

--- Click Here. I am pictured at the Lipan Apache exhibit at the Institute of Texan Cultures. The Mural a part of which is in the background pictures a Lipan encampment about 75 miles west of San Antonio. My Mescalero Apache friend and associate, Crow, is with me interpreting the exhibit for visitors.

Marni regarding spelling, as you know I am the world's worst a fact complicated by my also being the world's worst typist. I see Ambrose spells the Captain's name "Clark" and that is good enough authority for me.

Marni, might your Oregon town have been Astoria? That's the town of any size near Fort Clatsop.

Also, I'm not sure those are friends that I'd want to travel with any more. We have dear friends whom we love, but having traveled with them once, would never do so again. We have other friends who share our travel "personalities", and we go with them frequently.

I remember it from your site. me too with spelling and typing. When the time comes please be patient or feel free to correct me . . .Claire

Harold, that is a very nice photo. Love it. Also, thank you for adding the website.

Years ago my husband put down new linoleum in the bathroom of our condo and at the same time he also put in new fittings for the plumbing in the bathroom. To make a short story even shorter, I came home from shopping to find our new bathroom floor flooded with water and my husband cursing because it was hot water and he was drenched. (I think at that point I left by the back door in order to avoid the situation - yes I am a coward!) Later I discovered that he had put the pipes in backwards - don't ask me how. At any rate we had to call a plumber in to fix them and I think he charged an arm and a leg to have it done. To say the least my husband was not a happy camper.

I read the book a couple of years ago, but i'll see if i can get the paperback so i can write in it.....giggle.....have to make notes as i go. This is similar to the JJAudubon and the 1776 group, you were so good and provided so much additional information, i can't wait, and am loving your pre-comments and links!......

What are we imbibing during this discussion ......i guess we could use that word to mean "liquid" OR "to take in mentally"

(Encarta's definition - 2. transitive verb take in something mentally: to take in and assimilate something such as an idea or experience ( literary ) .......that fits!.......jean

It is always good to have people back from the previous discussions. Here we have a great book on a fascinating subject. Lets make it an event to remember.

Jean: I think the Lewis and Clark gang is going to be drinking a lot of whiskey on their trip. Sounds kind of strong for me. I'll be typing backwards if I drink whiskey. What do you think?

We were imbibing Madeira for Founding Mothers and are sipping Manzanilla for Don Quixote. I don't remember if we were drinking anything in particular for Audubon or 1776????

I wonder what constituted whiskey back in 1803? Is whiskey bourbon? Or is it a combination of liquors?

I thought of something we could have for lunch while we're discussing our book. BUFFALO BURGERS!

Has anyone tried buffalo? I had it instead of steak many years ago in a Vermont restaurant. It was just getting popular as a beef alternative. Mine was pretty tough although the flavor was like steak. Today I see ground buffalo in the supermarket all the time. I made buffalo burgers for dinner at home recently. The meat seemed more ground than beef is ground. It was very tender.

It's fun to try new foods. We had alligator down in New Orleans, frogs legs in Maine.

Has anyone tried ostrich? I understand there are ostrich farms now. Some people in CT are raising emus. Actually, this week two emus escaped from people's yard in CT. It's been on the news and in the paper with pictures. People keep spotting the emus here and there and trying to catch them. Apparently, they run 30 mph. They are incredibly strong and hard to catch because they kick. I'm having a huge chuckle over the stories about how the emus are eluding their hunters.

HiMabel, I am glad to see you here. I will never forget the Audubon and 1776 discussion. Some of you can even add the John Adams discussion.

Marni, if the boats are paper thin and carrying such heavy loads, we might need a little whiskey to knock the fear out of us. Poor Buffalo. I don't know. Do I want a Buffalo Burger? The roving Buffalo are all around us at this time, aren't they? What about trout cooked over a open fire? With corn? Didn't the Indians raise plenty of corn?

By the way, trying to be politically correct, should I write Native Americans or Indians? Is that a totally dumb question?

I did see the emus on tv too. They aren't easy to catch.

Ann, do you have some recipes?

didn't ladies drink SHERRY or something sweet? there's more activity here and the discussion hasn't even begun yet than anywhere else. it figures. people like to be free of those threads that bind us to a particular subject. we find a way out of them as often as we like. . . .hi jean and hats. just saw you at the fiction place.

and hats I do that all the time and finally settled on indians my heart is pure and the other is such a mouthful and a lot to type.

I know!! Claire, thanks for relieving my anxiety.

I note that the item is more available at Taos NM than in San Antonio. At least in Taos my sister-in-law buys unfrozen ground buffalo at the super market from which she makes the best burgers I have ever eaten. Here in san Antonio it is available only in pound pre-wrapped packages frozen. My buffalo burgers were not so good, even compared to the better fast food (Wendy's) products. I do however make good chili from the frozen buffalo.

In a rush (lunch is ready) so apologies to have forgotten who asked:

Which is correct, Indian or Native Americans?
The positive answer is Indian Nation, or the Nation of the (....fill in), or if you must, Indians.
My husband has done consulting work for several of the Nations in the MidWest, and
they hate the designation Native American!

Here are there interesting Sacagawea Web sites that I have added to the Web Resources page::

Click Here for a Sacagawea Web Biography from the Wikipeda Web encyclopedia

Click Here for Saacagawea, An American Legend.

Click Here for a Sacagawea Biography from PBS.

and it was delicious, very lean, the waitress warned us that if we cooked it at home to be very careful that it would dry up quickly! Don't know where she expected me to find some ostrich to cook at home - besides i don't cook at home except when we have guests....if i can avoid it.....LOL. If i remember correctly from reading the book a few yrs ago, beans were a constant food, some kind of bean soup mixture....that sounds good, probably would go well w/ a buffalo sandwich.

Whiskey? .....uuuuuuuuuummmmmm, i'm not really a whiskey fan, but i guess if i was riding the Missouri River in 1805 i might be!

I'm really looking forward to reading this again since i now have a son living in Bozeman, MT. His finacee told me today that there are Sacagawea things all around them. Thanks for the links Harold, i will look at them........jean

Harold, thank you for the Sacagawea links.

Mabel, I like the bean soup. That sounds delicious for a cold evening.

Mippy, thank you for the information.

virtual whisky won't hurt your stomach but who even likes it. . .claire

Claire, that's true! I would rather settle for the ostrich sandwich and a grape soda.

How are you? As long as we put those piroques in the water it doesn't matter. I just want to hit the trail.

How fast can we travel in one of those piroques? What's the difference between a canoe and a piroques? I hope my spelling is correct. Well. acanoe is not paper thin.

Oh. Claire, your good. Thanks!

in all mysubscriptions and it hasn't even started yet.

I think the dugout canoes used by L&C were referred to as prioques. The word is still used for small canoes on protected water in Louisana and lower Mississippi area. Click Here for picture.

Regarding the use of the word "Indian" to descrive the pre Columbus Native American population, I think it is much a matter of location. In San Antonio our native population seems to have no problem with the word and use it frequently to refer to themselves. At the ITC the only time I was questioned when using "Indian" was by a group from Western Canada. It seems the word is considered offesive there.

"Native Americian" too is not completely correct since they too were themselves earlier immigrants. The Author/historian Francis Jeannings (The Ambiguous Iroquois Empire) suggest the manufactured word "Amerindians." This I sort of like and frequentley used it at the ITC..

Harold: Will you share your chili recipe? That sounds so interesting with the buffalo in it!

Mary A: We WERE in Astoria when we were in the northwest. Thanks for the reminder. But, now that I think about it, I think the L&C statue was farther south - maybe in a place called Seaside, or something like that. That are probably a zillion statues of L&C out there.

I was telling my dad that I was reading this book. He lived in Buffalo, NY for many years and wondered why a parkway through Buffalo was named after Sacagawea.

Interesting to read in Harold's links how Sacagawea must have been pronounced with a hard g or k sound rather than j. Those were interesting links, Harold!

Speaking of unusual foods, my husband reminded me that we ate rattlesnake when we were in Arizona. How could I have forgotten?!

Jean: My cousin lives in Bozeman, MT. His name is Dr. Jack Tkach. Do you visit your son in Bozeman? It sounds wonderful - such beautiful country.

Marni

Here's a picture and the story of the "evasive and crafty" emu that escaped in CT.

http://www.ctcentral.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16904739&BRD=1645&PAG=461&dept_id=10856&rfi=6

We heard a lecture by a tribal leader of the Laguna Pueblo in New Mexico a number of years ago. She didn't like the term Native American. She said that we were just as "native" as she was. With what little contact we've had, I've felt the Indians would prefer to be called by their tribal names, i.e., Sioux, Navajo, Apache, Hopi, etc. We (the non-Indians) want to use an all-inclusive term, and it's been my impression that they don't think of themselves that way. The Laguna Pueblo lady gave us the impression that she considered anyone who wasn't from her pueblo as "other", and it didn't matter whether the person was another "Indian" or "white" or "black" or whatever.

I believe in Canada, they use the term "First Nation".

I would agree, though, that for the purposes of this discussion, Indian would be the term to use - simply for brevity and ease.

Hats: No need to worry about eating nearly extinct buffalo anymore. They have come back. And now they are raised on ranches like cattle to sell for their meat. Didn't Jane Fonda and once-husband Ted Turner own a buffalo ranch?

Yes, Americans and Canadians raise bison for meat. Some people I met last month purchased 3 bison, as the husband needs to lower his cholesterol and loves eating steak. The bison meat is much lower in saturated fats than cow.

As I sat at their trailer (their house burned down the week before the bison arrived) listening to their tails of getting the bison, the wife passed me a photo album of baby pictures of the bison, pictures of the bison being fed by their 2-year-old granddaughter, pictures of the bison running, pictures of the bison sitting in the shade, photos of the bison sunning themselves. The bison soon walked up to the barbed wire behind us, and the wife sat and gently chatted with one of the two females.

Sure, sure, they're going to eat these bovines. Uh, huh. Baby pictures. A photo album. Theirs are Bison bison athabascae or the wood bison, the more northern subspecies, also the largest extant North American mammal. The plains bison, Bison bison bison is the smaller one.

Anyway, here's a picture of the bull, Bill:

Buffalo Bill

Kleo

The bull looks very introspective, I think.

Egads, Winsum, have you no shame?

It was a very hot day, 106F, and very dry. The bison live on a hill in the Sierra Foothills. There were Bill, and two females, each with a calf. They walked right up to the fence, so one could reach out and pet them. I didn't, as petting wild animals seems unnatural, and I wanted to think of them, at that moment, as wild bison from the Old West. They breathe very loudly, distinctly. It made me want to hear them some night on a prairie 200 years or more ago. Most people want to hear the herds thundering past, but I want to hear them breathing on a prairie night under the country of stars before humans lit the sky.

There is so much modern humans will never know they missed.

Kleo

Kleo, that is so true. The loss will continue if we don't fight for the safety of our environment. Not to mention the harm Global Warming is causing. So much beauty is being stripped from the earth. Are we sounding like Rachel Carson?

I bet Lewis and Clark had the chance to see amazing sights as they traveled through the woods and on the water.

scroll back to peter browns explanation of what introduced species is doing to his country. . .starting with cane frogs.

.....funny, how i have found connections while reading w/ this group.....My son just went to Bozeman in March to be a defensive back football coach at Montana State, previous to that he was at Bucknell for 3 yrs ------ get this, the Bucknell mascot is.......drummmmm rrrroooolllllll.... a Bison!!.....jean

Ok Marnie, here is my recipe for Chili. I am going to give it as a recipe for a two person serving as follows:

Salt to taste; 1 Tbs olive oil; ½ lb Ground meat, (I have been using ground sirloin); 2/3 cup finally chopped onions, I like sweet yellow onions; 2- cloves garlic, or equivalent garlic powder; 2 Small Roma Tomatoes, sliced and quartered; 3 tbs picante salsa, I like the Pace brand Chunky, medium; 1 ½ teas chilli powder, I like Gebharts brand, Use a bit less for mild, a bit more for hot; 1 teas ground cumin; 1 teas flour; water.

First mix the picante salsa, garlic, chili powder, and cumin with about 1 Cup of water and set aside.

Second lightly brown the salted ground beef in olive oil, add the chopped onions, tomatoes and the previously prepared seasoning mixture.

Third simmer at least for ½ hour or until the water as been reduced by about ¾ of its original volume. You can simmer longer if time is available but you may have to add additional water.

Fourth for thickening, mix 1 teasp flour with about 1/3 cup water, add slowly to the chilli mixture while stiring. Continue to simmer for another 3 to five minutes.

Serve over white rice with corn or flour tortillas Alternately you can serve as tamale pie by layering the Chili with 3 or 4 corn tortillas with the chili in a casserole dish an baking about 20 minutes. You might also add a toping of a suitable chedder or other cheese.

Harold: That sounds so DELICIOUS!!! Thank you!!!

Harold, my husband would love to have your chili recipe. He loves making chili and making changes from time to time.

Claire, I can't find the Environmentalist folder.

Harold, will this site help?

Herbarium

Your L&C Herbarium Site is a great new site. I have not seen it before This speciman's flower looks something like our Texas bluebonnet Click Here but the leaves appear quite different. I am sure it is an entirely different specie.

I will add the site to the Web resources page

Harold, the leaves are not really all that different between the Texas bluebonnet (Lupinus texensis, probably other blue Lupini in Texas) and Lupinus argenteus var. palmeri , the western bluebonnet lupines. In fact the distinctive compound leaves of most lupines, with leaflet radiating out from a single point, and generally smaller on one side, larger towards another are how people recognize the lupines when not in flower.

Kleo

Marni = i haven't yet been to MT, my son just went there in March, but his pictures show great beauty and after this discussion i have a feeling i may have to make airline reservations. I'm not going to take a canoe trip up/down (?) the Missouri, thick bark or thin paper - neither way!!! Being in an airplane for 5 hours is adventure enough for me.

It's amazing how many people have said to me they have a connection to Bozeman, just since i've mentioned that Stephen went there. .....jean

Harold, I am glad you can use the site. I love flowers like so many other posters here. Between the flowers, animals and landscape, I can't imagine what great sights Lewis and Clark must have seen on their journey. Aside from the dangers, it must have been a magnificent journey. Thank goodness Thomas Jefferson had the foresight to send the two men on such a trek across the West.

I love the name Bluebonnet.

I had the chance years ago to visit the Gateway Arch in Missouri with my husband and children years ago. We enjoyed the trip. I made it to the top of the Arch with my heart in my hands because of my fear of heights. It was well worth it.

I just noticed that eskimos an inuits. far northern people have no trees to make boats of bark but they have lots of animal skins...mostly polar bar and they kill wales. what about the bones from them . without trees what else would they use for framing. just wondering. Claire

Claire: I wonder if they could use bones for framing?

Jean: I've never been to that part of the country. It sounds so magnificant. My cousin, in his early 60's, goes hiking with friends and wife all over, including trips to Yellowstone. I would love to see that area some day. The woman who owns our Curves (exercise for women chain) just sold it because she and her husband are moving to Idaho for retirement where her family lives. She said she has magnificant views of the mountains. I've just seen the Rockies from a jet. Unbelievable.

Is that part of the country what is called "big sky country"? I guess the great plains are out there, although I keep thinking the great plains must be farther south, for some reason.

I think the plains would have very big skies.we were trailer traveling and you could see storms coming from miles away, lightning etc. while the skies were blue where we were. I've been to grand canyon the upper edge which where we were was about seven thousand feet. I was a little scared.It's breathtaking. it's southwest. . . .I picked up some pictures. will look. . . claire

The Lewis and Clark Herbarium Site suggested by Hats is now on the Web Resources page. I am sorry for the delay in adding it to the page.

Apparently the blue bonnet and the L&C blue lupine flower are relatives. Unfortunately my knowledge of Lupines mostly stems from the 1960's Monty Python sketch involving the English version of that flower.

Occasionally a few bluebonnets will appear in the spring at my Guadalupe County place, but the soil there is a bit heavy for them and the spectacular red Indian paint brush is the most prominent spring wild flower there. Just a few miles away where there is a more sandy soil the blue bonnets in a good year will turn the landscape blue.

Claire: Isn't it something how every part of the country has its own special beauty.

My husband spent a summer working on a ranch in Colorado when he was a youth. (I'm trying to picture just where Colorado is.) I'm not sure if Colorado was part of the Louisiana Territory. I know that it's got big skies, though. A Life Magazine photographer was taking black and white pictures of the skies and scenery out there when my husband was working on the ranch. The photographer got some pictures of him and his buddy lifting bales of hay with giant skies above. He gave some of the pictures to my husband whose mother had them framed. They're huge photos and gorgeous country. My husband still talks about that experience on the ranch and we still have the photos, although they're not hanging on a wall.

The eastern half of Colorado was part of the Louisiana Purchase.

Kleo

Harold, I love the name "red Indian paint brush." I have heard of the name, can't remember what one looks like. I don't think the paint brush is on the Herbarium.

Kleo, I didn't know Colorada was part of the Louisiana Purchase. That is really interesting too. I thought the Louisiana Purchase just included the large territory of Louisiana.

Marni, I bet Colorada is beautiful country.

"The French territory of Louisiana included far more land than just the current U.S. state of Louisiana. The lands purchased contained parts or all of present-day Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota west of the Mississippi River, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, New Mexico, northern Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, the portions of Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado east of the Rocky Mountains, the portions of southern Manitoba, southern Saskatchewan and southern Alberta that drain into the Missouri River, and Louisiana on both sides of the Mississippi River including the city of New Orleans.

The land included in the Purchase comprises 22.3% of the territory of the modern United States.

The purchase was an important moment in the presidency of Thomas Jefferson. At the time, it faced domestic opposition as being possibly unconstitutional."

Map from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Purchase.

I have found in the many ironies of Tho Jefferson this one the most fascinating - that the man who said the federal gov't should be small and unobtrusive was the one to take it upon himself to purchase this territory and double the size of the U.S. He also established West Point as the military academy, something else that the constitution didn't directly allow him to do. ......

On BookTv on Sat i heard someone say that we have Haiti to thank for TJ being able to make that purchase, if Haiti hadn't rebelled against France, France wouldn't have needed the money and therefore considered selling the territory.

Of course, that takes us to a discussion of why those European kings felt they "owned" any of this North American territory to start with and/or had the right to sell it or give it to others! Which takes us to the religious discussion of the Christian Church and especially the Protestant arm of the CC preaching that people should be using the land and its resources for profit and since the Indians weren't doing that, they didn't deserve the land and the ores/minerals/oil under it.

One of the most fascinating pieces about studying history is how it just keeps evolving and rolling into so many other pieces of history. As we study it from present to past there are so many tangents to follow....jean

Indian paintbrus, or Castilleja is also called prairie fire. Here's a picture of it from Wikipedia:

Kleo

Wow! Kleo, isn't that paintbrush beautiful? The name fits its beauty.

Mabel, after reading your post. I definitely believe your last statement. Here is Mabel's statement again in quotes. Thank you.

"One of the most fascinating pieces about studying history is how it just keeps evolving and rolling into so many other pieces of history. As we study it from present to past there are so many tangents to follow...."jean

I think Thomas Jefferson was a man of vision. Just like his counterpart years later William H. Seward who bought Alaska from the Russians. Both of these men realized that if they didn't purchase these lands that they had the potential to be swollowed up by European countries. They saw that if America was going to be a world power like England, France, Russia, and Germany she would have to first be dominate in the Americas.

Scrawler, that's a good point.

Thanks, Jean, for the info about the states comprising the Louisiana Purchase.

Well, L&C made Page 1 of the Wall Street Journal today with an article entitled “Lewis and Clark are Met With a yawn after 200 Years.” The jest of the article is that tourist visitation at the Lewis and Clark Trail sites has been significantly below expectations. The WSJ makes a rather one sided analysis attributing the lack of interest to the fact that “America’s view of what makes a hero has changed, and, to many, Lewis and Clark no longer make the cut.”

Though it would be untimely and premature for us to discuss this article now we should all read it and perhaps discuss its view during the final conclusion of our discussion. Apparently all of you can read it (and save it) today on the WSJ web site. Click Here

I urge everyone to read it today and save it on your disk or make a paper copy for later discussion. I think it necessary to get this article today because I don’t think the public can get archived past articles.

Early 19th Century Spain would have argued the idea that the Louisiana Purchase included any of what is now the State of Texas. About 1820 a U.S./Spanish (later Mexican after 1821) Border Commission met and established the present Red and Sabine Rivers border. Marni do you remember Audubon was interested in joining this group as an artist?

The Republic of Texas claimed the Rio Grande water shed from its source to its mouth, This claim would have included Santa Fe and much of New Mexico, and much of Colorado. Under the Annexation Agreement the present boundaries were agreed to and the United States assumed responsibility for the $10,000.00 debt of the Republic of Texas in return for the establishment of the present borders. .

Harold, I can't read the WSJ article without subscribing - so I don't know their reasoning. But I wonder if they're counting visitation this year. We followed the L&C trail in 2003, which was at the beginning of the celebration. I wonder if maybe there wasn't more visitation at sites in 2004-05 - and before gasoline prices got so high. Just a possibility.....

The Republic of Texas National Debt assumed by the U.S. was $10,000,000, not 10.000 as I said in my previous message. The ten Million amount was considered a staggering amount at the time and was one of the reasons popularizing the annexation in Texas. Today of course that amount would be considered insignificant.

MaryZ, I thought anyone could get to the article today. Apparently I am wrong on that but I will have more to say about in during the discussion at which time I will quote more from the article. It seems a most one sided position that completely ignores the gasoline prices and other factors that now limit the auto travel that in particular is necessary to follow the many isolated trail sites.

.

I can't get to the article either. It says you have to be a subscriber and get 2 weeks free.

Harold: I vaguely remember something about Texas borders and Audubon but not the specifics. Sorry.

Click Here for the B&N catalog entry for “Texas By Terán.” This is the 1828 Diary kept by General Manuel de Mier Y Terán on his 1828 Journey through Texas in connection with his Inspection and Survey as Mexican Representative on the Boundary Commission set up to survey and mark critical points on the dividing line between the United States and Mexico. Actually this line had been decided upon by an 1819 treaty between the U.S. and Spain (The Adams Onis Treaty of 1819). This Treaty had defined the boundary but had not been surveyed and in 1828 had not been ratified by either party.

Terán had figured in the Mexican Revolution and early Mexican politics. After 1830 he fell out of favor and dropped out of politics. He was not active politically on either side in the 1836 Texas Revolution. I do not have my Audubon Biography any more but I do remember Audubon, as an artist was interested in accompanying the American commissioners in the 1828 expedition. As it happened Audubon did not accompany the American delegation.

Regarding the WSJ article yesterday I thought the current issue was available on line to the public. I am sorry it was not; I will plan to quote more from it during the conclusion of our discussion.

Having read the Wall St. Journal article, I don't think anyone missed anything important.
It's mostly about tourism. Who cares? We ought to read the book and enjoy learning the history. I don't think the value of the book has anything to do with how many tourists visit the L&C trail.
Not to say we ought not to do so, and it's great to read about those of you who have traveled there.
IMHO, the WSJ article was terrible journalism, and we should ignore reporting which does not affect our enjoyment of this book discussion.
I hope I didn't step on any toes. Sloppy reporting in the WSJ has annoyed me for years.

Harold: I watched a History Channel program about Alaska last night. One of the explorers (I have forgotten his name - yikes, pea brain! - it may have been Adams - I couldn't find it on the web) went up the Copper River with 2 others. They had a harrowing trip, crossed the mountains, made their way down some rivers and finally to the Behring Sea, I think. Anyway, the explorer was compared to Lewis and Clark. The historian interviewed said that this man was the only American explorer to even approach anything comparable to what Lewis and Clark had done.

It was really neat to hear that about Lewis and Clark. I feel sort of protective of their accomplishments now that I've been reading finally about their great feat! It's startling to me how little I knew about the expedition before and how little so many others know about them.

Does anyone know who I'm talking about who was the first American to explore the Alaskan Copper River? Apparently, he was looking for copper for mining. His reports apparently had a great deal to do with the rush for gold in Alaska.

While researching for something that I needed I came across this entry in Salmon P. Chases' journal concerning Thomas Jefferson:

Jan 1, 1830: Mrs. Smith [Margaret Bayard Smith's most notable works to date included "A Winter in Washington; or Memoirs of the Seymour Family, and "What is Gentility? A Moral Tale.] She was here when the Federal City [Washington City or Washington D.C.] was in it's infancy and knew all the great men who have at different times adorned councils of our republic or who have from foreign lands come to look upon our rising greatness. In consequence of such association she can tell much of by gone days & men. One evening she related to be the following anecdote of Jefferson. A report had prevailed that [Thomas] J had written a letter to Charles Thompson, in which he professed a conversion to the Christian religion and renounced the infidel opinions which he had formerly held. Mrs. S delighted to hear this wrote to Mr. J to enquire if such were the fact. He replied that he had written no such letter to Mr. Thompson and that his religious sentiments ought to be and were known only to himself and God. At Mrs. Smith's I [Salmon P. Chase] became acquainted with Mrs. Randolph the daughter of Jefferson. She is a very dignified lady, converses extremely well but sparingly. She reported to me, in his own words, a description of John Adams by Doctor Franklin, "Always an honest man often a great man and sometimes a madman." ~ The Journals of Salmon P. Chase.

Thank goodness for Jefferson's determination to keep church and state separate in the formation of our government. I believe Jefferson was a Deist.

"Historical and modern deism (from Latin: deus) is defined by the view that reason and logic, rather than revelation or tradition, should be the basis of belief in God. Deists reject both organized and revealed religion and maintain that reason is the essential element in all knowledge. For a "rational basis for religion" they refer to the cosmological argument (first cause argument), the teleological argument (argument from design), and other aspects of what was called natural religion. Deism has also come to be identified with the classical belief that God created but does not intervene in the world, though this is not a necessary component of deism."

More about Deism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

Interesting about Salmon Chase. He is one of the "rivals" to Lincoln in the wonderful book Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin. I highly recommend this book. Chase was quite an unusual guy.

Marni and Scrawler, thank you for the interesting posts. I didn't know the meaning of a Deist. I thought these people just believed in a higher power. This explanation fills in my gaps. Thank you for the link too.

This is another book going down on my library list, "Team of Rivals:" Often I see Doris Kearns Goodwin on the Today show or Booktv or other programs. I love to hear her speak. She makes history come alive. To me she is the female counterpart to David McCullough.

Somehow I've missed subscribing to this discussion, but here I am at last. Oregon Public Broadcasting is replaying an exciting series about L&C, starting this week, called Lewis & Clark, The Unfinished Journey. It is narrated by Peter Coyote and it is amazing complex. The web site is here, I will try to copy the episodes to my computer and may be able to send them electronically. To purchase the series costs $89! else I would do that and share them with any who are interested. Each sebment opens with a report of events happeming around the world, ala CNN. People are interviewed (using their own writings for their responses to reporters' questions). It is engrossing. The first episode exams the death of Merriweather Lewis and the "reporter" questions Captain Clark about the alleged letter Lewis wrote to him before his suicide. Clark responds that there is no such letter in existence! (We know that he burned the letter after reading it!) Hard to generate suspense when domehing is as well documented as this historical event, but it works.

Here it is:

Lewis & Clark: The Unfinished Journey

I agree Mippy is essentially correct in her conclusions concerning the Wall Street Journal. She is correct in that it was basically a report on tourist activity at the L&C Trail sites. What surprised me was the extreme negative opinion of the Captains and the results of the expedition as expressed in the quoted judgment of the College Professor billed in the article as an expedition expert whose interview formed the basis of the article and its explanation for the reduced tourist interest. When we discuss the social and historical impact of the expedition this position should be discussed along with the traditional far more positive view,

In reference to Scrawler’s post concerning Margaret Bayard Smith writings on early Washington, a author search on that name in the B&N on-line catalog brought up three titles on early Washington, DC society, all of which are out of print. One of these may be available through the used booksellers network. I am not familiar with her writings.

Marni, that is indeed an interesting site on Deism in message 135. I am addiding it to my list of favorite sites, It reiterates the rational arguments for the existance of god that were given 60 years ago in a Comparative Religous Thought course I took as an under-gradute, The details of that long-a-go course have been largely forgotton; the site offers an opportunity for a timely review.

Later today I will also add it to the Web Resources page as an explations of Jefferson's stand on rel;igion.

Mrs Sherlock I will also add your L&C Unfinished Journey Site to the Web Resources. Again we must resist the urge to prematurely discuss this interpretation until the proper place in the schedule.

Chicago's WBEZ has scheduled twqo hours of the Unfinished Journey special today at 7 - 9 PM, Chicgo time. I will try to capture it to my computer since WBEZ allows live broadcasting to computers. It really is special; catch it if you can.

Marni's Deism Web Site and Mrs Sherlock's Unfinished Journey Sites have now been added to the Web Resources Page.

I did not find the unfinished Journey broadcast listed in the program guides for either of my] NPR Stations KSTX, San Antonio or KUT, Austin. I will have to call tomorrow.

Quoting from the Unfinished Journey Web Page the broadcast will be in 13 parts as follows.

Series airs Fridays, July 21-October 13 at 2pm & 8pm on OPB Radio (all stations), rebroadcasts Sundays July 23-October 15 at 9pm (KOAC only)

Mrs. Sherlock: Thank you so much for the info about the L&C radio broadcasts. I checked out the web site, listened to part of the sample, and visited the Episodes tab. It lists each episode and links to a transcript of each. I had missed the first episode, so I printed out the transcript of it.

I'm going to read the transcript to my dad when I visit him on Wednesday. He's blind and bed-ridden, doesn't have a TV in his current room, and listens to radio. He used to listen to audio books all of the time, but hasn't been doing that lately. I think he'll cheer up when I read this to him because he loves history and we share many a conversation about American history.

Dad will be glad to know about this radio program. I'm not sure how to find it in our area. What is OPB radio?

Thanks! Marni

I missed the broadcast yesterday. In 105 degree weather my brain goes intto near catatonia. Maybe I'll buy a lotto ticket; when I win I can buy the set of CDs and we can share them! Hal, you can "tune" WBEZ in on your computer. You are in the Central Time Zone, aren't you? I thought of the broadcast when it was seven pm here on the West Coast, which is two hours too late.l

I read the transcript of the first "episode" of the L&C radio show to my dad when I visited this week. We both enjoyed it! However, we both missed Part 2.

Are we still on for our discussion tomorrow? This place has been pretty quiet!

Marni

By all means. Tomorrow we begin! I'll make a kick-off post later tonight.

Since technically “Undaunted Courage” is written as a biography of Meriwether Lewis we get in the first chapters much detail concerning the principal, his family, his growing up, his education and the social environment in which he was born and lived. On this our first day of our discussion let each of us give our comments concerning Meriwether Lewis’s early preparation for the command of the expedition. Some of the points that you might comment on include the following:

Family, his boyhood and education; Chapter 1. In your view was his father’s early death and his mother’s prompt remarriage typical or atypical for the period? Was his formal education sufficient to prepare him for leadership? Compared to John Adams, who had the better formal education?

Meriwether Lewis as a young Adult, Chapter 2. According to Ambrose what were some of the required character elements for a Gentleman? How did Lewis measure with respect to the required Standard? According to Ambrose, “life on the Albemarle plantation after the revolution had something of a Garden of Eden quality to it.” But what was the “snake in the grass that darkened the future? How did Ambrose describe the character of most Virginia women? What two were named as exceptions?

Meriwether Lewis as a young soldier, Chapter 3. What event caused Lewis to enlist in the Virginia Militia? What social advantage endowed Lewis with special privilege and early promotion? What was the cause and outcome of the Court Martial of Lewis? How did Lewis meet William Clark?

Thomas Jefferson’s America, Chapter 4. How much was known concerning the geography of the trans-Mississippi west? What European Countries were actively involved in the area? What was known about the Indian Tribes inhabiting the area? Who were the Presidential candidates in the election of 1800? What was the outcome?

Chapter 1:

"Meriwether Lewis was born on the eve of revolution into a world of conflict between Americans and the British government for control of the trans-Appalachian West in a colony whose western ambitions were limitless, a colony that was leading the surge of Americans over the mountains, and in a country that was a nursery of explorers."

I think this is a very significant passage. To be born on the very "eve of revolution" it was almost as if he were destined to be one of these explorers that was leading the surge of Americans over the mountains.

If you think about, the months and years before the Revolution were very different than those during or following the Revolution. Before we were a part of the British empire and for years we looked to her not only to provide us with the manufactured goods and food supplies, but also for her protection. But when we declared our independence we were also declaring that we were able to take care of ours by supplying our populace with goods and protection. Yet all we really had was a rag-tag army of volunteers and the a vast wilderness yet to be explored. But as history has shown it was enough to prevail.

Lewis was born into a country were men took pride in what they could do for their country even his family coat of arms was "All Earth Is to a Brave Man His Country" or an alternate translation is "Everything the Brave Man Does Is for His Country." But prior to the Revolution that country was England and now it was America. But regardless the ideals were the same, as a youth Lewis would have been conditioned to do the right thing for his country.

I find myself at a loss here. I have been concentrating on other books also which cover this time in our country's new life. I will go back and do some more reading of the earlier years and hope to comment tonight.

Chapter 1. In your view was his father’s early death and his mother’s prompt remarriage typical or atypical for the period? Was his formal education sufficient to prepare him for leadership? Compared to John Adams, who had the better formal education?

The book clearly states that losing your father early and your mother quickly remarrying were typical. John Adams had a much better formal education than Lewis. Closer to home, didn't Jefferson have about the same level of formal education as Lewis? Yet, Jefferson read extensively his whole life and comes across as a better educated man, although not more observant of nature.

I don't know that formal education has much to do with leadership. There are skills to leadership that can be learned, but a lot of being a leader is something you are born with, imo.

Chapter 2. But what was the “snake in the grass that darkened the future? How did Ambrose describe the character of most Virginia women? What two were named as exceptions?

The description of slavery in this book is fairly damning. I am also reading Robert Penn Warren's All the King's Men. In this book, a flashback to the past tells the reader that good, ethical slave owners wound up corrupt, as Ambrose says, because they could not look their slaves in the eyes. I appreciate Ambrose's insight into Jefferson, his comments about raising your children to be slave owners (an evil comparable with raising your children as slaves when you've raped their mother), and his ease with depicting Jefferson as the biggest hypocrite of his time.

All of my ancestors are immigrants from Europe. My earliest ancestors lived and owned plantations and slaves in Virginia as early as the 17th century. My Russian grandfather came to America in the early 20th century. He, like Lewis, was born into a privileged life, was a natural born leader, and was an explorer. While Lewis went west in America in the 19th century, my grandfather went east in Russia in the early 20th century. I have been fascinated by explorers all of my life.

Kleo

Thank you Scrawler, Ann and Kelo for your initial comments. Meriwether Lewis was certainly the product of the revolution. His mother was widowed after Lewis’s father died suddenly of pneumonia that resulted from a winter spill from a horse into an icy winter. In about 5 weeks we will read how the expedition crew was wet continuously for days at the mouth of the Columbia searching frantically for a dry winter camp site. Not one of those several dozen crewmen and women equally wet and cold recorded sick time.

As Kelo said the prompt remarriage was expected. We saw a similar outcome in the Audubon biography when Lucy’s mother died. Other contemporary biographies and social histories are full of a similar tales,

I suspect Lewis was pretty smart. Ssurely he would score high on today’s IQ tests. Considering how little formal education he actually had, he certainly learned what was necessary to establish the many geographic surveys with rather precise results. We will run into many other examples of precise scientific reporting as our discussion unfolds.

Of all the events mentioned in our introductory chapters the one that interests me the most is the Whiskey Rebellion. I guess it is the fact that just a mere dozen years after the Winning of independence in the west the settlers were again in revolt as the result of a new tax, this time imposed on them by their elected representatives. Apparently it was not so much the lack of representation as the tax itself causing the rebellion.

Ambrose paints a vivid picture of his excellency, President George Washington in full military uniform mounted on a white horse seeing the Federalized Militia off to quell the Rebellion. Perhaps my interest is sparked by an ancestor, Alexander Wells, Cilck Here, who at the time was a distiller in Washington County PA. Though there is no family tradition connecting him to the rebellion by reason of his economic interest he must have been involve. Also immediately after the Whiskey Rebellion ended, he sole his Pennsylvania property, still and all, and moved to Wellsburg Va better known today as Wellsburg W. VA.

Well, I eagerly await knowing whether they ever found a dry camp for, as far as I know, there's not a dry spot within 200 miles. The road that takes you from Portland to Astoria at the mouth of the Columbia is the Lewis and Clark Highway last time I drove it.

Kleo

About a couple of weeks ago there was an author on Booktv discussing his new book. The book is about the Whiskey Rebellion. I have no memory of the title of the book or the name of the author. He did make me very interested in the Whiskey Rebellion. I don't think we hear much about the Whiskey Rebellion.

Just catching up after being out all day, I see that many of the opening questions have been answered.
I hope to participate as soon as a conversation ensues, but so far the answers are complete, and no rebuttal of any kind seems required. Am I missing something?

Regarding whether Lewis's formal education was sufficient, we have not yet found out whether he was a good leader, nor what he was like as an adult, in the chapters for this week.
Are we assuming everyone has finished the book? How can we judge him later, as we know him now?

Mippy, there are questions for chapters four and five in Harold's post #146.

I've only read the first two chapters. However, Meriwhether Lewis is not a completely new character to Americans. We already know what he did. I can't read a biography of a man I know and forget everything about him before I start. Maybe the book will change my mind, and that will be noted as we read on. But I don't think it's realistic to act as if a man of Lewis's stature and fame in American history is a completely unknown entity. There may even be a lot about Lewis and America that this book doesn't tell us. Harold also asked, for instance, about John Adams' education, not a topic of the book.

We can always learn more about a person whom we already know and modify or more firmly establish our current judgment of him by reading and discussing them anew.

Kleo

Kleo ~ point taken,
but I do not know very much about these men, so I hope to learn from this discussion.

Hi, folks! I'm so glad this discussion has started. Yay!! I've been looking forward to it. I love this book so much!!!!

Re Lewis' education....I was surprised he had such a difficult time finding someone to teach him. He was of the gentry, would inherit the plantation as the oldest son, had wealth, land, and important acquaintances. I was surprised at the hunt he had to make to find qualified teachers to take him on.

Ambrose said there were no public schools in Virginia at that time. But you'd think there would have been plenty of qualified tutors. But, I guess not enough to go around.

Lewis finally found his teachers, but had only about 4 to 4 1/2 years of formal education. Then he had to take over management of his family's plantation. No college for him to his great disappointment.

It reminded me of George Washington who also was not able to attend college. He, too, was always sorry about his lack of formal education. Yet he became the first president of the U.S. Both Washington and Lewis were intelligent men who learned on their own. Lewis seemed more of a natural scholar to me. He was always learning, studying. Lack of a formal education did not hinder either Lewis or Washington.

I just thought of a tutor of this era - Eli Whitney. When he graduated from Yale, he was sent down south to Georgia to tutor and he ended up at Nathaniel Greene's home where he tutored the neighbors' children and invented the cotton gin.

Marni

I was really impressed with Lewis's ability to learn from Jefferson plus other learned men about biology, ornithology, medicine in such a short time. He did express an intense interest in learning when very young and really tried to enter different schools taught by private teachers when young. I also searched for the Philosophy Society and found this. American Philosophy Society

Jefferson had long been interested in exploring the West, about 20 years. Here are two little stories about Jefferson's desire to find a land way or waterway crossing the U.S. long before he became president.

: "As ambassador to France, Jefferson engaged John Ledyard to attempt a continental crossing from Europe by way of Russia, central Asia, and Siberia, over the Bering Sea into Canada, then southward along the western coastline before eventually turning inland and eastward to the Missouri River. Incredibly, Ledyard walked 3000 miles into Siberia before he was apprehended by Catherine the Great's troops and escorted back to Europe under suspicion of spying.

Jefferson was undaunted. While secretary of state, he commissioned French emigre Andre MIchaux to find a route across the continent, this time from the eastern states to the Missouri. Michaux managed to reach Kentucky before, in an ironic twist of history, he was unmasked as a real spy in the service of Edmond Charles Genet, French ambassador to Washington." From another history.

In reading the preface to the L&C Cookbook, I found an author who wrote about traveling throughout the U.S. from 1797-1799 returning in 1805. Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz met Jefferson in Paris in 1787 and dined with him often in Philadelphia and at Montecello. His keen observations of people, places, events, and culture are in his wonderful book "Under Their Vine and Fig Tree". I was able to find a copy of this book right here in the Ohio State University library and I will see if I can borrow it .

Neimcewicz traveled throughout the U.S. which meant only to the Mississippi River in the West. What must he have thought about L&C Corps of Discovery? I wonder if he talked to Jefferson about his travels when he returned and commented about the Discovery expedition. Now there's a table I would like to have been a guest!

We drove West from Portland to Astoria last year and returned via the north side of the Columbia River. Both days were sunny and beautiful but the days in between were windy, rainy and full of rainbows over the water. I have some good pics of the double rainbows that seem to be prolific out there.

Thanks for the info, Ann.

I loved reading about how Lewis was so very courageous from such a young age. Several quotes right in the beginning of the book mentioned his "undaunted courage." I guess partly it was from his experiences with his family's travels and explorations, partly from living so close to the edge of civilization, and partly from genes he inherited. What a brave young lad in the face of danger - right from the getgo.

And how fascinating to hear how Lewis loved to "ramble." He loved to go off by himself and explore. Sometimes he seemed like a loner, but from some of his letters, he also seems to enjoy himself with his special friends and with his family.

Lewis must have been very special to have been selected by Jefferson for the task of planning and leading the Corps of Discovery. We learn their families had long been friends and lived close to each other. Jefferson had known Lewis since Lewis was little. But Jefferson knew so many people. He recognised Lewis' special character, intelligence, bravery, knowledge of the wild, affinity towards exploration, attention to detail, and leadership skills. Jefferson made a wise decision in selecting Lewis for the task.

It seems that Jefferson also was like a father figure to Lewis. Jefferson also taught Lewis to write. The writing he would need as he made his explorations.

Ann, thank you for the link.

I have a map in my book, "Undaunted Courage." It is on page eighty-two. Is it a good map for a person with little knowledge?

I am not a good map reader. Does the Missouri River lead right into the Pacific Ocean?

I also wonder how much of the land to be explored by Lewis and Clark was settled by white settlers? Not much????

I hope my questions are alright to ask. I don't know the answers. I am very interested in the Lewis and Clark journey.

Jefferson's idea to buy Louisiana from Napoleon in order to avoid war was a very smart idea. Jefferson was a very forward thinking man.

Click Here for a web biographical sketch of John Leonard the American adventurer who Marni mentioned, I don’t judge this plan to enter North America from Russia accoros the polar ice field a very practical one. Leonard was fortunate that his arrest bu Russian police prevented his attempt.

Hats the source of the Missouri River ins in the high Rocky Mountains in today's Idaho. From that point of orgin the Missouri runs south east to enter the Mississippi at St Louis. The source of the Columbia is just a few miles west of the Missouri's source on the Pacific side of the continental divide. We will find this the most difficult leg of the L&C journey as it involved several hundred miles of high mountain passage

Harold and Marni, thank you.

I certainly agree with those of you who noted Jefferson's status as a father figure to Lewis. The Jefferson-Lewis relationship during the early months of the Jefferson Administration illustrates the quasi father-son relationship. Jefferson knew Lewis, he needed a secretary, naturally Lewis was chosen for the job.

Lewis's job at the President's house was comparable to the current chief of staff at the modern Whitehouse. Of course in his day there was no staff; Lewis by himself was the whole organization. It does not appear to have been a real fun job with the Prescient and his secretary often supping alone.

Another fact that connected the Jefferson –Lewis families was the fact that they were close neighbors. I think it is in the Ambrose book that notes the fact that Mrs Lewis’s home Cured Hams were the best in the area.. She always sent several to Monticello for TJ’s kitchen..

"The Whiskey Rebellion of 1794 was the greatest threat to national unity between the winning of independence and the outbreak of the Civil War."

This may have been the first time that our unity had been threatened, but it certainly was not going to be the last. Even as early as this the issue of states' rights vs a strong central government were at the fore front. Federalists like Alexander Hamilton were attempting to increase the power of the Federal government.

After the Revolution the federal government was in need of money. So the government laid an exercise tax on whiskey. Hamilton demanded that a tax be paid in currency. This favored those living in the East as opposed to those living in the West because the East had access to hard currency where as the West did not.

I found it interesting that the Founding Fathers had raised against "internal" taxes by England and the result was a revolution and now the Federal government was doing the same thing. So why wouldn't the farmers revolt.

I also found it interesting that the frontiersmen although they did not want to pay the tax; they also complained that the federal government neglected to protect them against the Indians and didn't build western roads and canals.

But in the wake of national bankruptcy what could the Federal government have done to correct this monetary situation. Was it a fair tax or like the frontiersmen said did it favor the rich absentee land speculators over the hardworking frontiersmen who only were trying to acquire land and build a home?

Hopefully this will be a learning experience for all of us. Therefore every one is encouraged to ask questions and to comment on anything that particularly interests them. Give us your particular interpretation of any event from which others might respond agreeing or disagreeing with your slant on the event.

Though I might from time to time to time pose questions, all are equally free to ask questions. Also there may be no single answer to a question. Other interpretations are always welcome since this is what makes a discussion really worthwhile. Never fear having an alternate interpretation of any event related to the L&C trek.

This is such good news. I am glad we can ask questions. Thanks.

It does look like the Federal Congress did in the 1790' what mmany later Congresses have done; that is to seek a politically weak sector of the nation to tax. The product of the west was corn and to market it, it was turned into whiskey and sent to market. There is mention in my Alexander Wells notes of sending the product, whiskey, down the Ohio and Mississippi to Spanish New Orleans from where it could pass into world commerce. It was the cash crop of the western farmers. Since they were fewer in numbers than the eastern interests, they had less numerical representation in Congress, so the necessary tax fell on them. Oh that really made them Mad and federal revenuers quickly becamd “personas non gratta” with many unpleasant incidents involving tar and feathers and even lynching.. This is what prompted Washington to send the Militia.

By the way. was there an earlier constitutional crisis involving A New England State. I seem to remember something but can’t find the details. If any one knows of an earlier Constitutional crisis, tell us in a post,

I have mentioned before in earlier discussions my favorite old Saturday Review cartoon, It showed two colonial types standing before a bulletin board outside Independence Hall in Phildeophia. It was July 4.1776; in the back ground in the tower, the liberty brll tolled its joyful message. One of the citizens after completing the reading of the great document remarked, “Its not so much the lack of representation that Tee's me off, Its the tax itself that leaves me as mad as hell.”

It's ironic that the argument of taxes seems to follow the colonists, well after they have gotten Britain off their backs.

I remember reading in other books that the fledgling U.S. got into big debt during the Revolution. We borrowed large sums from the Dutch and from the French (maybe from others?) to help finance the war. Also, private Americans such as financier Robert Morris and soldiers such as George Washington and Nathaniel Greene paid their troops out of their own pockets so they'd have clothing and food. They needed to be paid back. Also, the British were demanding that Loyalists be paid back for possessions they lost in the war. And, of course, the new American government had to be paid on an ongoing basis; Federal City (Washington, D.C.) had to be built, etc.

Where was the money to come from? When Alexander Hamilton became our first Secretary of the Treasury, it became his problem to figure out. It boiled down to collecting taxes and creating a national banking system.

I read that one type of tax Hamilton was allowed to create was a tax on certain imports. Americans would have been used to import taxes. Hamilton created the Revenue Service to oversee import tax collections at ports on the east coast. This also included building revenue cutters, boats that guarded the coast, plus building lighthouses. The Revenue Service eventually evolved into the U.S. Coast Guard.

Another tax Hamilton was allowed to create was the whiskey tax. This was different from import taxes because Americans were taxed on a product they produced and sold, rather than products they bought from elsewhere. The tax targeted the west where a lot of whiskey was produced. So westerners cried foul and said "Taxation without representation" since some western territories weren't states yet and didn't vote, I think.?

I don't remember why Hamilton was allowed to create certain types of taxes and not others. Can anyone shed any light on this?

Marni

Oh, Harold, you just posted something on this. I'll have to read it. Thanks!

Harold: I bet the other crisis was Shay's Rebellion in Massachusetts, a rebellion of farmers - something to do with paying taxes, as I recall. I'll have to look it up quickly.

Here's Wikipedia's info about Shay's Rebellion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shays'_Rebellion

Daniel Shay's Regulators tried to capture the U.S. arsenal at Springfield, MA to get ahold of arms stored there. I read recently that this arsenal was the first U.S. arsenal. I was interested in this because Springfield is where I was born and is only 20 minutes from where I live today. My son goes to law school in Springfield.

In 1794 "President Washington selected Springfield as the site for one of the two Federal Armories (the other being Harpers Ferry). Production of weaponry at the Armory began in 1795 when 245 flintlock muskets were produced monthly by 40 workers."

I wonder if this was the armory that produced the excellent muskets that Meriwether Lewis purchased for the Corps of Discovery?

Today the Springfield armory is a museum and a national historic site.

"In 1974, the Springfield Armory brand name was purchased by Robert Reese, who formed a new company to manufacture M1A rifles. This company, now owned and operated by Reese's sons, manufactures a wide array of firearms under the Springfield Armory name. However, the company is not located near the former armory site; it is now in Geneseo, Illinois."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springfield_Arsenal

Marni

Marni ~ those were interesting links!

Here is an addition link on this:
Shay's Rebellion

and here is a link to more information on the Whiskey one:
Whiskey Rebellion

I'm not in any way making a negative remark, but people have said things about Wikipedia recently which make me hesitate to post that information. Ginny has often said to try to look for links ending in .edu; however, they are not always available.
What do others think?

No offense taken, Mippy. I must say, though, that I use Wikipedia info often to quickly look up something. I have found much of its info. very informative, detailed, well-written, and helpful. Some of it apparently is not totally accurate. It's just an encyclopedia.

For true research, the scholar should go to source documents.

This reminds me.....

I started reading the Lewis and Clark journals last night. I bought the book which is edited by Bernard DeVoto, and with a Forward by Stephen Ambrose. I found out a bit about the differences in various publications about the journey:

-Lewis and Clark and members of their party kept journals.

-In 1814, a 2-volume history of their journey, based on their journals, edited by Nicholas Biddle, was published.

-In 1893, I believe, Thwaite's edition of the journals in their entirety for the first time were published. This is the text that is recommended for researchers and scholars.

-In 1953, another version of the journals, with repetions excluded, and notations added, was produced by Bernard DeVoto so the general public would be able to enjoy the language and spectacle of the journey through the words of the explorers themselves.

Marni and Mippy thank you for the links. I am trying to read very fast.

Marni, I noticed you mentioned Robert Morris. Did he also help to finance the Lewis and Clark expedition? I might have read his name in Undaunted Courage.

Shay's Rebellion almost sounds like the Depression, hard times for the farmers.

Hats: There was a recession going on when the rebellion occurred. I guess that's fairly common after a war. I don't know if it was officially a depression.

No, I don't think Robert Morris had anything to do with financing Lewis and Clark. I don't know the timeframes, but sometime after the Revolution Morris lost everything. He had been the big money man financing the war and I think Washington asked him to be his first Treasury Secretary, which Morris turned down. Morris overextended himself with his investments - he was into a lot of land speculation - and ended up losing everything he had. He even had to go to debtor's prison. Isn't that terrible! He had been the richest man in America, I think.

Our book mentioned that Washington and Hamilton both helped to finance the first attempt to explore the Louisiana territory when Jefferson first organized it - the Frenchman who turned out to be a spy? (I forget his name.) So that episode was a flop.

Marni

There were many economic downturns throughout the 19th century. Those of us in the Audubon discussion last year noted several effecting Audubon's economic life. They were often referred to as the panic of 18__.

I think the term panic came from the fact that when the economy turned down Banks were reluctant to make credit available to business people and people with bank accounts lost faith in the solvency of their banks resulting in public panic to withdraw their funds often causing immediate bank failure. There was no FDIC to protect deposit accounts

The Senate and the United States Constitution: "In the weeks before the Constitution's framers agreed to the compromise, the delegates from the states with large populations argued that each state's representation in the Senate should correspond to the size of the state. Large states, then stood to gain the most seats in the Senate. As justification for this advantage, delegates noted that their states contributed more of the nation's financial and defensive resources than small states, and therefore, required a greater say in government."

I threw this comment out because indirectly it is the last sentence that may have been the justification that the Federalists used in creating a tax on whiskey. The laws of the American government are more often than not based on a compromise such as the Missouri compromise of 1820 and the 1850 Compromise. But a compromise means that both parties are welling to give up something in return to gain something for the Entire country not just one segment.

However, sometimes a compromise is not enough when the very thread that binds our government starts to unravel. I think this is what happened when Hamilton was faced with bankruptcy in the American government. He had to act immediately. Not everyone agreed with the tax, but it did help to keep the United States from going into further debit.

It was the Shay Rebellion that I was thinking of but could not bring to focus in my memory last evening. I am putting the two links supplied by Marni and Mippy in the Web Resources page. I have also added the other Web pages mentioned yesterday and today to the Web Resources Page

Article 1, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution severely limited the power of the U.S. Congress to levy and collect taxes:

No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

The 16th amendment repealed this provision enabling the Income tax

I am like an impatient child sitting in the back of the car. When are we going to start our journey? There are supplies and plans to make before we can set off. Am I too impatient?

I just got home from the hospital yesterday having had a third angioplasty in two weeks. My husband is going today to get my book from the library, altho i read it about two years ago. So, I'll catch up on you're postings and be back - maybe tomorrow. Looking forward to this discussion as always w/ this group........jean

Jean: we'll be happy to have you with us.

Hats and all it is now time we hone in on the expedition. First for the remainder of this week we will center on Chapters six through ten that cover first the planning for the trip then actually bring it to its launch in the spring of 1803. This latter stage included the selection of the leaders, the number of personnel to be involved, and its equipment. It also included the training and the defining of the purpose of the Mission.

Some of the Key points of the discussion for the next 4 days will be:

The Louisiana Purchase: Had there been no formal Louisiana Purchase agreement, would Jefferson have sent an expedition anyway?

The plan for the expedition and the evolution of the plan through the planning period- what were the reasons for the substantial increase in the size of the expedition from the initial plan? How were the personnel selected? the leaders Lewis? Clark? the enlisted men? How was the expedition authorized and financed?

What specialized training was provided. What did Captain Lewis learn in Philadelphia? Who did he meet there (particularly Dr Benjamin Rush)? What other individuals with experience-learned knowledge of the Missouri River west did the Captains interview (particularly in Pittsburgh and St Louis).

Can we contrast the L&C exploration of the trans Mississippi west with the 20th century space exploration program?

Jean: I'm glad you're home from the hospital. I hope you are feeling comfortable and well. You've been through so much in such a short time. We're so glad you will be able to join us. It's not the sme without you!

Marni

Jean ~ Welcome back! We all look forward to hearing more from you!

What an excellent question, comparing this journey with the journey into outer space!
After having spent some time reading up on NASA and space exploration, I'd say NO, exploring the western U.S. was not the same as exploring space. Space is infinite, and the many open questions about outer space cannot be answered by small teams, done in a short time, and not with the resources of just the USA.

In contrast, the L&C exploration was of a finite land mass, over a relatively limited time span, and was clearly affordable by the U.S. under an enthusiastic President Jefferson.

Harold ~ Please don't put this NASA link in the resources above without a caution statement, since it takes one really off subject. Or perhaps do not put it in. While interesting, it's too much information, at least for me.

Space Exploration

I was amazed to find it - since it is so old - at my college library and am having it sent over to me. It is so interesting to have outsiders impressions of what was going on at various times in our history.......jean

and the first time I'm in here but I had read the first sixty pages previously and have a couple of things to say about education which I think was modeled upon the English idea of what makes a gentleman, emphasis on the classics. This is hardly relevant to what Lewis found interesting. He did believe in serving in the military. Is that part of an English gentleman's formal education?

At any rate I admired him for not have been taken in by it and following his own inclinations, although not really prepared to handle all the difficulties that arose. His strong mother caught my attention, important to him and not so available with her second marriage.

Lewis didn't seem to me to be mature and maybe he didn't ever become so in the way that we think of it. Clark was serious and practical as near as I can tell, but Lewis, driven by youthful enthusiasms struck out into the unknown with much the same delight as our modern youth experience wanting to become ASTRONAUTS and to explore the even greater unknown of space. The exploration of space and the trip to the moon seem to me to be related.Mippy I have to respectfully disagree and hope the references to the space program are still available for the rest of us.

Now back to re-read and see if I"m right. . ., plus all the additional pages assigned. . . Claire

As I mentioned yesterday, I was interested if the muskets Lewis purchased for the expedition came from the Springfield, MA armory. I found an article with additional interesting info about the guns taken on the journey. It sounds like guns may have came from both Harpers Ferry, VA, and from Springfield.

"Two kinds of guns were the main reliance of the explorers. Lewis obtained fifteen rifles at Harpers Ferry Arsenal in the spring of 1803. Apparently these were the “1792 Contract Rifle,” modified for the expedition. They were plain, Pennsylvania-style rifles, with no ornamentation. Full stocked, barrel length something like 36 to 40 inches (short for the day), and caliber at least 49 and perhaps as large as 54. At least nine men brought their own rifles, as did Lewis and Clark.

The other gun of daily use was the “Charleville pattern” musket, the standard firearm of US soldiers of the period. It is a 69 caliber smoothbore, and is now called the “Model 1795 Springfield” musket. Both the rifle and musket weighed nearly nine or ten pounds and required most of a minute to load a single shot. Powder horns, powder measures, patching, and lead balls were required accessories.

Clark brought a small 36 caliber “squirrel rifle,” and an “elegant fusil,” a light-weight gentleman's sporting smoothbore. Lewis brought a case of matched pistols, one of which he traded for a horse. Both captains carried a “horseman's pistol” either the “US 1799 North and Cheney” model, similar to the French Charleville 1763 pistol, or the “US 1799 Contract” pistol (McCormick model), both now great rarities.

Lewis's air gun was a remarkable property of the expedition. Widespread agreement is that it was a Girandoni-style air rifle, designed and built in Europe for the Austrian army. The Girandoni was 46 caliber, had a magazine for 20 shots, and was a repeater. Lewis used it to impress Indians in council. It was smokeless, nearly silent, and could fire 20 shots in one minute. The Indians were impressed. The air gun was the most unusual piece of equipment on the expedition.

There are no known surviving guns from the expedition. Claims are made for three guns, but the claims are doubtful, lacking any definitive proof."

http://home.earthlink.net/~swier/Lewis&Clark_Exp_Firearms.html

Here's a photo of the 1792 Contract Rifle (the gun in the middle) Lewis may have bought at Harpers Ferry:

http://www.lewis-clark.org/content/content-article.asp?ArticleID=2356

Here's a photo of the Model 1795 Springfield musket, the standard rifle of the US soldier at this time. (Click on the rifle to enlarge the photo):

http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?products_id=9503

Here's are pistols like those Lewis brought along:

http://www.lewis-clark.org/content/content-article.asp?ArticleID=2380

Here's detailed info plus photos of the amazing Girondi air rifle, which may be the air rifle that Lewis brought. It was developed for the use of the Austrian army. (Scroll down to see many photos.)

http://www.beemans.net/Austrian%20airguns.htm

Apparently, there are different opinions over which air rifle Lewis brought with him. For gun enthusiasts out there, here is an fascinating article with pictures by Dr. Robert Beeman regarding his research into Lewis' air rifle. It may have been an Isaiah Lukens air rifle. Beeman considers Lewis' air rifle to be one of the most important individual guns of any kind in American history.

http://www.beemans.net/Lewis%20&%20Clark%20Airgun.htm

Marni

but was there any expectation of warfare with the indians. I didn't get that impression. However the air rifle turned out to be a major public relations tool. So interesting.

Wow, I just read in the pistol site mentioned above that the pistols Lewis bought may have come from Berlin, CT:

"The standardized U.S. military pistol of that period was the Model 1799 single-shot flintlock gun made under contract with North & Cheney of Berlin, Connecticut. This would most likely be the weapon Lewis chose because it could use the same .69 caliber ball as the standard U.S. military musket."

Berlin, CT is just south of Hartford, CT. I hadn't realized before that they had manufactured so many guns in this area in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. Springfield, MA is just 20 minutes north of Hartford. Berlin is just south of Hartford. New Haven, CT, about 30 minutes south, produced guns. (Eli Whitney's father owned an armory in New Haven.) And of course the Colt factory was in Hartford. Wow.

is a new book reviewed here. . . .http://tinyurl.com/pb9ma

Claire

Re: Did they expect to fight Indians on the expedition?

I think it must have been a concern. There had been a history of trouble between whites and the Indians as the whites moved farther and farther west always into Indian territory.

I think one of the original concepts of using a very small group instead of a large group had had something to do with not getting the Indians, as well as the Spanish, worried. The Corps of Discovery didn't want to fight, but I think they went prepared for it. And didn't Ambrose say something to the effect that Lewis brought too many guns along - they actually hadn't needed them all? (Or am I thinking of the portable soup?)

The Corps already had collected some info about the Indians on part of the Missouri before they headed out. They knew that the Sioux were a problem and that they could expect trouble from them when they got to that territory up the river.

Marni

Mabel, so glad you are going on the journey with us. Just take care of yourself.

Mabel, I thank you.

Marni, thank you for the gun websites. I would think that the guns were very important. The problem with the Indians is not resolved. The Indians feel threatened. To run short of guns or ammunition would have been a very sad state of being.

I might have read that Jefferson didn't want too many men in the party because this might antagonize the Indian population. Did Lewis and Clark have any idea, before the journey, know anything about the mentality and habits of any of these Indian clans?

I did think of space travel while reading about the portable soup bought by Lewis for the journey.

I found Lewis's visit with Andrew Ellicott interesting. He was the "leading astronomer and mathematician." He must have been a very intelligent man. Lewis was taught how to use the sextant and chronometer and other instruments. I know nothing about what the sextant and chronometer are used for. Are these instruments used just on land and water or on both land and water? What do the sextant and chronometer look like?

I think it's realistic to consider that the expedition expected to fight Indians. Indians are no more ready to freely give their land away to invaders than Europeans or early Americans. The Americans had to fight to take some of the lands in the East, already, although the most dishonorable aspects of the American takings from the Indians were still just a few years ahead. Californians offered bounties for killing Indians. Yep, money to kill human beings.

Kleo

or more in keeping with an expedition they COLLECTED plants. Here is a site with beautiful present day pictures of the ones they collected It reminds me of the astronauts and the moon rocks they collected while there now residing in museums

http://tinyurl.com/opbrm claire

Claire, thanks. The Url did not come up. A white page came up.

my tiny url misdirected you so here we go with the real thing. hope it works.

thru indian eyes

claire

Yes, I have it now. Thanks.

Benjamin Rush, the physician, questions shows how little Lewis knew about the Indian tribes. Benjamin Rush wrote up a questionaire.

1.What was the rate of murder or suicide
2.The rate of their pulse at different times of day, night or morning
3.Questions about the Indians possible connection to the Lost Tribes of Israel.

Stephen Ambrose writes "They illustrated how little could even be guessed about the nature of the Indian tribes of the West, or their numbers."

Am I right to understand that no doctor would travel with the group? I think all of their medical directions came from Dr. Benjamin West. These written directions aided them if illness occurred.

Medical - I thought it was interesting to find out how much Lewis' mother knew about medicinal herbs and other plants. She practiced healing on the plantation. It sounds like Lewis learned some of what he knew about healing from his mom as well as from famous doctors. Some of what the doctors practiced then was pretty shocking.

Thanks for your mention of “Lewis and Clark Through Indian Eyes,” Alvin M. Josephy (Editor) Clidk Here for the B&N catalog entry with its publishers Information and Publisher’s Clearing House Review.

My Lewis and Clark Bibliography includes “Lewis And Clark Among The Indians” by James P. Rhoda.,Click Here for the B&N Catalog Information. Its unique approach is its interpretation of the Expedition as a diplomatic mission to the Indians. In other words, the role of the Indians and their contribution to the survival and success of the expedition is emphasized.. I will add the new book to the Bibliography.

Did anyone find the recipe for the expedition's portable soup? I was curious about it and apparently it's not in our book and not in the L&C journals.

I found the following recipe on the web. A researcher found the recipe below in "Only One Man Died" [Medical Aspects of the Lewis & Clark Expedition] by Eldon G. Chuinard, M.D. Ye Galleon Press, Fairfield, Wash. Apparently, it is a recipe of what the military of the time used.

"This portable soup was contained in lead canisters and may have been either a dry powder or a thick liquid substance. There is no known record to the portable soups used by armed forces at the time. Cutbush describes the preparation of a portable soup, or "Tablettes de bouillon (Under Direction to Nurses and Orderly Men for the Preparation of the diet, &c. for the sick.):"

"Take calves' feet, 4; the lean part of a rump of beef 12 pounds; fillet of veal 3 pounds; leg of mutton 10 pounds. These are to be boiled in a sufficient quantity of water and the scum taken off. When the meat becomes very tender, the liquor is to be separated from it by expression; and when cold, the fat must be carefully taken off. The jelly-like substance must then be dissolved over the fire and clarified with five or six whites of eggs. It is then to be salted to the taste and boiled down to the consistency of paste, when it is poured out on a marble table and cut into pieces, either round or square, and dried in a stove room. Then perfectly hard, they should be put up in close vessels of tine or glass. Powered rice, beans, peas, barley, celery, with any grateful aromatice may be added; but for the use of the sick it should be made plain. It may be simply made either of beef, mutton, or veal."

"Lewis wrote from Fredricktown on April 15, 1803, to General William Irvine regarding the preparation of portable soup for the Expedition. The soup was prepared by Francois Baillet, cook at 21 North Ninth street, Philadelphia, who presented a bill on May 30, 1803, for 193 pounds of Portable soup in the amount of $289.50. The soup was ready in plenty of time and Lewis receipted for it and took it with him overland to Pittsburgh, where he was to embark on the Ohio River. DeVoto called the portable soup an army experimental iron ration. hardly a correct description; iron was contained in the meat..."

http://www.historicaltrekking.com/foods/messages/104.shtml

I bet that soup came in handy for the sick. Marni, I think you wrote just as a broth not with the vegetables and meats. It is interesting knowing that Lewis's mother knew so much about herbs. I wish we used more herbs today instead of manmade medicines. I suppose with herbs you don't have to worry about side effects.

Without refrigeration there must have been many liquids or solids that could have not been carried along. I am thinking of milk. Did they drink river water or carry water with them along the way?

Marni, you mentioned dangerous medical practices, could you tell about those practices? I think of leaching. Is that one?

I see from the above link "mosquito curtains" were bought too. I bet the mosquitoes along the way were horrible. I am thinking they must have seen more mosquitoes than we see on any dark night.

Claire, that is a very good article. I enjoyed reading it. This part especially stood out to me. Thank you for the link.

"The voice of Indians themselves has not often been heard," Josephy writes in his introduction about the "entire venture" of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. With this anthology, a handful of Native Americans and Josephy have taken care of this oversight in excellent and provocative fashion."

Hats: I don't think I'd include leeching in dangerous medical practices. Haven't they gone back today to using leeches. Apparently, there is something antiseptic in leeches.

One medical practice that caused some damage was bleeding patients. I've read that it was a practice that led to George Washington's death. "The bleedings inflicted by Washington's doctors hastened his end. Some 80 ounces of blood were removed in 12 hours (this is .63 gallons, or about 35% of all the blood in his body)."

http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/g01.htm

Comparing the Expedition to Modern Space Exploration. The way I would compare the L&C Expedition to the modern manned space probes is that L&C really knew less about what they would encounter on their trek to the pacific than the modern space explorers knew about their route to the moon. The territory above the Mandan Village, certainly above the great falls was unknown. In particular they had no ideal of their road over the mountains and only a vague idea of the location of the upper reaches of the Columbia necessary for continuing on to the Pacific. Of course from the point of view of the technology, the cost,, and universal National interest there is no comparison; but from the minds of the individuals setting off, I think the comparison is justified.

Did the Expedition Expect To Fight Indians? I too expect that every man on the expedition went well aware of probable firefights with Indians. This would follow from the history of the settlement of the trans-Appalachian West from the 1750. The Alexander Wells link I gave the other day notes that in addition to the distillery the Wells settlement included a Fort where the settlers in the area would take refuge when attack was threatened. Most of the L&C men had been soldiers in the regular army that had been fighting Indians since the beginning of the United States.

Though their orders emphasized the diplomatic –peaceful nature of their mission and the laying of the foundations for trade and friendship was their goal, they went well armed and I expect most embarked expecting fire fights likely. As It turned out the Expedition was for the most part successful with only one actual exchange of fire and one incident whe a fight was narrowly avoided.

Thank you Marni for the links on the Rifles and the AirGun.

I will add these links to the Web resources page. The Indians were universally impressed with the air gun demonstrations. I did not realize it was capable of multiple shots with out re-pumping the air, I do not recall any of the journals indicating there were multiple shots, but all noted how impressed the Indians were with the demonstration. Also I have wondered if the Rifle came back in 1806 with the expedition., as I do not recall its appearance in the journals after the second year. Your link seemed to indicate there is a gun today purported to be the L&C Gun, but its authenticity is subject to challenge.

Re: Hat’s Comment of Dr Benjamin Rush. in Message #207

I agree with Hat’s comment that the questions authored by the famous Dr Rush were certainly strange and illustrative of how little the American knew about the Indians.

It would also seem to me that a Doctor could have been found to accompany the expedition, though surely he could not have saved Sergeant Floyd. Perhaps he would have expected more money than the others.

Ambrose tells us Dr Rush recommended Rush’s Thunderclappers a medication compounded by the doctor from calomel a mixture of six parts mercury, to one part chlorine and jalap. This pill quite likely ended any chance Sergeant might hav had of surviving his appendicitis attack.

Click Here for a Web biogeography .

I suspect that had there been no formal Louisiana Purchase agreement that Jefferson would have sent an expedition anyway. He was an advocate of western expansion and he was not only looking for a Northwest Passage, but he was also a Virginia farmer and realized that in order to get a profit from their crops that they had to acquire more land because of the way they grew their crops.

If there had been no formal agreement, no doubt the Spanish, French or British would have interfered with expedition. But as Napoleon realized that would have cost him more to bring troops in order to protect his foreign lands than the lands were worth. Besides it was only a matter of time before the Americans occupied these lands. Sixty million francs was cheap for what some supposed was "a great waste, a wilderness unpeopled with any beings except wolves and wandering Indians."

With this sale Napoleon would be assured of the expansion of the United States which he was sure at some point in time would rival England [always a thorn in Napoleon's side] and for Jefferson the purchased signaled the end of the "near-sighted" Federalists.

Scrawler, I'm inclined to agree with you on that. TJ was planning the expedition (at least in his mind) before the purchase was complete. He would not have hesitated a minute.

As I understand it the initial negotiation in Paris involved the transfer of the port of New Orleans with lower Louisiana. It came as something of surprised when the news arrived that Napoleon had included the whole package.

Spain was furious since they had just transferred the territory back to France with the provision that it would not be transferred to the U.S. In any case neither France nor Spain could have kept the U.S. out after the final defeat of Napoleon in 1815,

I think that one similarity between the men of the Journey of Discovery and the astronauts was, as Ambrose put it, their "undaunted courage," or as Jefferson stated about Lewis, "courage undaunted."

I have just been totally flabbergasted, as I continue to read, at the bravery and enthusiasm with which the Corps members face extreme hardships every single day. Ok, Ok, I should have realized. But, I didn't realize the extent.

I remember thinking "what could Jefferson have been thinking to send his SECRETARY to lead an expedition into the unknown wilderness?" Well, Lewis wasn't just a secretary. (I had him pictured sort of like Jefferson in his elegant clothing, a connoisseur of fine foods, conversing in French or English, drinking fine wines, discussing politics.....) He ends up being a "rambler," a marksman, an explorer, brave as brave can be, comfortable in the wilderness and calm in the face of danger.

I don't think Ambrose said exactly why the size of the expedition grew to be so large. But it was lucky that Lewis planned it that way. What a planner! And what a crew. Every man was hand-picked for such traits as endurance and stamina, courage and fortitude, marksmanship, experience in the wild, etc. And how wonderful that Lewis insisted that he needed an equal partner to co-captain the expedition in the person of William Clark. The two together made the supreme co-operative partnership and led a supremely co-operative effective team.

The expedition was established as a military expedition and the team was treated as a military unit. I think this also had a lot to do with their ultimate success.

Marni

Marni, that makes sense being trained like military men. I guess this too is like a space expedition. Units of people being trained for a very special and dangerous assignment. Other than Lewis and Clark, Sagagawea and York how many others went on the expedition? I haven't gotten that far in the book. No matter how many men were chosen I know Lewis made wise choices He is a very brave and intelligent young man.

Harold and Scrawler, I like learning about the Louisiana Purchase. What a wise purchase made by Jefferson. Do you think Napoleon sold it because he could see his loss of power in the future and wasn't, in the end, making wise decisions? After Louisiana was sold, why didn't Spain fight for it? I didn't quite understand why or how Spain and France could occupy the same territory, Louisiana, in peace? Since France and Spain were there in Louisiana, before the purchase, how free were the colonists to do anything in Louisiana? Were the colonists in a sort of bind with Spain and France having that territory?

About medical terminology I thought leeching and bleeding as the same medical treatment.

Harold, Sergeant Floyd, what caused his death? I don't remember reading or hearing about him yet.

Ann, I know you started did a lot of research for this discussion. Can you share some of the parts of the Lewis and Clark Cookbooks? Thank you for the clickable "American Philosophy Society.

Those of us reading the early chapters do not know who died on the way.

The questions about L&C taking food along led me to the link given at the bottom.
Apparently soups were the first foods to be served as restaurants came into existence!

Just think how meals-ready-to-eat which our brave troops have to eat nowadays is an
improvement over the not-too-sanitary portable soup.

Hats ~ Did you ask about water? I think the river water, or at least water from fast flowing creeks, was relatively safe to drink. People I know who hiked various trails were able to drink untreated creek water only 20 years ago. In the 18th century, except for animal wastes, not much pollution got into the creeks.

History of Soup

Mippy: Interesting article about soups. Thanks! Something in the article reminded me of the series of books by the Gears - about the early Native Americans - each book began with "The People of the...." The books described how these very early peoples lived. Apparently, they cooked soup in a pot made out of a skin which hung down. They added hot rocks from a fire into the "pot" until the soup was cooked and then took the rocks out.

It sounds as though L&C's portable soup was contained in lead cannisters. That sounds as healthy as the mercury in their pills. Imagine all the lead and mercury the expedition absorbed! Well, live and learn. We really didn't know until fairly recently what stuff like asbestos and pesticides would do to our health.

Hats, Sergeant Floyd’s death was most probably caused by appendicitis. It came 0n August 20 1804. He was buried on a bluff above the Missouri River now known a Floyd’s Bluff. The last entry in his journal was dated Aug 18,1804 that made no mention or illness.

The Captains allow the men to elect one of their group to be Sergeant to replace the deceased Floyd, Patrick Gass was elected to fill the position. The Sergeants were required to keep a written journal and the journal of Patrick Gass is one of the best. Gass lived until after the Civil War longer than any of the other members of the Corp.

Regarding why Napoleon sold Louisiana? Napoleon in 1803 was near the height of his power confident in his ability to hold his position for his dynasty for the future. Perhaps he did need the money. Spain was much weakened by the European war and never recovered its previous status as a world power. After 1815 neither France nor Spain was in a position to compete with the U.S. in the area. England from Canada was in a better position but was more involve in Africa and the South Pacific.

Marni do you suppose that TJ when he chose Lewis as his secretary, had already earmarked him as the leader of the expedition. I have read elsewhere that Jefferson had received and read the Alexander Mackenzie Journal of his trip across Canada to the Pacific in the winter of 1803 while he was waiting to hear the final results of the election. It seems likely he was already contemplating such a U.S. exploration.

Mippy and Hats, regarding drinking water, I suspect a thirsty crewman would scoop out a drink from the Missouri , Despite its high clay content biologically the river water was probably quite safe. Regarding the portable soup, the expedition did not use ie until 1805 when they were crossing the mountains. I think the used it all before they reached the pacific.

Marnie ~
Yes, I also read several books in that series on the early Native Americans, each book called
"The People of the...
Cannot find them now, but they sure had a lot of research packed in with the fictional lives of Indians. Their soup was sure less full of heavy metals than that of L&C. I recall similar soups on sailing ships, right?

Ambrose notes that when TJ and Lewis first began to plan the expedition they were thinking of a small group of maybe a dozen men with a single officer after the manner of the Mackenzie model. The group would use a single large canoe. As the planning progressed the deficiency of such plan became evident including the inability to carry the instruments necessary for scientific study and necessary gifts for the Indian tribes.

So as the planning progressed the nature of the expedition changed to a considerably larger force with a large 55 ft boat powered by some 20 ores and a single sail. Its hold would carry some 12 tons of instruments, and supplies. Also the platoon size military crew with dress uniforms, with the flag and drum was much more impressive to the Indians than a single squad of soldiers in buckskins would have been.

Ambrose tells us that in the 1980’s it took a dozen volunteers using power tools sixty working days to build a replica. Ambrose to my knowledge never tells us how much the Pittsburgh boat builder charged to build the boat though he tells us much of the delay and trouble resulting from the builders drinking habit.

Another notable point regarding the leadership is that while TJ choose Lewis, it was Lewis who choose Clark. Also it seems it was Lewis who insisted on the sharing of the command by the two officers. Wasn’t this an unusual command arrangement either for 1903 or for that matter today? Today, and I think then also, military command required a single officer with full command responsibility. A subordinate would be designated to succeed in command if the principal was unable to act, but so long as as the commander was able, it was his responsibility alone. But the arrangement seems to have worked in this case

Harold: I thought one of the sad things about the expedition was the "mistake" made about William Clark's commission. Lewis wanted Clark to be his co-Captain with an army Captain's commission, not Lieutenant. Lewis said he wanted equal leadership between him and Clark. Didn't Ambrose say he discussed this with Jefferson, who agreed. But there was some sort of mistake in the paperwork, or it was a deliberate mistake that Lewis and TJ both overlooked. I think by the end of chapter 10 Lewis is still waiting for the official word that Clark has been made Captain.

I read somewhere that Jefferson really didn't want Clark to be on equal footing with Lewis - that he wanted Lewis to be the unequivocal leader of the expedition reporting directly to Jefferson. Maybe Jefferson didn't think it was possible for a dual leadership to work.

I thought one of the interesting boats of the expedition was the metal one that Lewis had made. Sounds like there had never been anything like it. I guess the plan was to carry the metal parts along on the big boat and then when they got to the right spot, put the metal boat together and cover it with skins.

Does anyone remember what the purpose of the metal boat was to be? It must have been a heavy thing to lug along with all of the other paraphanalia the Corps brought.

I wonder if there are pictures of the boats - or replicas of the boats on the web? I'll check.....

Here are some photos of a replica of the keelboat (the large boat) that the expedition used:

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/LC/The%20Mission/KeelboatPhotos/keelboat_photos.htm

Here's a closeup the keelboat http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/LC/Explore/Oceti_Sakowin/Pierre0012a.JPG

Here's another closeup of the keelboat with the sail up:

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/LC/The%20Mission/KeelboatPhotos/Keelboat0005.JPG

Here's a picture of a replica of a white pirogue used on the expedition:

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/LC/Explore/Oceti_Sakowin/Pierre0027.JPG

Here's a site with a short video of Lewis and Clark in one of their boats called a pirogue. Click on the Video button to view. You need Quick TimePlayer on your computer to view.

L&C Pirogue

Here's a picture of a dugout canoe:

http://www.voyageofrediscovery.com/Part2/scenes/slideshows/boat/npdugouts24.jpg

Marni

Cooking with rocks is quite a trick, it turns out. Most descriptions I've seen say the rocks are simply put in until the food is cooked. This is not the case, with hide or woven vessels, the rocks are not allowed to sit in the food and heat the vessel, they are stirred the entire time they are in the food. One puts the food in the vessel while heating a series of rocks, especially chosen for the task to hold heat and not explode and cool slowly. Then you remove 2 or 3 rocks, usually done with two people, hand them to the person stirring the food, who stirs the rocks in the vessel until they cool off, just a minute or two. Then remove the cooled rocks from the vessel, add some more hot ones, stir and stir until they cool. Repeat until the food is hot enough. I've done this with acorn. It's quite a bit of work. But effective, and can be done in a basket without burning the basket, once one is experienced.

Kleo

The so-called metal boat was and example of an apparent good plans that proved a miserable failure when they tried to use it. In reality as I understand it, it was a metal frame that would be covered with skins. They planned to use it on the upper Missouri above the great falls. When they tried to use it, they found that the tree sap or pitch they planned to use to seal the seams proved inadequate. They should have stocked a couple of tubes of epoxy glue; but the idea proved worthless and the metal frame was abandoned somewhere just above the falls. It would be an interesting relic if the rusting remains were found today.

Thank you marni for the boat pictures. I think I remember Ambrose saying that the large boat was not patterned after the usual River Keel; Boat but was a 55 Foot long sloop powered by 20 ores, \and/or a single sail. Also it could be pushed by pole men or pulled (toed) by a horse from a path along the shore. More important it could carry 12 tons of cargo.

On page 106, Chapter 8 in the hard cover edition there is a reproduction of a Clark sketch of the craft. Is this sketch also in the pocket edition?

Dang, that's like a stratocruiser RV. Yesterday I saw an RV so huge it couldn't quite turn the corner it was trying to make. There were two bikes on the back. It was bigger than my apartment, I swear. And for two people on the road. Well, there were more people in the L&C expedition, but I don't think they were going to settle the West, just explore and map it. The boat just looks unwieldy, too much. Once you have to add oars, you need more provisions. Didn't they eat off the land?

Kleo

Kleo at the Institute of Texan Cultures our Lipan Mural includes women stone cooking using a buffalo stomach as a kettle. The first of the four stomachs is the large one, It is literally a big bag. They just slit open the top so they can tie it up on four stakes set in the ground. They also tie the lower opening tightly shut. Filled with water and copious quantities of Chopped buffalo meat the cooking process is a boiling one with successive hot rocks added one at a time until the water boils and sufficiently cooks the meat. Of course from time to time the cooled rocks are removed and can be returned to the fire for re-heating and repeated. The rocks used for stone cooking are generally a limestone that will not burst at high temperature.

Each of the four L&C Mess groups had a large cast iron cooking kettle. Much of their meet was cooked by boiling in these kettles. They also stocked other kettles for trade since metal cooking pots were high on Indian wish lists. On the return voyage down the Missouri they were out of extra kettles having used all the extras in trade..

Generally the journal do not tell us much about their menu, but in his journal on Feb 7. 1806, Captain Lewis waxed nostalgic with these words---

This evening we had what I call an excellent supper it consisted of a marrowbone a piece and a brisket of boiled elk that had the appearance of a little fat on it. this for Fort Clatsop is living in high style

Kleo: Why were you cooking with heated stones? Some sort of experiment? It sounds like such a difficult way to cook, although ingenious for people that didn't have metal cookware. No wonder the indians would want to trade for metal pots.

Harold: the Institute of Texan Cultures sounds like such a fascinating place. Is that where you volunteer?

Marni

Marni, simply to learn how it was done. Plus the fact that I was cooking in a basket which does not do well placed over a hot fire. I have seen demonstrations of this and it looks difficult and cumbersome--it is, indeed, for the unskilled. Metal pots directly over the fire are much easier.

Kleo

Kleo: You are amazing!

I found a picture of a "bullboat" which was a type of canoe that some of L&C's men used on the journey. Apparently, they learned to make these canoes from the Plains Indians. Bullboats were made from stretched cowhide or buffalo hide with the hair side out over a frame of wooden rods tied with tanned hide and cotton strips.

http://photos1.blogger.com/img/201/4123/320/missouri5%20059a.jpg

Here's an article that explains with the help of photos how a bullboat was made from buffalo skin by the Minataree back in the 1830's. Scroll down to see the step-by-step pictures.

http://www.womenofthefurtrade.com/wst_page15.html

They certainly used a variety of boats on their journey! I guess they had to be flexible to handle the load, the men, and the different types of waterways they faced along the way.

Marni

Hats: I think you asked awhile ago if bleeding and leeching were the same thing. I don't think so, although I don't know much about it.

I think bleeding was when a surgeon (barber) actually cut a small incision in a patient's arm to deliberately cause bleeding into a pan. I guess they thought by letting out some blood, the patient would feel better. I think they believed it let out one of the humours? Which one was it? Hmmmmm????

Leeching was when a doctor placed leeches on a patient's wound. The leeches sucked the blood. By doing so, something in their....saliva??...with antiseptic qualities helped the wound to heal. I don't know if they placed leeches on just plain skin with no wound to heal.

Do we have a doctor in the house?

Take a tour with me and Crow! Click Here.

By the way tomorrow morning early I am going to Seguin to show the property to a potential buyer. I'm afraid I wont check in until the evening. During the day you might debate the question What did Lewis Learn in Phillidelphia? Also how were the enlisted personal chosen? What particular class of applicants did Clark specifically reject? Another question comes ftom the fact that I still can't find the cost of the 55 ft boat. Congress appropriated only $2500. surely this did not cover the cost of the boats and the 12 tuns of instruments and supplies. Where did the other cost come from?.

The general term is "bloodletting," but bleeding is also used for the general term, and there were many ways of performing it, although for ages, from maybe the 16th century to the 19th in Europe and the Americas, it was done by barber surgeons under the orders of physicians. The red and white striped barber's pole represents the red blood and the white tournequet. Bleeding may be the specific term for the type of bloodletting barber surgeons did. I don't know.

Probably rich people were occasionally killed by blood letting, although it also probably had some unintentional therapeutic values.

Leeches were used for bloodletting after a technique was found (are you sure you want to know this) to allow the leech to release the blood it took in--so it efficiently took out blood without end. It is used in modern medicine in limb reattachments, particularly of the digits, because it causes the small veins of blood to flow readily. My niece lost the terminal part of one of her fingers, got it reattached and was given medicinal leeches (it's only one species that is used, specially raised under sterile laboratory conditions and not reused) to help in making sure it reattached well. She gave them names. Her mother got ill. Not from the names, from the leeches. They worked very well.

Kleo

Hats, following the Napoleonic Wars, the British Empire emerged as the world's leading power. The empire controlled one quarter of the world's population and one third of the land. Napoleon feared that England would get a greater foot-hold into the United States and give the empire even more control over the world than she already had; so I think this was the main reason that Napoleon was willing to let Louisiana go at a mere 60 million francs.

He probably also realized that the Americans would adventually take control of the area one way or the other. This way not only were the Americans able to expand their territory, but it also resulted in not allowing England to get even more control in the Americas than she already had.

While Louisiana was in the hands of the Spanish, Jefferson was welling to wait because he knew that Spain was on the decline. But when in the spring of 1801 Jefferson learned that Spain had secretly transferred Louisiana from Spain back to France he became alarmed. In the past France had shown itself to be expansionist, but as it turned out France was more afraid of England's expansion than the fear that America would create its own empire and become a super-power.

Of course Scrawler is correct; I have read before that one of the reasons Napoleon was willing to sell Louisiana to the U.S. was because he feared if he didn't Britain would take it. They were certainly capable of doing it since in 1803 there was no real French defense force and a dozen years later they had no trouble landing a large force that was then defeated by Andrew Jackson.

Scrawler, thank you.

Marni, I would have never imagined what a bullboat looked like. I used the second link.

So, Hats asked me about the L&C cookbook which is very interesting but the recipes are convened around today's ingredients along with short blurbs quoted from the L&C journey, TJ's letters plus some from Niemcewicz himself after he returned from his journeys of the U.S. Not even the infamous "dried Soup" is included. I have enjoyed reading the blurbs on each page and trying to imagine what it must have been like living in those years. Here's an interesting one: From July 20, 1805---"I found a black currant which I thought preferable in flavor to the yellow. This currant is really a charming fruit and I am confident would be preferred at our markets to any currant now cultivated in the V. States." Lewis.

A quote under the recipe for "Green Beans with Summer Savory". Oct 6, 2820---"When we had the ploeasure of possessing you here, you expressed a wish to have some of the Ricara snap beans, and of the Columbian Salsafia brought from the Western side of the Continent by Governer Lewis. I now enclose you some seeds of each the Ricara bean is one of the most excellent we have had. I have cultivated them plentifully for the two years." Jefferson to Benjamin S. Barton.

As to the Frenchman who turned out to be a spy, Jefferson, then secretary of state, commissioned French emigre Andre Michaux to find a route across the continent. TJ wanted him to start on the east coast and along the Missouri, which TJ was quite sure ended at the Pacific(wishful thinking on his part). Michaux reached Kentucky where he was unmasked as a real spy (not a supposed spy like John Ledyard), working for Edmond Charles Genet, the French ambassador to Washington.

I found a very interesting site about medicine in Jefferson's day and will include the link here: Medicine at Turn of the 19th Century

There is a good accounting of Lucy Merriwether, Lewis's mother. Annnnnd, pictures of the medical equipment that was used during that time!!!! Scarrrrrrrry! And remember, we still hadn't discoved germs yet!! There was nothing about sterilization back then! They must have had the constitutions of oxen!

Do you think that Jefferson was aware of the journeys of discovery that being made by the French Canadians and the British at this time? That they too wanted to have a better place for trading and shipping their furs from than the process in place at that time?

Ann, wow! You have put a lot in one post. Thank you. I will definitely click on the medical link. They were very strong people. Milk wasn't pasteurized yet, right???? If we were only so strong as those people, what secret did they own????

Please get well soon.

Mabel, if you are reading this, my thoughts and prayers are with you too.

Benjamin Rush was known as the Father of Psychiatry. I would have given that name to Sigmund Freud. Little did I know that the Father of Psychiatry was from Philadelphia. He was also an abolitionist.

Ann, the article is full of information. Thank you.

Where did you read that Rush was the Father of Psychiatry?? I thought it said that he was considered the premiere physician of America. I read this at the site about Medicine of the 19th Century. I found it unbelievable that he thought that "bleeding" would cure almost every serious illness, didn't you?

Ann, it's in the article you just listed. Wait a minute. I will try to find the exact line.

"Rush quickly became a prominent and leading citizen in America as he wrote and spoke on nearly every medical, social, or political matter. During his lifetime, Rush sought to improve the health care needs of the poor, studied the causation of yellow fever, and explored mental illness for which he is called the “Father of American psychiatry.”

"The Father of AMERICAN Psychiatry is more exact. Click on the first long sentence about Benjamin Rush. Then, scroll down the page. I know. My directions are terrible. Do you see it?

Short comment from a lurker: Granted there were some infections that killed people before antibiotics were discovered. But, people got a lot of acquired immunity from their general living, and that prevented lesser infections from being so serious for them. I really think, and some studies are proving that now, that we are not getting this acquired immunity because we are TOO clean. Something like the old wives' tale of every child having to "eat a peck of dirt" as they grow up.

1.Click on (Benjamin Rush, America's Premiere Physician)

2.Then, you will see title BENJAMIN RUSH

3.Go down to second paragraph.

Thomas Jefferson believed in eating lots of vegetables for good health. I don't think he approved of bloodletting.

The life expectancy of Americans in the early 19th century was probably only about mid 30s. Infant mortality was very high as was maternal death during or after childbirth due to infection. There were still, in my opinion, a lot of very serious infections going around.

Simply the lack of sewer systems in early 19th century American towns probably made rural living much healthier--fewer germs, not immunity.

Jefferson was finely tuned to herbal cures for human ailments and also thought that allowing the body to heal itself was good practice. I know he thought that bloodletting, purgatives and the like were overused and often led to illness instead of curing it. I would have been scared of the medicine of the day. He had personal dietary guidelines that he considered good for health. I wonder if they included as much alcohol as the average Virginian?

Kleo

I would like to know a little about the methods Indians used to keep healthy during this period. What was the life expectancy for Indians vs. the Americans? I imagine the diet of the Indian included corn, fish. What else? For the Indians, were there any animals on the frontier untouchable because of religious reasons?

I have a book about the Indians during the Lewis and Clark expedition. I haven't opened it because reading two books about the same subject is not one I have decided to toggle yet.

I have my copy of "Lewis and Clark among the Indians" by James P. Ronda. In the index I can't find answers to my questions. I will wait for help from the experts here.

Most American Indian groups used herbal medicines, like peoples all over the world of the time. Western medicine with its bleedings and purges and Chinese medicine were pretty much the only exceptions that I can think of. And the Chinese always used herbs, even when adding something like acupuncture. People knew what plants grew around them and what properties they had.

I don't think any of us are experts. Life expectancy among American Indians differed widely. I suspect for most of the tribes Lewis and Clark encountered along the way it was not greater than for the average American non-Indian, except for the plantation slaves with much lower life expectancies. My guess is life expectancy for many of the northeastern tribes and eastern tribes and maybe some of the coastal Indians might have been higher. There is quite a bit of discussion about the care and role of elders in most Indian literature. I don't know how old an elder was, though.

Please, anyone who knows or has the time to elaborate, do so.

One thing to consider when asking this question is how incredibly diverse the Indians were. In California there were hundreds of languages belonging to dozens of major groups. It's as if you had Afghans, Nigerians, Javanese, French, Mayans, and Russians all living within a hundred miles of each other and asked what methods they used to keep healthy. Very different.

Kleo

Thanks, Marni, and others for the excellent links.
Going back to medical techniques:
Bleeding, when an incision was cut in a patient's arm or leg, was often done to reduce high blood pressure, although the barber very likely did not know the affliction by that name. The danger was often from infection from the procedure, since sterilization of instruments was just beginning to be done at that time.
I recall by the 1700s, some barbers and physicians knew to sterilize their instruments, either by soaking them in alcoholic beverages or by heating the lancets in a flame.
(no references for this, just recalling from history books, including several by David McCullough.)

Rush submitted to Lewis ten health commandments to subscribe to for the Corps of Discovery.

1. Flannel worn next to the skin, especially in wet weather.

2. Always to take a little raw spirits after being very wet or much fatigued; and as little as possible at any other time.

3. When you feel the least indisposition, fasting and rest; and diluting drinks for a few hours, take a sweat, and if costive take a purge of two pills every four hours until they operate freely.

4. Unusual costiveness is often the sign of an approaching disease. When you feel it, take one or two of the opening pills.

5. Where salt cannot be had with your meat, steep it a day or two in common lye.

6. In difficult and laborious enterprises or marches, eating sparingly will enable you to bear them with less fatigue and more safety to your health.

7. Washing feet with spirit when chilled, and every morning with cold water.

8. Molasses or sugar with water with vit. [victuals] and for drink with meals.

9. Shoes without heels.

10.Lying down when fatigued.

"Though patent medicines were widely available, many nineteenth-century housewives continued to prepare their own remedies at home. The following are just a few of the popular medicinal receipts available:

To apply leeches: The leeches [must] be kept out of water for half an hour before applying, and the skin they are to be applied to [must] be well washed and rubbed dry. A little sweetened milk placed on the part will make them bite, and in placing them on the patient put the mouth, which is in the tapering end of the body, against the patient. Place the leeches in a glass and turn it over upon the spot to be bitten. They must not be pulled off; when they have done their work they will fall off naturally, and can be put into a plate of salt to vomit the blood. The leech bites should be bathed in cold water until the bleeding stops and then cover with linen. "Never" put leeches directly over a vein.

Chamomile tea: Take two dozen flowers and infuse them in a pint of boiling water for half an hour; decent, sweent with honey, and drink a half gil. When taken in not too strong a dose, from its tonic and antispasmodic qualities, strengthens the digestive organs and tends to dispel dyspepsia.

To prevent hysterics: Mix finely pounded caraway seeds with a small measure of ginger and salt, spread upon bread and butter. Eaten each day, especially early in the day and at night before retiring, this is a good remedy against hysterics.

Saline wash for headache: Take of fine salt a half ounce, four ounces each of vinegar and soft water, two ounces whiskey or brandy and mix together until the salt is dissolved. This a good cooling wash for headache and inflammation of the brain.

To destroy vermin in the hair: Take one once vinegar, one ounce stavesacre well powdered, half ounce of honey, the same of sulphur and two ounces sweet oil; mix the whole together into a liniment, rub the head repeadtedly with this mix until the vermin is gone." ~"Everyday Life in Regency and Victorian England"

Lewis and Clark probably didn't use all of these remedies on the expedition, but they were no doubt aware of them. I don't know about any of you but it would take some real "undaunted courage" on my part to try some of these remedies. It is any wonder that we have any ancestors at all after all these treatments. But I will say this that I still take honey and lemon whenever I have a cough and it seems to do the trick even today just like it did back in the '40s and '50s when my mother used to give it to me.

Rush's pills: "Those pills were under Dr. Rush's patent, known as "Rush's pills" but generally referred to as "Thunderclappers." As far as Rush was concerned they were sovereign for nearly all mankind's ills. They were composed of calomel, a mixture of six parts mercury to one part chlorine, and jalap. Each drug was a purgative of explosive power; the combination was awesome. Mercury had an even more important role in Lewis's pharmacy: it was the choice for syphilis (and remained so until the advent of penicillin during World War II). (p.89)

I can't help wonder what affect mercury and chlorine would have on the human body. Do you suppose that taking this mixture might have led to some of the problems that Lewis had later on in his life? He did seem to be "popping" Dr. Rush's pills quite a bit during and after the expedition.

Indian Health

I think it is generally understood that the Indian lifestyle with everyone of all ages, and both sexes constantly engaged in outdoor physical activity contributed to a basically healthy environment. Though this live style did nothing to protect the Indians against the killer European diseases against which they had no acquired hereditary immunity, it did much to product them against a multitude of common ailments that plagued the European population.

In particular the records show that Indian Woman had far less trouble in childbirth than their European counterpart. Early plains Indian accounts are full of stories of a pregnant Indian woman dropping from her position in a line of march to give birth on the prairie alone, catching up a few hours later with here new born child secure on her back strapped in a previously prepared cradle board.

Of course there is no evidence of great longevity; but the problem was more related to violence than to poor health. This included a universal propensity for war. Also hunting buffalo was not a safe occupation and accident were common. As a result most tribes always had a substantially greater female component than male, reflecting the greater exposure to physical violence of men resulting from war and hunting. activities.

Dr Benjamin Rush

We run into Dr Rush in every book we do on the period. He was amazing as a doctor and as a politician signer of the Declaration of Independence, His medicine of course was 18th century frequently wierd to us today. In the John Adam Biography he was consulted when John Adam’s Daughter came down with breast cancer. He recommended surgery but did not not do the surgery himself since he was in Philadelphia and the patient was in Boston.

Ann, I loved the article you posted. I read every word including the ten points. I read those points to my husband. We enjoyed talking about some of the points.

Harold, this is a quote from your above paragraph. "In particular the records show that Indian Woman had far less trouble in childbirth than their European counterpart."

Harold, I admire Benjamin Rush greatly. I am a native of Philadelphia. I grew up in school hearing much about him. I also admire his abolitionist ideas.

Indian women like slave women were not given time to comfortably give birth at home in bed. Neither were they given time to heal after childbirth. I feel this is not because these people were able to bare the pain easier than women settlers. I think it is because their lifestyle was so different. Saying the Indian woman can bare pain better than the settlers, for whatever reason, leads to a lack of consciousness for the Indian woman's suffering.

I choose to say that all women, Indians, slaves, faced the same amount of pain in childbirth. However, due to circumstances they were not allowed the time for certain comforts nor the time to bond with their babies.

From my reading over the years, IMHO the Indian women were able to bond with their newborns due to the way they had to carry them everywhere they went. One sees pictures of them carrying the baby in a sling in the front and later on their backs.

I am not aware of what the slave women did with their babies after they gave birth. Do you know anything about that?

Yes, after reading about Benjamin Rush, I am impressed with all the things that he knew and cared about. Also, I am surprised at the great amount of medical info that was known in that century through the use of herbs. Makes me want to know about Lewis' mother's herbal treatments.

Ann, it's not the bonding that bothers me. It's the thought that Indian women did not suffer the amount of pain as the European woman. This is the point that really bothers me.

Yes, I find the herbal information interesting too. Lewis did have a chance to learn fascinating and much needed information from his mother.

Harold, I enjoyed taking your virtual tour of The Institute of Texan Cultures. I looked closely at the sharecropper's cabin also. I love the huge globe.

--- with highest regard I think it quite likely that Indian woman did experience less pain in childbirth. Though there are no medical evidences their outdoor active lifestyle seems to have made normal positioned births more ordinary and breach birth and other complications less likely. In addition their greater muscular strength would make delivery and labor a shorter experience. In any case the story I told about unattended Indian prairie births are mentioned by both George Catlin and Francis Parkman.

Also I would take exception to the styling of the at home bed deliveries of the early 19th Century European woman as “comfortable.” In 1817 in England, The Princess Charlotte, the daughter of the Prince of Whales and heir presumptive to the throne with the best local medicine in attendance died in agony on her delivery bed. This scene was a common one that was repeated countless times during the period throughout Europe and European America.

I have no specific reading concerning childbirth among slave woman but logically their more physically active life might have made their birth easier for them too, as it seems to have done for Indians.

Harold, I most definitely respect your opinion. You are very knowledgable about historical events. I know you give historical questions your deepest thought and give as much research as possible. Thank you and Ann for answering my question or questions.

Perhaps we have deviated a bit from the current subject of discussion. We will have much opportunity to talk about Indians and their contact with the Expedition including any observed cultural crashes in later weeks. Right now we must concentrate on getting the expedition to their winter quarters ready for their official launch in May 2004.. This includes the shakedown cruise down the Ohio from Philadelphia, the meeting of Lewis and Clark (for the first time in 7 years). and finally the moving of the boats up the Mississippi to St Louis and a short distance up the Missouri to winter camp.

Some suggested issues for discussion include: What important decisions concerning Personnel were made during the fall of 1803? What decision made by Captain Lewis was quickly overruled by President Jefferson?

"To make that journey required a frontiersman's expert knowledge combined with an understanding of technology and what it could do to make the passage easier and more fruitful. That was the positive side of Jefferson's choice of Lewis, who was in fact the perfect choice.

He knew the Old Northwest about as well as any man in the country, he knew lonely forest trails through Indian country, he knew hunting and fishing and canoes, he knew how to keep records, had adequate mathematical skills, and for two years had been privy to Mr. Jefferson's hopes and dreams, his curiosity and knowledge." (p. 80-81)

Certainly, these were fine qualities for any explorer, but what were some of the problems that Lewis had that might have jeopardized the expedition. It seems to me that Lewis was young to be put in charge of the expedition which is probably why he insisted that Clark be his equal.

Not only was Lewis young, but he was also impulsive. Some times doing things without really thinking them through or without seeing the bigger picture. I'm sure that is why Jefferson gave Lewis very specific instructions. I think this is what saved Lewis from himself. He had been in the military and Lewis was used to following orders.

He also was a heavy drinker and suffered from depression. I don't think his drinking resulted in jeopardizing the expedition especially the farther away they got from civilization. By the way does anyone know what a "gil" is? This was the measurement of liquor that was given to those on the expedition.

But I do think at times his depression was great enough that he could not write in his journals. From what I've read this was inherited from his father. It is to bad that Lewis was unable to write because what he did write was so well written and had so much scientific information. I marveled at how detailed his reports and journal entries were at a time when most frontiersmen were still illiterate.

I guess the next person to discuss is Clark. Lewis trusted Clark with every fiber of his being. Lewis knew Clark was a completely honest man. With him by his side, he would not have to worry about so many details. For example, Clark was a very strong man. He and Lewis had served in the army for six months together. Lewis, four years younger than Clark, served under Clark in the army. Clark also had the skills for mapmaking.

Both Lewis and Clark were born in Virginia. Clark the oldest by four years. Clark's family would move from Virginia to Kentucky. I think Lewis could not have been happier at getting word that Clark would go on the expedition with him.

What interests me is how much Lewis had to do before starting the trip. He had to learn how to work instruments such as the sextant, chronometer. He had to choose how many supplies to buy. For example, the crew would need to barter with the Indians. Thimbles, beads, combs and knives had to be bought. If mistaken conclusions were made, they would not find Old Navy stores along the way to correct their mistakes. Thank goodness, they had enough ammunition and guns.

Marni, thank you for the links on guns.

There was also no time to loiter. Lewis and Clark had to be on their way, for the best comfort, by a certain date. Unfortunately, the man working on the boat slowed the schedule down. That caused some problems.

I mentioned Robert Morris earlier. If I have the wrong Robert Morris, please correct me.

This is a quote from "Undaunted Courage." The page is 70 in my book.

""Jefferson was spurred, not depressed, by the information. He proposed to the American Philosophical Society of Philadelphia that a subscription be undertaken to engage an explorer to lead an overland expedition to the Pacific. Big donors, led by George Washington, Robert Morris, and Alexander Hamilton, came in on the subscription, ensuring its success."

I agree with moving on, Harold, but I have to disagree that slave women had an easier time at childbirth. I don't know anything about the subject except that, in general, poor maternal health leads to harder childbirth. Slave women were not healthy because of the poor nutrition of the slave diet. Archaeological digs and studies of bones bear out the fact that slaves did not eat well enough to have proper nutrition even when their owners did. Poor maternal health makes for difficulties in childbirth.

Let's remember how diverse the Indians of the Americas are, also. Please.

Preparing for an expedition is a lot of work. My grandfather writes about it in a book he wrote on an expedition he led. Unlike Lewis, though, he didn't have to learn to use the instruments of his trade as he already knew them quite well. It amazes me today the maps men made with the most rudimentary (compared to GPS) device.

Kleo

I would love to read a book about a mapmaker. I think of their work as "amazing" too.

I think the best one is Simon Winchester's The Map That Changed the World: William Smith and the Birth of Modern Geology.

Yes, their work is amazing.

Kleo

Kleo, thank you for the title.

I just read that Meriwhether Lewis was known to be addicted to laudanum, like Edgar Alan Poe, and Lord Byron and quite a few others.

Hats, is there anything you're not interested in?

Kleo

Hi, All,

I got confused on the time to start this discussion, just finished the first week's reading and was thinking the discussion started TOMORROW! So I'm behind on reading the posts and now must scurry around and catch up on the reading for this week.

But there was a question I had - I read (and saw posted) that Jefferson taught Lewis to write. I did a double take when I read that in the book and at that time decided Ambrose meant that Jefferson taught Lewis to write well, to write descriptively. If you read in the book where he mentions it, the next sentence or two implies this. I'm thinking surely with the several years of education Lewis did get he could actually write and that Washington taught him to be more descriptive, expanded his vocabulary, etc. What do you all think?

Did Ambrose ever give a number for how many were on the expedition? I didn't see one and found that frustating. Does anyone know what the head count was?

I was actually a bit shocked when Ambrose pointed out that there were huge gaps in Lewis' journals - one of almost a year. How long was the expedition - I'm thinking 3 years? And what do we know of the travels during the time of the gaps? Do we have any idea at all why the gaps? Someone mentioned Lewis' tendency towards depression could have been a factor. No wonder he had ink powder and paper left when he returned!

No one has yet mentioned that of course the rumors about Jefferson having children by a black slave - at least one named Sally (Henning?) has been proven true by DNA testing. Guess this book came out prior to the DNA testing?

It has not been proved true because the type of DNA testing done could not prove it true, it could only prove what it did, that there is an extremely high likelihood that Sally Hemmings' descendents were fathered by a male member of the Jefferson family. It's no better for Thomas Jefferson if they were fathered by him or his brother, imo, as female slaves had no recourse to defend themselves through the judicial system or by any other means against rape by slave owners. Thomas Jefferson raped a female slave named Sally Hemmings or allowed his brother to rape the slave woman.

The book is about Meriwhether Lewis rather than Jefferson, so I don't know that it's necessary to discuss Jefferson's relations with his slaves.

Kleo

Scrawler Its quite true that Lewis’s frequent habit o letting long periods of time pas without making a journal entry is often cited as evidence of the later depression that marred his later post expedition life. I suppose this inability to consistently carry out a routine daily] task might be taken as a symptom. But if this were so it is virtually the only evidence of a symptom indicating Lewis was depressed during the trip years. .I don’t see how he could have carried out so well had depression been present.

I know that Laudanum and other forms of opium were legal and easily obtainable in Colonial and early U.S. America. I am sure it was included in the medications stocked by the Expedition, Yet there is no evidence or indication that Lewis was taking the drug. Likewise the expedition stocked large stocks of whiskey that were from time to time during the first year and a half rationed to the men often as reward for some particular accomplishment. Again thee are no indications that Lewis had any more than an allotted share.

I simply do not see Lewis as subject to any depression during the period of the exploration. .

Kelo I will defer the judgment of others regarding the general health of slave women in the early years s of the 19th century. I know the diet of the South at the time was deplorable deficient even for the rich Southerners and worse for the poor and the slaves. It would seem that the economic interest of the slave owner would assure an adequate diet available for the slaves, but quite likely the connection between good diet and good health was simply not yet realized by these people/

"The book is about Meriwhether Lewis rather than Jefferson, so I don't know that it's necessary to discuss Jefferson's relations with his slaves." -Kleo

This was mentioned in the book several times, the book is about Jefferson as well as Lewis, and it is not appropriate for you to tell me it is not necessary to discuss this.

In Sept 1803 Lewis did announce a strange decision that is worthy of notation. It was in a letter to the President when he said that when the expedition reached the Missouri and entered camp for the winter he would take a horse back trip up the Kansas River in the direction of Santa Fe. He also indicated that he would send Clark on a similar winter sortie west on the prairie. TJ when he received the Letter was shocked. He knew how sensitive the Spanish were of their Santa Fe possession. He may even have questioned for the first time the wisdom of his appointing Lewis as commander. He immediately wrote Lewis ordering him not to follow through with his intended winter explorations.

Though one can wonder how close to Santa Fe Lewis could have come, one thing is certain. If he had run into the Spanish he would have been arrested and marched to Mexico City and probably shot. But even if he stayed away from the Spanish, what could he have learned that would have compensated for the risk he was running not just from the Spanish but the winter danger itself. With Clark on a similar exploration the expedition might have found itself leaderless when the spring thaw singled it was time to begin the trek west.

I think Jefferson had good cause to be upset and concerned since the risk associated with such winter exploration seems much greater than any profit coming from them. But I also think Lewis’s purpose was his way to avoid the boredom and inaction of the Winter camp.

It does seem like Jefferson had good cause to be upset. I think Jefferson was very concerned about the welfare of Lewis. Harold, after reading your explanation, Lewis idea about traveling up the Kansas River does not seem like a good idea.

Kleo and All,

I became very excited to read about the passenger pigeons seen by M. Lewis. I think we read or talked about passenger pigeons in the Audubon discussion.

I also find it interesting to read about Ohio or Marietta. The population was very tiny, not at all like we think of it today. It's interesting, I don't know how populations take off in a state and just grow and grow and grow. In California, I am just guessing, the gold rush must have led to population growth.

As far as Ohio the slaves did run to Ohio for safety. That must have added to population growth.

I will find it interesting to look at these villages along the way. So different from what we see on the map today. We were talking about Cartography. How often are maps altered due to the growth of cities, annexations, etc.?

Harold, I am very frightened about veering too far away from the set questions you ask. I know we only have so much time. Usually, MARNI, and MABEL are here to do any extra research. They are also good guides in keeping the discussion on course. I hope my questions aren't out of step this time. It's just such an exciting journey my mind is jumping all over the place, like a jumping bean.

Ann did so much research too. I looked forward to hearing from her. Of course, Scrawler always gives interesting facts. Am I here too often? I am always afraid my presence frightens people away. If I am out of step, I don't mind being told.

This journey by Lewis and Clark is so important to American History. I had hoped we would take it together, one big bunch of Seniors. I miss Ella too. I know her eyes aren't well. Get well soon, Ella.

I know how to use Google. I just feel insecure wading through the material. If you don't know a subject well, I don't know history well, you can find the wrong material or material not exactly supportive of the discussion.

Earlier Kleo asked about my interest. I want to know about those instruments. What do they look like? Are they heavy, big? Are those instruments used today?

1. Chronometer
2. Sextant
3. Theodolite

This is a quote about the instruments. This quote is on page 87.

"With Patterson's help, he selected a chronometer. He bought it from Thomas Parker,....watchmaker on South Third Street, for $250, by far the largest sum expended for any single item carried on the expedition."

Scamper, I don't know how many men are going with Lewis and Clark either. I must have missed that information. Harold will help us.

Wow, Hats - you surely are up early this morning (or late last night)!

Hats ~ You asked about some of the scientific instruments.
This has always been one of my favorite topics in the history of this period. No GPS until recently!
Just like a navigator on a ship, Lewis needed a chronometer to know the time to calculate his location;
links are given below.
A sextant is also used both on ship and on land to "shoot the sun", that is, to measure one's position with respect to the sun at noon, and thus to figure out your latitude. A theodolite is another surveying instrument, used to calculate angles.

chronometer
sextant
theodolite

Mippy, thank you for the links. These are pretty complicated instruments. No wonder Lewis had to be taught how to use these tools.

--- asked in Message #287

How many men on expedition?

Click here for a list of the names of personnel actually physically attached to the expedition.

In summary, I count the names of 64 individuals who participated at one time or another, This includes the 2 captains, 19 individuals who went as far as Fort Mandan to return the long boat and the first year's specmens and reports from Fort Mandan, plus 33 names constituting the permanent party including York, Sakakawea, and other non-military.

Actually York should no longer be listed non Military since as I understand it the Army has officially made him army. Has the same been done for Sakakawea? If so I have not heard.

I suggest that that every one print this link since it contains Biographical data on many members that will come up in our continuing discussion. .

Some early tho'ts as i started re-reading the book: WOW, that quote from TJ in the front of the book about Lewis is powerful and so typical TJ in its writing.

I tho't as i read SA's Introduction that "here we have another teacher" - and tho't of his comparability to McCourt. Many of those we have discussed - Adams, Audubon, Jefferson, etc - have had "teaching" in their lives in some way. Do great men automatically teach/train others to their knowledge/expertise?

I think I've become very cynical in my 7th decade. I had great respect for TJ and the "esteemed" land-owners of the colonies and early country through my first four or five decades of life and learning, but i find myself having more negative feelings about their behavior and circumstances in my more recent years.

On pg 20 SA quotes TJ as saying ML's forebears were "one of the distinguished families of Virginia and among the earliest......Robt arrived in 1635 w/ a grant from the king for 33,3331/3 acres of Virginia land. ..." First of all it always infuriates me that the kings of Europe felt that this land was theirs to "give" to anyone and secondly, why should someone be esteemed or "distinguished" just because someone handed them thousands of acres of land. What did they do to earn it? Have a close association w/ a king, or a duke, etc? SA lauds Wm Lewis for serving w/out pay "like Geo Washington" and bore his own expenses "as his patriotic contribution to his country." Somehow, giving up money that you have inherited and kept by the labor of slaves, to a cause that is going to make you even more independent of authority and probably more independently wealthy doesn't strike me as brave and patriotic as those soldiers who had little and gave it up to fight for freedom and liberty for 8 yrs.............too cynical???

I am grateful for TJ's writing ability and his vision on human liberties, it just doesn't ring as powerful when you know his history of slave-owning and not emancipating any of his slaves even when he apparently had clarity of mind about how awful the institution was for everybody associated w/ it. Wealth was obvious the priority for all of these "freedom-talking" "drivers of Negroes" ala Samuel Johnson.

The omitting of statements about the women in TJ's writings and his comments about American and French women are telling. Who cannot believe that he would have used Sally Hemmings as his mistress based on his statements and non-statements of his attitude about women. They are not important enough to write about, or they should "know their place" and not trouble their "pretty heads about politics," as though politics are not impacting upon them. Why shouldn't plantation wives be "cold, melancholy" and "reserved," when they are essentially told "stay out of my way, keep your mouth shut about my relationships w/ slave women, ignore the children that you see around you who are obviously mine." If you are told to be a non-person, wouldn't you become a non-person.

Of course, SA gives us that picture of insipid, self-indugent women, but then goes on to tell us how well Mrs. Lewis takes care of the plantations after the death of her husbands and while her son goes about other things.

Enough for now, I shall return!!

Hats, your questions and comments are always interesting and never "too much." Keep them coming........jean

Jean: You've expressed some of my thoughts about TJ and about the comments about southern women. That "cold, melancholy, and reserved" statement really shocked me. And the quote in the book from a TJ letter pertaining to the difference between French women and American women - that American women knew their place and kept their mouths shut. Pretty startling stuff.

Hats: Thanks for finding that info about Robert Morris. He did invest in the original 1787 expedition which flopped. Maybe that was one of his investments which failed and that caused him to go bankrupt!

I thought it was interesting to read some of the medical practices of the day. I particularly enjoyed "To prevent hysterics: Mix finely pounded caraway seeds with a small measure of ginger and salt, spread upon bread and butter. Eaten each day, especially early in the day and at night before retiring, this is a good remedy against hysterics." I wonder who was having the hysterics. Maybe it was southern women from having to stifle themselves!

Regarding the mapping instruments - I think Ambrose said that Lewis bought a chronometer but that it didn't work out due to the rough passage. I think TJ wanted Lewis to bring a theodolite, but Lewis wouldn't do it. I think Ambrose said the expedition had to rely on other instruments such as the Sextant and the Octant, although in reading about the octant, I'm not sure why he used both. Sounds like they do the same thing?? Didn't Lewis use one in the day and one at night.??

Info and pictures of the Octant and other instruments: http://www.math.nus.edu.sg/aslaksen/gem-projects/hm/0203-1-10-instruments/sextant.htm

Mystic Seaport has a whole building devoted to nautical instruments such as chronometers and sextants - the Nautical Instruments Shop. It's quite fascinating and the instruments are beautiful.

Marni

Thanks, Harold, for providing more information about the number of men in the expedition and also the link, which I've printed out and tucked in my book! Wow, I couldn't tell from where we are in the book that anything like 64 people were included!!

All we know therefore is Jefferson or his brother had children by Sally Hemmings. We certainly do not know if it was rape or a consentual relationshsip. Enough said.

Harold: Thanks for the info about the members of the expedition. Lewis certainly did add to the original number that had been approved even though some of them returned at points along the way. Ambrose mentioned that Congress approved $2500 for the expedition and, if I remember correctly, that only 12 enlisted men were approved. So far I don't see anywhere that this figure was increased, although it sounds like Jefferson basically told Lewis to get what he needed and, in effect, charge it to the government. And Lewis did buy. He delayed the trip by another month in 1804 because he needed to get more provisions for the increased number of men in the expedition.

I thought it was interesting that Lewis and Clark decided to keep the basic Corps together on the keelboat - those men who were to go the entire route. I guess so they could bond? I thought it was interesting, too, to see how several of the men were let go when they didn't work out. But even some of the men who caused trouble temporarily were kept on - like Colter, for example, who disobeyed orders and left camp to go drinking. Lewis and Clark understood that the men were young and high-spirited and anxious to be on the way - that left sitting around for months was a recipe for trouble.

Scamper: I have to put in my 2 bits on this (sorry) re the term "consentual relationshsip." It's hard for me to think that a relationship between a slave and her owner could be considered exactly "consentual."

Personally, I found the more poignant story of slave and master in the L&C expedition to be the relationship between Clark and York. We will be reading some very interesting information about this in upcoming chapters.

Golly, these posts are so great! It makes me proud to know the Senior Bookies.

Harold, thank you for the printable list of men going on the expedition. I feel a slight fear for so many men to travel in Indian territory. I felt more comfortable with a dozen men. I think Jefferson felt more comfortable with a few men. I can see his point. Then, my mind thinks if trouble erupts more men can help. I suppose choosing the perfect number would have been impossible.

Mabel, your whole post is interesting. I know now, through reading, that the Founding Fathers did have their flaws. It's painful. I guess it's no different than today's politicians.

Marni, We are going on this trip, aren't we? Hot dog! Thank you for more information on the instruments. Also, I am hoping to hear more about York along the way too.

Hi Scamper!

Hats: Yes, we're off! I'm traveling on the keelboat myself. As long as we don't get stuck on a sandbar or bash into a giant log, I think this might be the safest place to be. (I'm such a chicken.) I'm going to let the strong young men handle the rowing, though.

I'll be watching for new types of birds and plants - and maybe spend some time playing with Lewis' Newfoundland Seaman, too.

I don't think I'll be able to drink our daily allotment of 1 gil of whiskey, though. I'll be falling off the boat and into the river.

1 gill = 1/2 cup = 4 fluid ounces = 8 tablespoons

Marni

Marni, you have mentioned just what my mind is thinking about. We might have went over it earlier or had links. Just point me in the right direction or answer my questions.

1.What is the difference between a keelboat and a piroque?

2.Don't laugh! what exactly is a sandbar?

I read this morning about Malaria being on the frontier. I never knew that Malaria had gotten over here. I always thought of it as a tropical disease. If I remember correctly, while on the Ohio River or in Ohio Lewis caught Malaria. Malaria isn't curable. It can recur. Lewis took along Peruvian bark. In Peruvian bark there is quinine. I found it interesting to learn that Quinine allowed us to explore and enter tropical territory. I guess taking Quinine was like taking seasick pills on a deepsea fishing trip.

Oh, another question. What are mammouths? Lewis found these bones while in Ohio too. He did a very long report just on the tusks of a mammouth.

Also, what happened to these mammouths? Can you find any paintings? I don't think we read about the mamouths in the Audubon discussion. Were they a threat to man? I think my spelling is off. I better go check my book.

No, I can't drink the liquor either. What shall we drink? Just water??

Mammoth is the correct spelling. Did any of you read the part where Lewis and Clark had a hard time spelling mosquitoes. That made me laugh. I am having the same trouble spelling mammoth.

This was mentioned in the book several times, the book is about Jefferson as well as Lewis, and it is not appropriate for you to tell me it is not necessary to discuss this.

Oh, Scamper, take a breath. I'm just commenting, and not really to you.

Kleo

Marni, you're correct we do KNOW by law and the definition of rape that it was RAPE, not consentual sexual relations. The slave can't say no. The slave can't report the rape to anyone but the master. The slave can't speak out against the master in a court of law. The slave can't tell on the master. The slave can't do anything. Therefore the slave is raped.

It can only be mutual consent if both people can both say yes and no. When one party can only say yes, they can never consent.

Sally Hemmings had no recourse to the law or legal proceedings to protect her against rape by her master. If you have no right or ability to say no, it is always rape. If Sally Hemmings cannot freely call the local magistrate and accuse her master of rape and get her voice in court then her master cannot have consentual sexual relations with her. She does not have a choice, she can only submit. This is called rape.

Kleo

Thanks, everyone for adding to our knowledge. I was 32 posts behind but I have caught up now.

I spent yesterday afternoon in the ER and am now home being medicated with something to mask the abdominal pain that I have had since Thursday. Will be seeing the dr on Wednesday after the CT scan results are in.

You know, I have become so interested in this L&C cookbook that I want to put in a few comments from those who are making the trip and trying so hard to feed all the men. Did you read that they ate about 9lbs of meat everyday along with the many side dishes of vegetables? That means killing some pretty hefty animals along the way. So heres a quote from the cookbook about a different kind of veggie that they were grateful to take with them for the first winter. Its SALSIFY------and here's what precedes the recipe.

"Salisify is a winter root vegetable native to North America that has a faintly oyster flavor and was in fact known as the oyster plant and the vegetable oyster as early as 1690. It is particularly good with slow-braised roast of beef or buffalo. Salsify quickly discolors, so immediately place it in cold water with vinegar as soon as it is pared."<B/>

After the above, the recipe "Salisfy with Shallots and Chives" follows and then there is quote from one TJ's letters to Charles Clay, in 1812--"I do not remember to have seen Salsifia in your garden, and yet is is one of the best roots for the winters. Some call it oyster plant because fried in butter it can scarcely be distinguished from a fried oyster. I send your some seed. It is to be sowed and managed as carrots and to be taken up at the same time and put awsay for winter use."

I wonder if it is still grown here in the States. Hmmmmmm! Yes, it is! Salsify Later I will add another little quote from this timely book about "SORREL" and its use along the trek.

Octants and sextants do the same thing, they just use different scales, and a sextant can measure greater angles because of its greater scale (1/8 versus 1/6 of a circle). One primary use is to measure the angle of the sun at noon from your position to locate your latitude or distance north or south of the equator.

Chronometers are very sensitive clocks used to help in measuring longitude.

A mammoth is an extinct member of the elephant family. They lived to about 4000 years ago? Their almost complete remains have been found in the permafrost of Siberia and their bones all over the northern hemisphere. A pygmy mammoth lived on the Channel Islands of California.

Kleo

Hats, I think you're going to be mistaken to drink the water instead of freely imbibing. Even if the water from the creek is as safe as someone else pointed out earlier I doubt the drinking vessel is clean. And how are you going to store the water in between trips to the creek?

The book on John Adams discusses this, how much alcoholic beverages were drunk by Americans in the late 18th, early 19th C. Even children drank some. It seems, from a modern perspective, that how the west was won was drunkenly.

Kleo

Ann, please take care and get well soon. I have never heard of Salsify. I am glad you have added a link. I bet it was delicious with braised beef. I can imagine the cookbooks are great fun. I am glad you are sharing parts of it.

I do agree with Kleo. Women slaves were not given the right to protect their bodies. Their masters ruled over their bodies. If the master wanted a sexual relationship with the female slave, she had to give in. This, of course, is rape.

If a child was conceived, the master had the right to do with the child what he wished. He could sell the child, whatever he desired. The mother of the child could not say a word.

Kleo, you made me fall over laughing.

"It seems, from a modern perspective, that how the west was won was drunkenly."

Are there any paintings of "Seaman?"

Marni, I have the beautiful links you posted of the Keelboat and Piroque. Thank you. Somehow I missed these links earlier. I became too involved with the bullboat. In the Piroque and Dugout canoe there doesn't seem like the men would find much protection that is if they were shot at from the woods.

I like reading about the flora and fauna. There is mention of the Osage Orange. The Indians would go miles and miles to obtain this wood to make their bows and/or arrows.

I bet Jefferson would wait anxiously to receive boxes of findings sent back to him by Lewis and Clark. To bad mail was so slow to travel in those days.

Were there more mammoths than bison on the frontier? Were mammoths dangerous? If I remember correctly, SA wrote that Lewis wrote two thousand some pages about the mammoth's tusk. Where in the world did he find the time to write such a thorough report?

There were no mammoths on the western frontier when Lewis and Clark went on their expedition. The mammoths went extinct thousands of years before they began. There were only bison, of the two large mammals. Other large mammals on the frontier were grizzly bears, cougars, various elk and deer.

Oh, and wolves.

Mammoths, being extinct, are fascinating to modern naturalists.

Kleo

About 25 years ago I planted several Osage Orange (Bois d' Arc) trees at my Guadalupe Country place. Later I made one 40 inch bow from a blank I harvested in summer. I shaped it and cured it for several months after which I strung it and drew a test flex that produced ominous sound of cracking wood fibers. I stopped short of breaking it, and have used it as a conversation piece. Later I learned I should have harvested the blank in the dead of winter when sap is gone from the blank..

The Osage Orange is not a great yard tree because of the large messy fall of inetable fruit each summer and particularly because of the many sharp thorns from limbs that frequently break off to the ground.

As Hats said they were the preferred wood that the Indians used for bows. An alternate was Ash. In either case the Indian would glue a long strip of buffalo sinew to the face of the bow that greatly increased its strength.. There are many 19th century accounts of an arrow fired into one side of the running buffalo from 15 to 20 feet away, penetrating completely through to the other side. And the Indian horseman chasing on Horseback (look mom, no hands!) could fire some 15 arrows a minute.

Ann: Thanks for the Salsify info. How fascinating! I've never even hears of salsify or oyster plant before. I hope you're feeling better.

Kleo: Thanks for all of your informative tidbits.

Hats: I'm thinking about you drinking the water instead of whiskey.

The Corps members did drink the river water. I've read some comments Clark made in his journal. When they reached the point where the Missouri joined the Mississippi River, Clark wrote that he preferred Missouri River water to Mississippi River water because the Missouri water was cooler. But the water was very muddy. He told the men to dip their cups down deeper into the river to get their drinks so they didn't have to drink so much stuff floating near the top.

Although the rivers must have been so much cleaner then than they are today, I bet there was all kinds of bacteria and stuff in the water. Periodically the men got sick. I bet the water had something to do with some of the illnesses.

I wonder if people drank alcoholic beverages so much to avoid getting sick drinking bad water? I think that was one reason they drank so much grog on ships back then. Their water at sea eventually got all kinds of slime etc. in it. It could not have been appetizing. They added water to rum to make grog, but perhaps the alcohol killed some bacteria and also killed to taste of the slime.

Maybe I'll stick to whiskey on this trip while it lasts - or mix whiskey into my river water.

Marni

Aren't you supposed to let the bow wood cure for a year? How did they do it before the introduction of horses?

Mammoth

Kleo

Malaria was endemic in much of America at that time. So many famous people got malaria. Jefferson had it. James Madison had it. So did Washington and Hamilton. I imagine all of the men of the Corps of Discovery got it - there were so many mosquitos and they didn't have repellent in those days. Did you see they used hog lard for repellent - I guess they rubbed it over the exposed parts of their bodies. Yuck. Also, they stayed in smoke near fires when possible. They must have been absolutely tortured by mosquito bites - and the horses and Seaman must have suffered, too.

I loved reading that Clark spelled mosquito 16 different ways in his journal. His spellings always ended in "r" I noticed. Like "mosquiter." I guess that was the Kentucky accent.

I'm reading the Lewis and Clark journals as I'm going along in our book. The edition of the journals I have maintained the original spelling. It's quite fascinating to see how they spelled phonetically. The journals are available online and are in our online resources, if anyone wants to check them out.

Ambrose noted long timeframes when Lewis didn't write in his journal or at least we don't have those journals. Someone mentioned Lewis might have been in a depressed state when he didn't wasn't writing in his journals. But, he was constantly writing letters and reports to Jefferson. I think he must spent an awful lot of time on those. Maybe he just didn't feel like writing anymore sometimes when it came to journals since the other men on the expedition were keeping journals.

When you think of all the hard physical labor the men did on their route (rowing, hauling, hunting, walking, guarding, etc.) - they must have been totalling exhausted when evening rolled around. I bet there must have been plenty of days when they just wanted to fall asleep instead of write.

Seaman

I suppose this is just a likeness of Seaman. Isn't he beautiful?

I didn't realize so many famous people suffered with Malaria. It must have been relatively easy to catch. I did read about the hog lard being used as an applicator. Yucky is right! The mosquitoes alone would have chased me home.

Harold, does the Osage Orange bloom?

I don’t want to get side tract with the many social problems of Thomas Jefferson and his time that is not the subject of our book, but some of these social shortcomings were mentioned by Ambrose in the book and might be incidentally mentioned here. They are not, however the subject of the book and should not distract us for our discussion of the main event.

In brief as I understand it, TJ did free Sally Hemings and her brothers as he promised he would. He probably could not have freed his other slaves at his death as Washington did even if he had wanted too because of his debts. TJ throughout his life was always land and slave rich but always cash poor. Somehow credit was always available that seems to have enabled a grand lifestyle but as I understand it on his death his estate was bankrupt’ and his creditors were there to collect as much repayment as the assets would permit.

It appears to me that the Sally Hemings relationship began when she and her Brothers were brought to Paris during the Revolution. TJ sent a brother to Cooking school to learn the art of French Cooking. In the McCullough John Adams Biography opon the arrival of Sally, Abigail Adams quickly suspected hankey pankey. Neither the McCullough source or another TJ Biography that I free read one cold winter afternoon from the shelves of t the local B&N, suggest evidence of physical force or violence. Of course obviously mental cohesion was certainly present.

"But in that six months together they had taken each other's measure. That they liked what they saw is obvious from Lewis's letter to Clark, and Clark's response. They complemented each other. Clark was a tough woodsman accustomed to command; he had been a company commander and had led a party down the Mississippi as far as Natchez. He had a way with enlisted men, without ever getting familiar. He was a better terrestrial surveyor than Lewis, and a better water man. Lewis apparently knew of his map making ability. In general in areas in which Lewis was shaky, Clark was strong, and vice versa.

Most of all, Lewis knew that Clark was competent to the task, that his word was his bond, that his back was steel. Clark knew the same about Lewis. Their trust in each other was complete, even before they took the first step west together. How this closeness came about cannot be known in any detail, but that it clearly was there before the expedition cannot be doubted." (p. 97)

I think one of the reasons that the expedition succeeded was because of the relationship between Clark and Lewis. Jefferson and others may have seen Lewis as the leader of this expedition, but Lewis saw Clark as his equal. I think he recognized early on that he could not possibly be proficient in everything. He knew himself as far as tasks and leadership qualities were concerned and he was also aware of Clark's qualities.

I found that it was interesting that it seemed that Clark did not feel snubbed in being paid less than Lewis. Some men would have taken this to task, but Clark and Lewis seemed to work well together and because of this they both worked well with those under them. "He [Clark] had a way with enlisted men, without ever getting familiar." I thought this was an interesting fact about Clark. At a time when the various class distinctions were prevalent, it was important that Lewis and Clark not only could trust each other, but also had the trust of their men.

Harold, does the Osage Orange bloom?

You ask a good question Hats; I wish I had a good answer. The truth is, I'v never noticed. I suspect the likely answer is y]es, but the blooms are small and unspectactular. Perhaps someone else will have a more complete answer?

also describes Sally Hemmings as so childlike that it is unimaginable that she is a teenager. Please reread the McCullough on this and you will see how repulsed Abigail Adams is by the situation.

Child sexual predators also, like slave-owning masters, rely upon the ability of adults to coerce children. They can do so without physical violence. That doesn't mean the 5-year-old consented because there are no bruises.

Rape does not require physical force or violence. In the case of slaves the force was the rule of law, with the threat of physical violence, a brutal, sometimes deadly, whipping. If someone is drugged there may be no force or violence, but it does not remove the rape. If someone is told their children will be killed if they don't comply it's still rape.

Rape is simply forcing someone to have sex against their will. Slaves had no legal will, they could even be killed for failing to do their master's will. If one cannot say no, one cannot say yes, because yes is forced.

Consent and choice imply their is an alternative, the choice NOT to. Sally Hemmings had NO choice not to have sex with her master. This makes any sexual contact rape. ONLY if she could say no AND enforce her no can she consent. A 5-year-old cannot enforce a NO against an adult, physically or mentally, so it is always rape.

Sally Hemmings had no choice to meet other men she might be interested in because she was owned by another human being and she had no right to be anywhere but where her owner ordered her to be at all times.

This is a difficult but important issue to me that people understand consentual sex REQUIRES the ability to say no. If someone, by law!, has NO ability to say no, they can't say yes, either. They are forced to comply with the demand upon their body. Forced by law. This makes it rape by definition.

Kleo

They have tiny flowers on the female trees, but they are in balls the size and shape of the eventual fruit so they're kind of pretty. I don't know what the male flowers look like.

Kleo

they had an exhibit of plants sent/brought back to Phila from the L&C expedition. I wish i had paid more attention to it at the time. They included the "mock orange" bush, is that different than the Osage Orange? I believe it is philadelphus saxifragacae, the common mock orange is syringa. They smell wonderful, blooming for a short time in April or May and they are very easy to grow. We have "voluteers" all over our yard and have provided all our friends w/ cuttings. The encyclopedia Encarta says that there is also a western genus.

Loved the link to the stories of Seaman. I had forgotten about him until i read the part about the cactus thorns and prickly pears. I remembered that when i read UC a few years ago i had empathy for the dog and his poor paws. When one of you writes a book about dogs in history, remember to include Seaman.

Yes, our ancestors were lushes and yes, in some cases it was because potable water was hard to come by at various times and places, but even in PHila where they often had access to good deep wells and good water, our Founding Fathers felt the need to have many glasses a day of something alcoholic. Ben F and John Adams liked hard cider along w/ port and other fermented drinks. I would have been asleep at 8 o'clock if i drank as much as they did. Maybe your body adjusts? Who is our resident biologist/alcohol expert? I'm just surprised that they felt the need to take up transportation space for that much alcohol. It was obviously considered a dire necessity, of course, if i had had to endure some of the travails that they did, maybe i would wish for something very strong and alcoholic also.........jean

Yes, Jean, they're completely different plants. There are a number of western species of Philadelphus.

I don't know how your body adjusts. If by 8, you mean by 8 in the morning after the breakfast ciders, make up another bed, because I'd be asleep, too.

Yes, they had wells. I think it was just the town water that was bad. Adams lived way out in the boonies, though. He must have had well water.

I still can't get over the boat. Geeze, it's huge.

Kleo

Re "Clark did not feel snubbed in being paid less than Lewis"

I re-read this section. Turns out Dearborn told Lewis that although Clark would not receive a Captain's commission, he would be paid as a captain. So, Clark didn't grumble about the pay. However, Clark was definitely put out by not getting the expected commission. He was made a Lieutenant in, I believe, an artillery unit. Plus Dearborn didn't backdate his commission to the date Clark actually started the job, so he lost out on some pay he should have received.

Ambrose tells us that years after the expedition, when Clark was working with Nicholas Biddle in approx 1810 or 1811 on producing a publication of the expedition, Biddle asked Clark to clarify the situation. Clark told him the story but asked Biddle to keep it to himself. Clark was humiliated by what happened. Only several people actually knew that he was not officially a captain, and Clark asked Biddle to keep it that way and not print anything about their commissions.

Hats: Thanks for the Seaman information. Newfoundlands are great dogs. They're called "gentle giants." They're one of the largest dogs. They look like a combination of a black labrador and a St. Bernard. They're huge! My friend had one and it had the temperament of a labrador - very gentle and sweet, good with children, patient, smart, but an excellent watch dog. Sounds like Seaman had these characteristics.

I was surprised that Lewis picked out such a huge dog, thinking he'd take up a lot of space in the boat and maybe eat a lot. But, he probably walked the whole way. And now that I think about it, my labrador was large, but didn't eat very much once it was grown out of puppy stage.

I noticed on Barnes & Noble that there are books written about Seaman:

Captain's Dog: My Journey with the Lewis and Clark Tribe by Roland Smith and Seaman: The Dog Who Explored the West with Lewis and Clark by Gail Langer Karwoski.

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=Ag3o5H1Ct0&isbn=0152026967&itm=1

I understand what you all are saying about no legal will for Sally to have said no to her master. The only thing I am saying is we really don't know what Jefferson was like. Was he one that enforced his legal rights, or did he give slaves a voice? We don't know, so we can't quite tell what the real relationship was between him and Sally. I'm not condoning his actions or of course slavery, but there is often more to the story. A slight parallel might be the lack of legal rights of women in certain ages. Just because the husband could force his wife to do his will doesn't mean that he did. And if Jefferson didn't force her, in my book rape is too strong a word to use. Just thinking about the other side of the story, that's all...

Week 2. Aug 8 - 14. Up the Missouri to the Mandan Village; a typical day's experience during the first summer; the tragic death of Sergeant Floyd; and relations with the Indians Chapters 11 - 15, pp 122 - 190.

The Men had spent some 5 months in winter camp on the east side of the Mississippi at the mouth of the Wood River one mile below the mouth of the Missouri. Clark embarked the men on May 14th a rainy morning. Lewis was away at St Louis; he would join them two days later. All of the enlisted journals say 43 men including Capt Clark formed the departing party that paddled upstream to the Missouri; continuing on the party camped for the night 6 miles further up the Missouri.

On the third day, May 16 the party arrived at St Charles an old French village around which some Americans had settled. Patrick Gass in his Journal for that day wrote:

We remained at ST Charles until the 21st, where Captain Lewis arrived from St Louis and joined us. At 4 o’clock in the afternoon we left this place under a salute of three cheers from the inhabitants, which we returned with three more, and a discharge of three guns. This evening was showery and we again encamped on the north side of the river.

This May 21 departure from St Charles marked the last contact with an American town and the real beginning of their long trek west.

I note we appear to have a problem with the number of expedition personnel that seems lower than the 64 total noted this morning. I know that 4 or 5 were added at Fort Mandan, but I dont think 20. All of the enlisted men’s journals say 43 men embarked. The list in the link I gave this morning listed 64. We will iron this out over the next few days.

Harold: Here is a government site of the Lewis & Clark Journey of Discovery with a listing of the various personnel in the Corps of Discovery. It includes the leaders, the enlisted men, the civilians, the engages, and the dog. An asterisk indicates who made the round trip.

It says the following: "On May 14, 1804, William Clark and the Corps of Discovery left Camp River Dubois, and were joined by Meriwether Lewis in St. Charles, Missouri. The party numbered over 45, and included 27 young, unmarried soldiers, a French-Indian interpreter, and Clark's Black slave York. An additional group of men, engagés, would travel only to the Mandan country for the first winter, and these included six soldiers and several French boatmen." The list includes the Charbonneau family who were added later.

http://www.nps.gov/jeff/LewisClark2/CorpsOfDiscovery/TheOthers/Others.htm

It is difficult to count the number listed because of the way the names, particularly long French names, wrap around.

I count 33 names with asterisks, those who made the round trip. It includes the Charbonneaus. Then 34 is Seaman, the dog!

There is interesting information about each member of the Corps with names in blue ink, if you click on the name. There is even a picture about poor Sgt. Floyd who died, based on his recovered skull from which a cast was made and a model constructed of his face.

I wonder if some sources indicating the high figure count include any of the Indian guides who helped for intervals later on?

I was disappointed also to find that great gap of information had maybe been lost.

From Alexander Thom's book, From Sea to Shining Sea.

When the pirogue spilled over, most of the journals that Lewis had already written floated away and none of these were ever recovered. In the Journals, I am not finding that gap of info since Biddle and Clark have put in their own diary writings of the time we have nothing quoted from Lewis. Do you think that Biddle was trying to put together,from Clark's journals, what he thought Lewis might have written??

Marni,I must have that book about Seaman. I have written the title down and will check my library. A "Gentle Giant" is how I have always thought of a Labrador.

When I lived in Philadelphia as a girl, I visited Elfreth's Alley more than once. If my memory serves me correctly, I remember the WELLS behind the houses or by the houses. The narrow cobblestone streets I definitely remember.

Elfreth's Alley

Mabel's Quote below.

"I believe it is philadelphus saxifragacae, the common mock orange is syringa. They smell wonderful, blooming for a short time in April or May and they are very easy to grow. We have "voluteers" all over our yard and have provided all our friends w/ cuttings. The encyclopedia Encarta says that there is also a western genus."

I bet they smell yummy. I read about "cuttings" somewhere in our SA book. I think Lewis sent many cuttings back to Thomas Jefferson. Lewis did buy a Botany book in Philadelphia for $6.00.

Kleo's Quote below.

"Sally Hemmings had no choice to meet other men she might be interested in because she was owned by another human being and she had no right to be anywhere but where her owner ordered her to be at all times."

I feel Kleo is totally right on this issue. There is a lot I don't understand about Jefferson's views on slavery and the Indian issue either. I suppose both issues could serve as full discussions within themselves. After reading about Jefferson in the 1776 discussion, I began to distrust him. I thought the Callender affair was totally sneaky and underhanded. Then, in this book learning about his thoughts and behavior involving slavery is again depressing. Jefferson's views about women are also very questionable and leave me thinking not very highly of him.

Harold, thank you for leading us onward. I have two more pages to go in chapter 10. I am anxious to get to the Mandan Village.

I can't remember well. It's been years. I do believe the streets are brick laid. Well, this is really off topic.

It's very hard driving the keelboat down the Missouri River. There are so many hidden limbs, pulled up trees from river banks in the water. It's amazing that a hole isn't poked through the keelboat. The keelboat is going very slowly just for the sake of safety.

Lewis and Clark stopped at the Daniel Boone Settlement. There isn't a written account whether they had the chance to meet Daniel Boone. Sometimes we are too close to events to see how important those events will seem to future generations. Do you think this is why this event isn't written about?

I didn't know Thomas Jefferson was the founder of West Point.

Speaking of West Point, wasn't that interesting about Lewis' idea to send sons of important men in the Louisiana Territory to West Point as one way to make the newly acquired territory feel part of America? And one of the young men Lewis recommended was half white and half Indian. Although someone important in Louisiana didn't want a "halfbreed" to be allowed to attend West Point, Lewis persisted, and the young man was allowed to enroll in this prestigious school back east.

I wonder why it was that West Point was the choice of location for the new army school?

I thought that was very interesting. One person was concerned about the color of the Indian. He ended up being accepted or going. Marni, your question makes me want to know more about West Point.

I have also been thinking about the Osage Indian sent to Washington to see Jefferson. What did Jefferson want to learn from him? I guess it was just a friendly introduction to Washington and the leaders.

I thought it was really fascinating about the chiefs who agreed to travel east to visit the American president. Lewis and Clark pursuaded a number of them to do it. What a long strange trip it must have been for chiefs of the Plains Indians to travel all the way to Washington, D.C. They must have been very brave.

That's what I am thinking too. Was it just the Osage Indian Chief or other tribes too? From what I can understand the Sioux Indians were the most numerous and most hostile. We need some photos of these Indians. How did dress, appearance differ from one tribe to the next?

Osage Indian

Did the Indian Chiefs dress in their customary dress while in Washington?

Marni thank you for the post of the link naming the personnel. Since the 47 does not include the Temps who were signed on only for the first year and since I know they picked up several at Fort Mandan, the link I gave yesterday might be ok.

Seaman was Lewis's dog, Did he make it back? I'm not sure, we will have to watch that. When the party left St Charles they had 2 horses that was used by the hunters who traveled the banks fopllowing the boats. Initially game was somewhat scarce but the journals of cite the specific number of deer or other animals killed that day. During the first week the bred, flower,lard, and similar stock probable constituted a significant part of their diet. Later their diet became near 100% meat. the group was divided into 4 Mess groups that prepared meals for its members.

Hats, at this point they were not driving Down the Missouri, theywere paddling up. Likey you say that was hard Work!

I too have never assocated TJ with the founding of West Point although it certainly begain during his administration.

Off Subject:
In case anyone is interested there is a Q & A session going on today (Tuesday) on the October SeniorNet conference. In the header, Click on Discussions, then 20th Anniversary Conference.
Will some of us "historians" be getting together at the Conference?

Did the Indian Chiefs dress in their customary dress while in Washington?

I don't think so. They were decked out in suits with hats. George Catlin painted a picture of a Mandan delegation returning to the Mandan villag from a visit to Washington. They were clad in eastern suits and hats and one had an umbrella. I will see if I can find it on the Web.

Harold, thank you for answering that question. I would love to see the picture. Did T. Jefferson ever get the chance to see Indians in their natural setting and dress?

Some information from the West Point web site about its history is given
here

In our 2nd week's reading we are introduced to a number of the Indian tribes that the expedition met on their journey up river. One of the tensest times of the trip was the experience with the powerful Teton (Lakota) Sioux in Sept. 1804. I felt so nervous for the Corps members as I read this part! It would have been so easy for a battle to begin but that would have defeated one of the main purposes of the expedition - to establish trading relations with the Indians.

A govt. Lewis and Clark site has some interesting information about the tribes the Corps met. The tribes are listed in chronological order. Click on the Lakota Sioux button and other buttons to find interesting info. about the tribes.

http://www.nps.gov/jeff/LewisClark2/TheJourney/NativePeoples.htm

I read info about the various Sioux that make up the Great Sioux Nation. The Sioux are:

"A confederation of Native North American tribes, the dominant group of the Hokan-Siouan linguistic stock, which is divided into several separate branches. The Sioux, or Dakota, consisted of seven tribes in three major divisions: [I] Wahpekute, Mdewakantonwan, Wahpetonwan, Sisitonwan (who together formed the Santee or Eastern division, sometimes referred to as the Dakota), [2] the Ihanktonwan, or Yankton, and the Ihanktonwana, or Yanktonai (who form the Middle division, sometimes referred to as the Nakota), and [3] the Titonwan, or Teton (who form the Western division, sometimes referred to as the Lakota). The Tetons, originally a single band, divided into seven sub-bands after the move to the plains, these seven including the Hunkpapa, Sihasapa (or Blackfoot), and Oglala."

Famous Lakota Sioux of a somewhat later time were Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse. Black Elk was an Oglala Sioux.

Here are some photos and paintings depicting famous Sioux, tepees, etc.: http://www.nativeamericans.com/Sioux.htm

Here is an interesting article decribing the Lakota Vision Quest, an important Lakota ritual: http://thewildwest.org/interface/index.php?action=267

Here, listen to Indian music as you read the story of The White Buffalo Woman, the most important Sioux legend: http://www.merceronline.com/Native/native05.htm

I don't know who first put up the "Discovering Lewis and Clark" site w/ the info on Philly, but, thank you, that is a great site. I saw Hats link as the last one. Elfreth's Alley is an interesting place, if you tour PHilly, don't miss it and have dinner at Old City Tavern.

Just one more piece of info re: Sally Hemmings. Barbara Chase-Riboud wrote two well-researched, well-written novels about Hemmings, TJ and the Hemmings family. "Sally Hemmings, a novel" and "The President's Daughter." I enjoyed them both as fiction and potential fact......jean

Hats: That painting you posted is a beauty. It reminds me of my husband's grandfather whom I mentioned in our pre-discussion. He lived on the Navaho reservation for 2 years painting the Navahos in the early 1900's. We have one of his paintings - a face of a beautiful Navaho boy of about 6 - and we have a number of lithographs and other types of prints of various tribal members. I'll see if I can find any on the web to show you.

Oh, I found several. The first is a Navaho and the last is Hopi. He also spent a lot of time in Mexico painting:

http://www.askart.com/AskART/artists/search/Search_Repeat.aspx?searchtype=IMAGES&artist=4471

Marni's Indian links are now on the Web Resources page. The link on the Sioux Tribe appears to me a good one. In the 17 century they were on the lakes and forest of what is now Minnosota. After a disasterous War with the Ojibwa who had been armed with firearms by the europeans they migrated southwest to become buffalo hunters,

They completely abandoned their lake culture and in a single generation they had given up the canoe. As time past they substituted the horse and became the power of the plains. Lewis and Clark were lucky to have avoided a firefight. Future river travlers were not so lucky and for a while they were successful in demanding payments for passing their lands.

Thank you Marni and Mabel. The links just add to the exciting adventure. Also, the name of future book titles are very helpful. The paintings are beautiful too.

Mippy, thank you for the West Point site too.

Thanks, Hats. I don't think one can overstate the horrors of being a female slave in the USA.

Kleo

I don't think so either.

Harold: What an interesting story about how the Sioux changed their culture and in such an amazingly short period of time. I read that originally they were Eastern Woodland Indians and then when they were forced west, they became Plains Indians. How fascinating that they switched from the canoe to the horse and were successful.

I am continually amazed the more I find out about Native Americans. I read about Indians in the Northeast that over 90% of them were wiped out from smallpox before the Pilgrims even showed up at Plymouth. Apparently, smallpox was brought over from Europe by the French and the disease traveled down from Canada. Smallpox hit tribes in other areas of the country in devastating numbers. It didn't attack each tribe equally, but nearly wiped some tribes out while leaving others intact. Imagine what this did to their cultures and structures of societies and relationships between tribes before the Europeans ever traveled west in America.

"On October 10, Tableau came over first. He warned the captains that there was some jealousy among the chiefs of the three villages. Then the chiefs themselves, and some of their warriors, came to the council. After smoking and an exchange of small presents, Lewis stood and began speaking, with Gravelines interpreting. It was his basic Indian speech, according to Clark providing the Indians with "good counsel," which was to accept American sovereignty, to make peace with the Mandans, to shun the Sioux, and to trade with American merchants. If they did as told, they would be protected by their new father, the chief of the seventeen great nations of America." (p.179)

My husband was born and raised on a Navajo Indian reservation. His father was a butcher for the American Army. He and his brother were the only white boys on the reservation. He grew up playing with the Indian boys until they sent him to the white school in Gallop, New Mexico.

I asked him once where the Americans got the idea that their ways were the "only" ways in regards to the Indians. I had a romantic image of the Indians and really knew little about their ways. My husband said that while he was away at the white school the teachers used to beat the idea into him that the white race was the superior race and that's the way he felt when he came back to the reservation. I used to ask him why he thought that way since he used to play with these same boys as a child, unfortantely I never did get a straight answer out of him. He was just brought up to hate the Indians and to think of himself as superior to them. But what was interesting was that he adopted their methods of using herbs and other medicines. He saved my life once when I got bit by a rattlesnake and when I was having trouble when I was carrying my children he gave me some herbs that helped ease my nausea. So in a sense he was willing to adopt some of their ways, but not the people themselves.

Also, one other thing about female slaves. After three years of researching for my own book that I'm writing about the 1800s, I did discover that there were times when a female Negro slave would go out of her way to bed with an important white male in the hopes that her children by him would be able to advance themselves. There were several instances that I found when the white males paid for the care of these Negro children and very often he would send them north, especially when they were boys and could pass for white. (Unfortantely, I have read over 3,000 books and since this information was only read in passing, I didn't keep the reference as to where I read this particular information since I wasn't going to use it for my novel so I'm sorry, but I can't site this for you. I do know that I read at least three references to this situation.)

Thanks, Anne, for pointing out that relationships between slave women and owners were not 100% rape situations. I'm sure we've said plenty on this, all I was pointing out from the beginning is it is not easy to determine what happened in individual cases.

It is really a point hard to make, but the law says, and women have rightfully fought hard for this, that if you take away a woman's right to say no, or a woman does not have the right to say no, it is ALWAYS rape. A 12-year-old girl cannot be accused in court, thank God, of seducing her stepfather, because he has a position of authority over her--the law recognizes this.

I can hardly think of a circumstance more horrible than having to pick a man by his race, white, to father my children with the hopes he won't sell them down the river and with the knowledge that if he decides to I can do nothing to stop him. This is NOT a choice.

A slave woman who cannot OWN her own children in addition to her own body and chooses to have sexual relations to pick who CAN own her children is not seeking a consentual sexual relationship. It's still rape. Rape is horrid. Slavery is far worse. To combine the two is unthinkable. Or should be.

I don't understand this need for revision of slavery, to make it out to be something good. A slave woman was NOT seducing her master when she hoped she might be able to keep some of the children if she had a powerful white master. She had a millions doors slammed in her face because she was born a slave, not a white woman in the Americas, just because there are 6 doors to hell left open for her to choose from, doesn't mean she's having a willing sexual relationship with the white man who might not sell her children down river.

One also often cannot determine what happened when a toddler is raped. This doesn't mean the child consented and it isn't rape.

Rape is rape. If a woman CANNOT legally say no, it's ALWAYS rape.

Kleo

One of the stories in our book that was very moving was the one about Sgt. Shannon. He was sent out to hunt or something and he got lost. Eventually, he thought the rest of the expedition got ahead of him and he kept racing north to catch up when they were actually behind him. L&C sent people out to track him, but they couldn't find him. They worried that he had been captured, or had an accident, or was starving. Over 2 weeks later, they spotted him by the river. He was very weak and had nearly starved to death.

Shannon had run out of bullets and had been living off grapes and such. He was able to kill a rabbit using a stick for a bullet in his gun, but that was all he could catch. Can you imagine the experience - lost like that in the wilderness so far from civilization with no weapon? I wonder if he had nightmares about it for the rest of his life?

It was amazing to me that more people in the Corps didn't get lost or captured or killed.

I was walking on our town river walk along the Farmington River today trying to get some exercise while the weather was beautiful. I spotted an egret in a marsh near the river and got this sort of Lewis and Clark adventure feeling of being out in the wild - as I listened to the music on my iPod. Of course, I had to take a picture of the egret with my camera cellphone - just like Lewis would have done

!

But....I came across a sandbar out in the middle of the Farmington. Of course, I thought of Hats right away. I snapped a photo of the sandbar with my cellphone and made a link.

So, Hats, here's a sandbar. You had asked what it is. The Farmington River has a sandy bottom. The sand builds up in some areas, probably from being pushed around from the current. When the river is low, you can really see the sandy area, the sandbar. Boats have to be careful to go around sandbars carefully so they don't go aground. The sandbar is the white part sticking up in the middle of the water in the photo. (The picture is not as clear as the photos from my digital camera. Sorry.)

Sandbar

Marni

Here's the egret in the marsh. It ate some frogs while I watched!

Egret

FYI marni0308, Your clickable for Egret did not work for me. It said no acsss.

Oh, rats, Ginger! Were you able to see the sandbar?

Scrawler the Indian too considered their particular tribe superior to all others. This is evident from the fact that the tribal name in their language meant something like “The People” or “The Chosen People.”

And promoting American trade was an easy sell for L&C. Universally the Indian was much attracted to European traders whatever their nationality. They quickly saw the utility of woven wool blankets, copper cooking pots, iron knives an hatchets and of course firearms.

Promoting intertribal peace on the other hand was a hard sell. It takes more than a sharp talker in a fancy suit with a drum and fiddle to convince the Indians make peace with ancient enemies

marni0308, It said no acess so could not see anything.

Click Here for George Catlin paintings. Additional paintings can be had by clicking links on the page. I did not see the one of the Mandan Delegation arriving to their village after the visit to Washington.

I have six hand colored 11 X 14 inch prints on my bed room walls.

Here's the sandbar:

I can't seem to get the egret photo out here.

Marni

Please you guys, the schedule this week is L&C's jaunt up the Missouri and particularly their relations with the Indians. TJ's questionable morals and Sally Hemings was last week. I thought we covered it prety good then.

Didn't get either of those, either, marnie - just the dreaded red X.

Oh, well. I guess I'm limited in my technology. Sorry! I used to be able to post pictures on a free website and then use the URLs. But now it seems people have to have a password to see them.

Harold: The Catlin paintings are spectacular!

Marni, thank you for trying to get the clickables. I would have loved seeing both the sandbar and the Egret. I feel badly, Marni. I know you spent some time trying to get the sandbar and egret. You use to post photos and all sorts of interesting items.

Harold, the paintings are just beautiful. I will spend time enjoying the site.

I am glad Lewis is concerned about Shannon's disappearance. I am glad the men found Shannon. He could have starved to death. It is a little funny. He was running ahead of the keelboat while the boat was behind him. Well, when a person gets lost, anything can happen.

The Sioux were a very important Indian tribe on the Plains. What were the names of some other big tribes on the Plain? Since each tribe had their particular customs and languages, how did one tribe converse with the other tribe?

Harold, I have read the biography with the paintings. George Catlin's life is very interesting. He gave up law in order to become a painter. He wanted to catch the Indian's way of life paintings. His way of preserving their way of life during that period. Have any of you read a full biography of George Catlin?

I had to read back through the links. I have found the answers to my above questions about the Indians.

"During the course of the expedition, contact was made with at least 55 different native cultural groups."

I think this comment from the article is interesting too. I have never about how the Indians of today might feel about the commemoration of the Lewis and Clark expedition. This is from the above article.

"Whether Lewis and Clark knew it or not, they were the "spearpoints" of an invasion of American Indian homelands in the West. Whether or not their actions were deliberate, they touched off an invasion rarely paralleled in world history, displacing entire peoples and tribal groups with Anglo settlers, backed by the U.S. Army and English land law. It is for this reason that many native peoples see no reason to be happy about the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial, and why this event should be looked upon by all as a "commemoration" rather than a "celebration."

While thinking about Shannon, it really isn't funny. Getting lost is frightening to the best of us especially someone out in an unknown wilderness. All of the trees must have looked alike to him. He could have easily picked some poisonous berries to eat. Anything could have happened. He could have discovered a wolf pack roaming around or coyotes. It had to be a traumatic experience.

It was no way Shannon could tell whether he was running forward or backward. Did he have any wilderness skills? Poor guy.

I am beginning to wonder what happened to those missing journals. Maybe Lewis didn't write for a time. Thomas Jefferson didn't say he had to make journal entries. If the journals were lost along the way, wouldn't Lewis have mentioned his feelings about losing such important papers?

Lewis did suffer with depression. Depression could easily have impacted whether he felt like writing on any given day. Besides, how does it feel to be in wilderness territory for days and days and days? Surely, there are feelings of loneliness. Loneliness can cause depression. Perhaps, this is why the men needed so much liquor. They were dealing with fears, loneliness, not knowing what to expect day or night. Being an explorer, I bet, is very, very rough.

Re: "....how did one tribe converse with the other tribe?"

One way mentioned in our book was through sign language. I wonder what their sign language was like?

Re: "....It is for this reason that many native peoples see no reason to be happy about the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial.."

This reminds me of when I was in Washington, D.C. a couple of years ago. It just happened to be during the week that the new Native American Smithsonian museum opened. There was a huge ceremony that week and 500,000 Native Americans were in D.C. for the event. I got to talking with several who were having breakfast in my hotel restaurant. One said to me that the new museum was the Indians' holocaust museum. He talked to me loudly and belligerently as though he were very angry with me and I felt very uncomfortable. His companion apologized to me for his friend.

That wasn't the first time I have felt uncomfortable around Native Americans. A few years ago I attended an annual Schemitzun, the World Championship of Native American song and dance where about 2,000 dancers and approx 65 drum groups from North America competed for awards and recognition. There were many empty seats in the arena, but some Indians sat down right in front of me and my friends even though we were the only ones sitting in the area. They stood up and stayed standing blocking our view. I finally asked them if they could please sit down so we could see. One woman said to me strongly, "These are MY people." We had to move to other seats.

Another time was when my husband and I were driving through the Navaho reservation in Arizona several years ago, visiting the Hubbell Trading Post and other sites. We stopped at a restaurant - something like a Friendly's type place. Some Native American young men were hanging around out front and they glared at us like we shouldn't be there. When we went inside, we were the only whites there. We were the only ones waiting to be seated, but they didn't wait on us for a long time. Finally, we were seated and then we didn't get waited on for a long time although it wasn't very busy. All the workers and customers were Indians. People looked at us like we shouldn't be there and we thought we should leave. Then the manager came over. He was really nice and saw to it were got dinner and he chatted with us. Apparently, it was the first Navaho-owned franchise on their reservation and they were very proud of it.

I can certainly understand why the people would have a gigantic grudge against whites after our history and what happened to them. Just look at the message Lewis and Clark were to deliver to tribes all along their trail. But I can't change the past. It does make me feel very uncomfortable, however.

We live not far from the Mashantucket Pequot Foxwoods gambling casino and the Mohegan Sun casino. Foxwoods is now the largest casino in the world. Indians are making a huge fortune off whites gambling there. It's unbelievable how much money people lose there. Sometimes I think that's how tribes are going to get back at the whites.

I hope no one takes offense at my remarks. I know this is a touchy subject. But there certainly has been a long history of abuse, lies, hatred and war.

Marni

Marni, thank you for sharing your experiences.

I just loved reading about the relationship between the Mandans and the members of the expedition during their winter there. They really got along and shared things. They danced and played music together, hunted and played sports together, and shared information about their cultures. The Mandans seemed like a lovely people, warm, open, sharing. The poor women, though. They were like work horses and slaves.

I thought it was startling to read about how the Mandan husbands (and other tribes) shared their wives and about how syphillis had spread through the tribes and was passed along to probably nearly every member of the Corps. That's a disease that is passed along from a mother to a child in the womb. I wonder what percent of the people in the tribes had venereal disease and how many died of it?

Ambrose said problems from the cold like frostbite and syphillis were the biggest health problems of the expedition. Lewis treated his men's syphillis with the mercury pills. That was the standard treatment until the development of penicillin in the 20th century. I wonder how well the mercury worked and how it worked. I wonder how many members of the expedition died from syphillis and how many from mercury poisoning? I think I read that most members of the expedition died young.

It's a bit shocking how few survival skills so many of the party have. Today they'd be rejected on the application or have to go through that Air Force survival school up in D. B. Cooper country.

Packs of wolves and coyotes aren't particularly dangerous to humans. They're not like cougars or grizzly bears. His own lack of skills was probably his biggest threat.

The Indians also communicated with one another the same way others do who speak different languages: through interpreters. There were always explorers in human cultures, and Indians in the Americas were no exception, some tribal member or members spoke more than one language. In addition, many of the Plains Indians speak related languages, or have intermediary languages.

Kleo

Kleo: I was thinking just the opposite re how many in the party had survival skills. It seemed when Shannon got lost that he was sort of the exception. Lewis and Clark were always sending men off here and there by themselves to hunt up some dinner. They'd go traipsing off on a jaunt through totally unknown territory by themselves, kill some animals for dinner, and head back to the river. Sometimes they'd be gone for days, but they'd get themselves back.

They did have some pretty exciting experiences, though. Every once in awhile, someone would nearly get killed in some sort of accident or another. I saw in one entry in Clark's journal that Lewis fell off a 300-foot cliff and saved himself from sure death at 20 feet by catching his knife on something. Yikes!

"MacKenzie* got to know Charbonneau and was not much impressed. He noted that translation was more an art form than scientific at Fort Mandan. "Sacagawea spoke a little Hidatsa," he wrote, "in which she had to converse with her husband, who was a Canadian and did not understand English. A mulatto [Jessaume], who spoke bad French and worse English, served as interpreter to the Captains, so that a single word to be understood by the party required to pass from the natives to the woman, from the woman to the husband, from the husband to the mulatto, from the mulatto to the captains." (p.187)

Alexander Mackenzie was a young Scotsman in the fur trade out of Montreal, working for the North West Company. In 1787, he was posted to a wild trading post on the west end of Lake Athabaska, in what is now northern Alberta.

This "art form" of interpretation reminds of the "telephone" game I used to play as a child, when one child whispered something to one child and they in turn passed it on to the another. It is any wonder that the captains got anywhere near the correct interpretation by this method. I've wondered why at the beginning of the expedition Lewis didn't include someone who could speak more Indian languages. But of course there are so many different dialect I guess you just couldn't find any one person. Still I would think if you were going on an expedition where you were trying to collect scientific data from the natives that you would be better prepared to understand what they are telling you.

Didn't they bring George Drouillard along as an interpreter because he knew some of the Indian languages? Then later they wanted Sacagawea because she knew....Shoshone?....of was it Hidatsa?....because she could help them get horses farther west?

It really was something like the telephone game, wasn't he! That's exactly what I was thinking hahaha!!! It's amazing they did as well as they did.

Drouillard spoke a number of Indian languages, was also a superb hunter, and a cartographer. He was killed by the Montana Blackfoot for leading the expedition through their territory when he returned to hunt there a few years later.

Sacagawea was Shoshone by birth, but kidnapped and raised by the Hidatsa. She spoke both languages but was with the expedition because she spoke Shoshone, a language that would be necessary later on. Her husband was initially the one interviewed by Lewis and Clark. Ambrose might tell us more.

Kleo

Click Here for Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs, and Conditions of the North American, Vol. 1.

Click Here for Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs and Conditions of North American Indians, Vol. 2

These are the Catlin notes on his travels among Indians . Volume 1 begins in 1833 when he went up the Missouri to the Mandan Village on the first American Fur Co steamboat to make that trip. I think this is when he painted the returning Mandan delegation landing at their village after a Washington visit. After painting Mandan scenes and portraits he continued upriver to the American Fur Co’s Fort Union at the mouth of the Yellowstone where he spent the summer painting activities and Indians there.

These books are his reports to us by letter containing much primary source information on native customs and culture. Unfortunately there is much repetitive text telling how the native Indian culture is doomed for extinction in a short time and his pictures are intended to preserve for posterity the knowledge of their Culture. It never occurred to George Catlin or to any American at the time to do anything designed to preserve the culture or even to engineer its soft landing in a future multi cultural America. He was always the observer recording the story of a dieing culture, doomed to extinction by the inevitable operation of a perceived natural law.

In Volume 2 Cattlin continues with letters on later Indian travels including an interesting sortie from Fort Gibson in Arkansas with a regiment of U.S. dragoons Commanded by a Col Dodge. Also in overall command was the famous General Leavenworth. The mission, a diplomatic one, was to travel southwest across Indian Territory into Texas to return certain Kiowa women captured by the army from the Comanche. An illness described by Catlin as bilious fever broke out and about half the men died including Col Dodge and General Leavenworth. Catin was fortunate in as much as he was late in contacting the disease and made it back to Fort Gibson where he recovered in the army infirmary there.

Catlin’s letters, available in these two books have much to tell us concerning the Indians in the 1830’s.

I couldn't agree MORE (more than you can possibly imagine!), Harold, way past time to move on.

I enjoyed reading this week's segment, realized while I was reading it how much fun I was having, LOL! Didn't I read somewhere in it about some of Lewis' journals being lost in the river? Or did I dream it, or perhaps read it elsewhere.

I will be interested to see how Ambrose describes Sacagawea's contributions. I have wondered if we haven't romanticized her involvement just a bit - we tend to look for heros and especially heroines and make them more than they are. We'll see.

Interesting that the Indian tribe - the Mandans? - never used physical punishment. If someone needed killing, they'd do that - but they never beat their men or their children. It just occurred to me that we no longer use physical punishment as part of our laws, though of course that doesn't stop men from being others. I'm remembering older civilizations where hands, etc. were cut off for punishments, ugg.

I went looking for more information on the 'missing' Lewis journals and stumbled over this amazing site:

http://lewisandclarkjournals.unl.edu/introduction.general.html

There's so much there I didn't have time to read it all just yet, but it has a wonderful discussion on the journals, when they were written, what state they were in, etc.

There is no hard evidence that the crew received and specific survival training, yet it would seem that some rudimentary instruction like what to do if you become separated from the party would have been mentioned. Fortunately because of the general long frontier experience of most of the crew they seem to have been rather well prepared.

The best example of the need for survival training is the Experience of George Shannon. He was only 18 years old, the youngest of the group. He enjoyed the high respect of both Captains. Some authorities have mentioned that Shannon was the only member of the crew that the two captains would have been comfortable with in a social situation. Also the Captains designated him to serve as leader of his squad on the indisposition of its sergeant.

On Aug 26th Shannon was sent to retrieve the horses that had strayed during the night. He found the horses and thinking the boats were upriver he headed in that direction. Apparently he had begun his mission without balls for his rifle. As a result he nearly starved to death, as it was more than two weeks before the party caught up with him.

His starting out with out rifle balls does not speak well for the level of survival training provided, The fact that he survived does speak well for the high general woodsman competence of the crew,

Click Here for a bio Sketch of George Shannon,

For additional information about Sacagawea, and discussion of how Shoshone women were held in low esteem, please see this link. This may give information which is perhaps from a different viewpoint than that of Ambrose.
Sacagawea

Sacagawea's time begins next week when she joins the Expedition as it leaves the winter Camp at Fort Mandan and particularly in the following weeks as her value to the expedition becomes apparent.

This week we have much to talk about. How about the sergeants and other members of the company? How about Private Whitehouse, the only private to keep a journal? Let us talk more about tribes met. Which one was first? Why were there no meetings in June and July and so few in August.? What was the tribe the expedition met in Oct 1804? What was its health situation and how was it culturally different from the earlier tribes? In particular talk about the several breaches of Army rules and regulation and the punishment. What was the opinion of the Indians of the flogging incident?

I love reading about the new sightings of birds and other animals along the way. Lewis mentions finding a bird from the goatsucker family. The footnote calls this bird a poorwill related to the whipporwill. I would like to know what a poorwill looks like. Are there any around today? Have the poorwills become extinct? Did Audubon mention the poorwill?

Private Cruzette met his first grizzly bear. He called it a white bear. I didn't understand why he called it a white bear. After all, it wasn't a polar bear. Seeing a grizzly bear stand up on his two feet is a very frightening sight. I don't think we are told whether the grizzly tried to attack. Clark did say his behavior was "ferocious." The bear must have tried to attack.

A very few months ago a family, a mother, daughter and son were camping in the Smokies. A grizzly attacked. The little girl died. The mother and son lived. Mary Z might remember this story being in our news.

The Arikara people, I believe, are the first people met by the team. These people are farmers. The Arikara trade with the Sioux. Of great help to the Lewis and Clark team is a man named Joseph Gravelines. He lives with the Arikaras. He has been living there for thirteen years. Do we know anything about Joseph Gravelines? Is he from another tribe of Indians? His first name is English. The second name sounds like a Indian tribal name. Is he part English and part Indian?

Someone posted a beautiful site for Alexander Mackenzie. I think Harold posted it. I am going to look in my bookmarks or do a search since we have been talking Alexander Mackenzie.

I went to A. Mackenzie site. I couldn't get in. I think the site is down. Anyway, it's a beautiful site.

York is brought along to visit the Arikara villages. He is well liked although the Indians have never seen a black man. The Arikara women are offered to the team and York. I can see why the Veneral disease is rampant among the tribe. What did the Indians use for medicine? I can't remember whether Ben Rush gave any advice to Lewis about what to do about a Veneral disease. Veneral disease is contagious and could bring down the whole team of men. Marni gave a post about smallpox and Veneral disease.

I also don't like the fact that women are used in such a way. The Arikara women are being used as prostitutes by their own men. I would love to know the name of the first woman who spoke out against this practice. I am sure many women didn't want to be intimate with these strange men. There had to be many children conceived. Did the Indians know of a herb useful in birth control?

Throughout history there is so much use and misuse of sex. Most of the pain falling upon the women because no one listened to her words.

Yes, Hats, there was a bear attack this spring in the Smoky Mountains - but not a grizzly bear. We don't have them in this part of the country. It was a black bear - the kind that is native to the eastern US. As I understand it, the bears (which are really brown) are called grizzly because of the gray hair on their neck humps. I guess this could shine whitish in the sun, hence calling it a "white bear".

It was always my impression that the venereal diseases were brought here by the Europeans, and passed to the Native Americans, who then returned the "favor". Guess that's one we'll never know the absolute answer to.

Sorry to have jumped ahead, Harold.

Actually the breaches of army rules are not a major point of the book, IMHO.
I and perhaps others are much more interested in the cultures of the Indians (not Native Americans, please) and there have already been many links given to some of that information, although perhaps not all are in the headers.

Harold ~ Could you please put that link on Sacagawea up in the header next week? I see some have already looked at it.

When Newman and a man named Reed get together, there is trouble. Bad words are spoken against the men and the expedition. Reed had already been punished. Finally, Reed is punished too. Reed is punished by flogging. This is very upsetting to the Indian who claim not to beat their children.

How do the Indians punish rebellious Indians in their tribes?

I believe Scamper already talked about flogging.

I was surprised to see how much the army of the time used flogging. It was like reading about the British Navy. And it actually sounds as though L&C were more lax in this than other army units. I wonder when they stopped the practice of flogging in the U.S. Army?

There was one guy in the expedition who was punished with 400 lashes on his bare back - over 4 days, 100 per day, I think it was. He lived. I can't imagine. I wonder what L&C used to flog offenders?

I guess they had to maintain order and protect the Corps. Some of the most heinous punishable crimes were falling asleep while on guard duty, or leaving the post during guard duty. It exposed the others to attack and jeopardized their lives.

I got sort of a chuckle out of one incident. One of the soldiers came back to Fort Mandan late and snuck in by climbing over the palisade. An Indian saw him and decided to do the same thing. He was caught. The soldier was in big trouble and was to be flogged with 75 lashes. I think L&C forgave him before he was whipped.

I read about grizzly bears. Apparently, the word "grizzly" comes from the word "grizzled" which means partly gray or streaked with gray. Grizzly bears' "guard hairs are often pale in color at the tips; hence the name 'grizzly.'" (The guard hairs are the outer hairs as opposed to the underfur.)

There used to be about 50,000 grizzly bears between the Pacific and the Plains. Today there are about 1200 to 1400 in the wild. Males weigh 400 to 600 pounds. (Yikes.)

The Indians were afraid of grizzly bears and with good reason. They were very hard to kill. Apparently, the Corps of Discovery didn't take the Indians too seriously until they had their own experiences with these bears on their journey. There are some very exciting encounters with grizzly bears described in our book. Several members of the expedition came very close to being killed by grizzlies. They could shoot again and again at a grizzly without being able to bring it down.

Here's info about the grizzly bear. Click on the Grizzly Photo Gallery for some wonderful photos of grizzly bears. The 17th photo down from the top shows a wonderful grizzled look - maybe that's why L&C called them "white bears."

http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/mammals/grizzly/

I'm trying out displaying a photo. This is a test.

Oh, it worked! You can see how white the grizzly looks.

Marni

Here's the photo of the sandbar I shot for Hats - it's in the Farmington River in CT. See the white? You can see why those on the keelboat would have to be careful:

Marni

Hats, I don't know about contraceptives but abortifactants are familiar herbs in herbal.

Grizzly bears are not only hard to kill, they are dangerously unpredictable in their behavior. Hunters that I know consider them to be the most dangerous predator in the Americas, many consider them, along with polar bears, to be the most dangerous predators for humans in the world, because of the difficulty of seeing them in their territory versus lions, crocodiles and hippos.

Werner Herzog did a film of the life of that idiot, Timothy Treadwell, who got himself and his girlfriend killed by the grizzlies in Alaska. This got the bears killed and made their territory vastly unsafer for all humans because he familiarized the bears with human and took away some natural fear of humans. This last point, natural fear of humans, seems generally to be more lacking in grizzly bears than in other animals that eat humans.

Great picture of a sandbar, Marni. It really made me think of them on a river.

Kleo

Thanks, Kleo. I couldn't bring myself to see that Treadwill film. What a fool.

Herzog is interesting as a documentarian, though. I would not have seen a movie about Treadwell done by anyone else. Herzog, unlike Michael Moore, assumes his audience is intelligent enough to figure out the truth and might even disagree with Herzog's interpretation of the truth. He tends to show what is.

Black bears are dangerous animals, but a human may come out of an attack alive, and attacks are rare and somewhat controllable compared to grizzlies. The expedition had surely heard tales of grizzlies before they left, yet I expect their encounters were beyond their expectations. What would they have thought of Timothy Treadwell? Same thing I do, I expect.

We live in a world where we've removed the danger from living (the First World at least) that used to face humans regularly. Danger from disease, infection, wild animals. So now, some humans artificially seek the adrenaline rush of real danger with things like skiing out of helicopters, climbing Mt. Everest. When faced with real situations, like losing money to try to save a man's life on Mt. Everest, the modern human tends to be found wanting.

I often wonder, while reading a book like this, what they would have thought of our world. The most interesting aspect of time travel in fiction, to me, is speculating how the past would react to the future, not vice versa.

Kleo

Marni thanks for showing the sandbar. The sandbar, I can see now, would definitely cause trouble. What a beautiful area! Kleo I like your turnabout for time travel.

I would think the future would be quite overwhelming to an unsuspecting person from the past.

I suppose the Native Americans faced something like that, in a way, when the Europeans appeared on the scene with their "guns, germs, and steel" and horses and ships etc.

Did Lewis and Clark meet Daniel Boone?

"In 1799, with his son Daniel Morgan Boone, he moved to Missouri, which was at the time, still part of the Louisiana Territory under Spanish control. On June 11, 1800 Boone was appointed a judicial magistrate and commandant of the Femme Osage region. He held this position until the Louisiana Territory became part of the United States at which time Daniel Boone lost all of his land titles. Boone's land claims were later restored by the United States Congress in 1814."

"The next day, May 25, the expedition passed La Charette, the last settlement of whites on the river. French and American settlers had lived there for four or five years; Daniel Boone would move their in 1805. The site is gone now, washed away by the river. Clark recorded, "The people at this Village is pore, houses Small, they Sent us milk & eggs to eat." (p. 144)

Did Lewis and Clark meet Daniel Boone? Did they shake hands? Did Boone offer advice to Lewis and Clark?

I would say that if Lewis and Clark actually met Boone that they would have recorded the experience at some point. But if I'm not mistaken it looks like Boone missed them. But what a moment that could have been. Can't you just see the young Lewis shaking hands with one of the most famous fontiersman in American history. Boone would have been close to 70 years old at the time Lewis and Lark were in Missouri. Boone died on September 26, 1820 in Femme Osage Creek, St. Charles County, Missouri.

The smallpox epidemics which swept through the Indian tribes are mentioned several places in this week's reading.
The following link includes the history of these infections in North America, as well as a discussion of the sources of the virus and the extent of the early epidemics.
The L&C encounter with some of the Western tribes, which we will soon read about, is mentioned, when you scoll down through several pages.

Smallpox epidemics

Regarding the May 23rd stop at the Boone settlement Ambrose too appears to agree that no actual L&C/Daniel Boone meeting actually occured. He thinks that Clark would have mentioned it with his entry for the day had it occurred. Amabrose notes that Lewis did not make a diary entry for that day. The captains certainly did meet the other settlers at the Boone settlement and recived fresh supplies from them. Perhaps old Daniel Boone was away hunting?

Sergenats Ordway, Floyd and Gass do not mention the Boone Settlement in their journsls; only Pvt Whitehouse mentions it with the following entry:

We embarked this morning at 6 oCloch having fair wedather, and proceeded on very well, and passed some Plantations, which is called Boons settlement lying on the North sice of the River. This settlement was made by Colonel Daniel Boone, the person who first discover'd Kentucky, & who was residing at this pllace, with a number of his family and friends.

I can't imagine any explorer or expedition meeting Daniel Boone and not mentioning it.

Kleo

Thank you Mippy for the link concerning smallpox among the Indians. The disease always seemed to run ahead to the settlements my quite a few years. Also it would repeat ever few years thereafter. In 1804 when the Expedition passed up the Missouri though the Tribes has been hit over the preceding half century, they were still viable societies. Even in 1833 when the first American Steam boat made it up to the Yellowstone though further reduced they were still viable societies. A few years after that some of them had ceased to exist as viable social groups.

It appears to me that it was the more sedimentary agricultural cultures who suffered the greatest from the European disease. Perhaps this would follow that it was in these villages where the European traders of missionaries tended to congregate. In any case on the Missouri it was the more sedimentary Mandans who disappeared as a tribe while the Sioux survive to this day; likewise in Texas by the mid 19th century the sedimentary Caddos are virtually gone while the nomadic Comanche and Kiowa survive.

I found an article in the “army Lawyer” June 2003

On Page one the Lead article is entitled “Never Have So Many Been Punished So Much by So Few.” This came up in a google search on the string “Flogging In the U.S. Army.” The Article is an examination of the Constitutionality of the new special court Martial rules. I was not inclined to read it in its entirety, but I found on page six references to the fact that flogging was abolished in the U.S. Navy in 1850. Apparently during the 18th and early 19th century confinement for military offenses was not authorized. Flogging (or I suppose Hanging) were the customary authorized punishment. In any case flogging seems to have survived in the U.S. Navy until it was abolished in 1850.

Did you notice that Lewis brought cowpox vaccine with his supplies and vaccinated his men against smallpox before they set out? He planned to carry it up to vaccinate the Indians. There was something in our book about how he could tell when the vaccine no longer was effective because the person vaccinated wouldn't get the sore/scab resulting from being scratched. Sounds like Lewis had ordered more of the vaccine before they headed up river.

I was surprised to see that Lewis was already using the cowpox vaccine rather than the earlier smallpox vaccine. I think Edward Jenner, who discovered it, only first published works about it around 1798 or so. I know during the American Revolution they were using smallpox vaccine, which sometimes killed the patient and was fairly dangerous, whereas the later cowpox vaccine was much safer and just as effective.

During the first three months, the main source of fresh meat sustaining the expedition was deer. It was not unusual for the enlisted men journals to record as may as eight deer bagged in a single day.

The first buffalo was not sighted until June 28 as the expedition was passing the mouth of the Kansas River some 366 Miles above the Mississippi. That first buffalo sighting was this far above the settlements is not surprising. That animal had a natural aversion to the settlements; as soon as they appeared they kept a wide buffer between them and the settlements in this case some 366 miles.

It was almost two months later before an expedition hunter killed their first buffalo on August 23rd. Sergeant Ordway’s Journal notes, “Jo Fields came to the boat (and) informed us that he had killed a Bull Buffalo. Capt. Lewis & myself & 10 more of the party went out Bucherd & Brought it to the Boat.” Thereafter buffalo became an increasing portion of the men’s diet until by the fall and winter and the following spring and summer, it was near 100 percent. The men greatly miss it when that reached the Mountains the western limit of its range

Mc McCullough tells us in his John Adams Biography that Abigail had the children vaccinated during the Revolutionary War years while John was in Europe. Would that have been with the real Smallpox virus? That does sound scary; surely it must have been in a dead or greatly weakened state? I guess I guess I havet thought the original vaccine was by Pasteur and it was cowpox?

Several of the enlisted men’s Journals note that on July 4th a snake bit Joseph Field on his foot. Sergeant Gass adds, “not dangerously.” That does not preclude the fact that it may well have been a rattlesnake bite. Based on my experience with my neighbor’s, and my dogs I know all rattlesnake bights are not equal. It’s not unusual for the injected poison to be insufficient to do much damage. My dog Jazz was well in a week; it took four full months for Bum to recover from his bite.

On July 4 th the expedition celebrated the holliday by firing the swivel gun in the morning and again in the evening. Also each man received a gill of whiskey.

Lewis and Clark started out on this journey together with others in the team. It is interesting to read that they did not expect to return together, one would, they hoped, return by sea and the other man would return by the route taken in the beginning of their journey.

I read this somewhere in one of the chapters. I will try to find the place where I read it.

"I think it more than probable that Capt. Lewis or myself will return by sea, the other by the same rout we proceed."

Harold did you have to take Jazz to a vet?

Marni thanks for mentioning Edward Jenner. I also thought of Pasteur.

Jefferson also wanted the men to claim Oregon. At this time was Oregon occupied by the French or Britain? Oregon must have been huge territory. It is described as "Oregon country." Could someone give a little information about Oregon during the Lewis and Clark expedition?

I do think of Oregon as beautiful country. I would love to go there for a visit.

Since we are still discussing smallpox vacination, a link about Edward Jenner follows. The procedure remained controversial throughout the 19th century. As we may recall from the news, even today some parents are afraid of other kinds of inoculations for infants and young children.
Jenner

Mippy thank you.

It is easy to sit at home reading about the expedition. These men really were suffering: dysentery, boils, etc. The water was not clean. The surface of the water was full of scum and mud. Lewis and or Clark told the men to dip below the surface of water in that way not gathering so much mud. I can not imagine eating hominy and lard. Then, at times, it was cold. No vegetables. How many men died just due to plain old illness?

Hats, the incredible thing is that NONE of them died, except for the one (whose name escapes me) who died from what was possibly appendicitis. (Oops, I hope I'm not giving away the end of the story.)

Mary Z that is amazing. I wondered how many died because of one reason or another. I thought some would have been murdered by the Indians.

"The Oregon Territory is the name applied both to the unorganized Oregon Country claimed by both the United States and Britain, as well as to the organized U.S. territory from from it that existed between 1848 and 1859.

The Territory of Oregon was organized on August 14, 1848 by Act of Congress out of the U.S. portion of the Oregon Country below the 49th parallel. It originally included all of the present-day states of Idaho, Oregon and Washington as well as Montana, west of the Continental Divide, and Wyoming, west of the Continental Divide and north of the 42nd parallel - the northern border of the Mexican Cession."

What If:

"Up the bank, twenty yards from Clark and the pirogue, some warriors saw Lewis preparing the swivel gun and began to back away, but others strung their bows and took out their quivers, or began to cock their shotguns.

It was a dramatic moment. Had Lewis cried "Fire!" and touched his lighted taper to the fuse of the swivel gun, the whole history of North America might have changed. Here is one possible scenario:

The cannon roared, spitting out sixteen musket balls. The blunderbusses roared, spitting out buckshot. The muskets roared, spitting out aimed lead bullets. Sioux warriors were mowed down in the dozens.

But there were still hundreds of warriors on the bank, and even as the smoke lifted they filled the air with arrows, and kept them coming, for they could reload and fire at a much faster pace than the American soldiers. Lewis and Clark, prime targets, went down. With the captains incapacitated or dead, Sergeant Ordway rallied the survivors, got into the keelboat, pushed off and retreated down river."

I am always fascinated by "what if" scenarios. With Lewis and Clark dead how long do you think Jefferson or another president would have waited before they sent out another expedition. Or would they have done so at all. Perhaps the federalists would have convinced Congress that there was no reason to explore west of the Mississippi because there was in fact only wild Indians and wilderness and the land was not fit for the white settler. Or would the United States have retaliated against the Sioux and tried to exterminate the Indians sooner than they did. And what scientific information would we have lost if there were no expeditions to the Pacific Northwest. There are all sorts of fascinating "what if" scenarios to think about.

I like the "what if" questions too. I have also been thinking about Jefferson not wanting Lewis to travel off the beaten path down or up the Kansas River. Much later Kansas is called "Bloody Kansas." I hope my facts are remembered correctly. Kansas is involved deeply in the free slave state question at that time. If Lewis would have travelled the Kansas River during his trek, what would he have seen? Just Indian tribes? Were the settlers in any battles with themselves at this time?

Harold: I read somewhere that the smallpox vaccine was invented in Turkey and the wife of the British ambassador to Turkey brought back the information and spent the rest of her life touring and speaking to pursuade people to get inocculated against smallpox.

The smallpox vaccine was quite dangerous because a number of people accually caught severe smallpox from it and died. However, many more made it through the innoculation period unscathed and were then protected forever from smallpox.

As you could see from Mippy's link, Jenner's cowpox vaccine info wasn't published until 1798, way after the Revolution.

I'll see if I can find anything about this on the web.....Ahah! Here's something:

"The fall of smallpox began with the realization that survivors of the disease were immune for the rest of their lives. This led to the practice of variolation - a process of exposing a healthy person to infected material from a person with smallpox in the hopes of producing a mild disease that provided immunity from further infection. The first written account of variolation describes a Buddhist nun practicing around 1022 to 1063 AD. She would grind up scabs taken from a person infected with smallpox into a powder, and then blow it into the nostrils of a non-immune person. By the 1700's, this method of variolation was common practice in China, India, and Turkey. In the late 1700's European physicians used this and other methods of variolation, but reported "devastating" results in some cases. Overall, 2% to 3% of people who were variolated died of smallpox, but this practice decreased the total number of smallpox fatalities by 10-fold.

The next step towards the eradication of smallpox occurred with the observation by English physician, Edward Jenner, that milkmaids who developed cowpox, a less serious disease, did not develop the deadly smallpox. In 1796, Jenner took the fluid from a cowpox pustule on a dairymaid's hand and inoculated an 8-year-old boy. Six weeks later, he exposed the boy to smallpox, and the boy did not develop any symptoms. Jenner coined the term "vaccine" from the word "vaca" which means "cow" in Latin. His work was initially criticized, but soon was rapidly accepted and adopted. By 1800 about 100,000 people had been vaccinated worldwide."

http://dermatology.about.com/cs/smallpox/a/smallpoxhx.htm

Interesting to see that Jenner created the word "vaccine" came from the Latin "vaca" for "cow."

Marni thank you for all the research about the smallpox, Edward Jenner and the link.

"The fall of smallpox began with the realization that survivors of the disease were immune for the rest of their lives."

Does this mean if the person survived, he or she would not get smallpox again? In this way is it different from Malaria?

Hats: Yup. Once you had smallpox and lived through it, you'd never get it again.

I am just reading a biography about Andrew Jackson. He and a brother were captured and imprisoned by the British during the American Revolution - Jackson was 15 years old. They both caught smallpox in the prison. His brother died from it but Andrew survived. However, he was never able to have children. The author speculates that possibly he became sterile from smallpox. I wonder if that is one of the effects of the disease? George Washington got smallpox and apparently was sterile.

That's an interesting point. I wonder if smallpox could cause a person to become sterilized? I know it's off topic. I didn't know Andrew Jackson was imprisoned by the British. Sounds like a good book.

century. I got the book from the college library, they had it because he has a lot about New Jersey, Philadelphia and NYC. It's very interesting. It's called "Under their Vine and Fig Tree." Metchie Budka translated and edited it for his thesis at Harvard and the New Jersey Historical Society published it as part of their collections. I'll give you a taste of it later, his very descriptive of everyday life.......jean

Yes, sterility was a side effect of smallpox in men. I think, like some other diseases, young men and teenage men might suffer the worst from infection--German Measles, Measles and Chicken pox are all more dangerous to young adult and subadult males.

Blindness is the better known catastrophic effect of smallpox for those who survive.

Kleo

In 1796, Jenner took the fluid from a cowpox pustule on a dairymaid's hand and inoculated an 8-year-old boy. Six weeks later, he exposed the boy to smallpox, and the boy did not develop any symptoms

Jenners testing methods would never get FDA approval today

Hats, indeed Jazz was immediately taken to the vet. I had a guilty conscious because her reckless charge save me from the snakebite. The vet did not have the antivenin in stock but he administered a steroid drug stock that was an anti inflammatory. Jazz was very lucky; the snake did not inject much poison. She was coplpetely healed in a week. .

Hats; up until the time of Lewis and Clark European and North American presence in Oregon was by the visits of whaling ships. As Scrawler said both England and the U.S claimed the territory. Prior to L&C England’s claim was a strong one. I have a book about one American who was shipwrecked near there about the time of L&C. It was on one of these ships that the Captains considered as a return option. I will say more on this subject in in three weeks when it comes up on our discussion schedule.

Regarding drinking water I suspect too much of the men’s drinking water was scooped up from the Missouri (Ole Muddy). Here is a comment from the Ordway Journal that seems to confirm this or at least it shows he (Ordway) could appreciate a good clean cool swig of water when it was available. It was on June 28, 1804 when Ordway wrote:

I went out hunting 2 ½ miles & passed a fine Spring Running from under the hills. I drank hearty of the water & found it the best & coolest I have seen in the country.

It was Sergeant Floyd who died on August 20, 1804, which is on this week’s schedule. This event was the only death suffered by the expedition. As you said it was probably appendicitis.

It seems to have come on him quite suddenly; the last entry he made in his Journal was on August 18 and he made no mention of illness. All three of the enlisted men’s journals that I have, report that he was very ill on Aug 19th. They all describe his illness as the “cholick.” Lewis bled him and no doubt administered Rushes thunderbolt pill neither of which could have helped him.

Harold I am glad you are going to talk more about Oregon. I find the subject very interesting. Scrawler thank you for your input too.

Mabel looking forward to hearing from you.

Ann I hope you are improving.

First, I missed so much on my first reading. I would also like to say how much I am enjoying our journey.

I didn't connect whaling boats with Oregon. I always connect whaling ships with the New England states. Anyway, on the second reading of the chapters I did notice that the Kansas River and Missouri River is weighed by Clark. The Missouri is much heavier. No wonder the name "Ole Muddy." Clark found the water in the Kansas River untasty too. Well, is the Mississippi River a bit muddy too? How does it compare in taste to the other two rivers?

The men have named two creeks. Clark named one creek Cupboard Creek. While Lewis named another creek the Independence. It reminds me of the men giving names while doing space travel.

--- both Captains and ten men (including Sergeant Ordway) took the white pirogue back down the river a few miles to hike to Spirit mound (sometimes called Little People Mound). Like the tourists that they were, they “walked hard 3 hours from the Missouri to git to the hill (called) little people.” The party climbed the mound for a great view of the surrounding countryside including a great flock of birds and several “gangs” of distant buffalo. Ordway seemed a bit disappointed in writing, “(We ---) found none of the little people ther.” The sun was setting when the party returned to the Missouri. Ordway again waxed nostalgic writing, “(we) walked the whole day in the Beautiful prairie.”

I note that both Captains left the main group to take this excursion to the mound. That night the excursion party camped still separated from the main party that set off up stream on their own the next morning. It was the next evening before the Captains and the excursion party caught up with the main group. I think this was the first incidence when at least one of the captains was not present with the main group overnight.

On the 25th, while the excursion group was away the main party caught 9 large catfish, 5 of them very large. Pvt. Whitehouse defines “very large” as over 100 lbs.

The following is a copy of a post I made during the 1998 discussion of this book::

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.

I must have got this from the Ambrose Book. Fortunately with in a few weeks they were in an area where fresh venison was most often available. It was September before they could count on a regular supply of buffalo.

is that it makes you grateful for what we have at the moment. I've been kevetching about my low-fat, low-salt, low-chlorestoral diet and how bored i am w/ it.......hahahaha........hominy, salt pork, corn meal, or that beans and vegatable soup for days and days and days makes my diet sound like a banquet.........

I remember when i read this book a few years ago that i was disturbed by SA frequently saying, very definitely, that L&C were 'the first white men" at various parts of the trek. I wondered at the time if he could say that quite so assuredly and whether he might more correctly have said "first white-men that we know about." It just seems to me that there may have been trappers, especially French trappers, or adventurers, who were not literate, who may have been in those parts before L&C. As a prominent historian, who people take literally, i felt he needed to be more accurate in his statements.......but maybe i'm being too picky about that......

After weeks of very hot temperatures, I'm reading UC on my patio in low-80 degree temps and a beautiful breeze, it's just a perfect Saturday morning for reading in the backyard, wish you could all join me for our discussion and a cuppa..........jean

"On October 13, Clark and Lewis were confronted with a severe disciplinary problem. Former Private Moses Reed, the erstwhile deserter, was a grousing, malcontented soldier who wanted to poison the mind of at least one member of the expedition. He had been picking on Private John Newman, agitating him about "those" captains and how unfair they were and how arbritary and worse.

Newman lashed out at the captains, who had him and Reed arrested. Reed was beyond the power to punish, but Newman was subject to the articles of war. The captains convened a court-martial, with Clark as president and Sgt. Ordway head of the court.

Lewis read the charge, that Newman had "uttered repeated expressions of a highly criminal and mutinous nature; the same having a tendency not only to destroy every principle of military discipline, but also to alienate the affections of the individuals composing this Detachment to their officers, and disaffect them to the service for which they have been sacredly and solemnly engaged.

Newman pleaded, "Not Guilty!" Evidence was presented; Newman made his defense. Whatever Newman said, his peers rejected. The ten men on the court "are unanimously of pinion that the prisoner John Newman is guilty of every part of the charge exhibited against him."

The sentence was seventy-five lashes on the bare back and "to be discarded from the permanent party engaged for North Western discovery." Not dismissed, not discharged, but discarded.

The captains approved the sentence and set noon the next day for the lashing. They further ordered that Newman join the Frenchmen in the canoes as a laboring hand." (p. 181-182)

"Warning against the excessive use of flogging were written as early as 1797 by Captain Thomas Truxtun and in 1808 by Surgeon Edward Cutbursh. A proposal to abolish flogging was first introduced in Congress in 1820 by Representative Foot, but it was unsuccessful.

In 1840 William M. Murrell published a book entitled "Cruise of the Frigate Columbia Around the World." In it he recounts how men received twelve lashes for trivial offences such as having dirty pots or failing to close the door of a toilet. He himself received twelve lashes for failing to properly mark a piece of clothing and for accidently spilling ink on the deck.

In the year 1840 also saw the publication of Richard Henry Dana's "Two Years Before the Mast," in which he recounted his experience as a merchant sailor in the brig "Pilgrim. He presented a description of a terrible flogging in the ship in 1839 and of living under tyranny in the ship.

In the public mind, especially in the North, the practice of flogging was often associated with the treatment of convicts and slaves, and it was believed to be contrary to the democratic spirit of the times and the ideals of the United States.

In March 1850 Herman Melville's novel, "White-Jacket, or The World in a Man-of-War" was published. It contained a chapter on flogging and others on its evil effects and unlawful use. He called for its abolition. Some naval officers took exception to Melville's remarks and wrote rebuttals, a few of which were published in newspapers or pamphlets."

Definition of "flog": To punish by striking with the cat-o'nine tails. This punishment is now forbidden in our [US Navy] service, though quite common in some others, particularly the Russian.

Definition of "Cat o' Nine Tails: An instrument formerly used for flogging in the [US Navy]. It consisted of nine pieces of cord, with three knots in each, fixed on a short piece of thick rope as a handle. With this the offender was flogged on the bare back."~ http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/flogging.htm

Although the above articles were from "Navy Department Library" and discussed naval history, you can get some idea of what Newman must have gone through and the later controversy that adventually brought an end to the use of flogging in the military.

I guess the first question I have is why couldn't the captains touch Reed, since he to me was the agitator of the whole thing. Newman seems to simply "succumbs" to the poison that Reed was feeding him. I understand that Lewis and Clark had too have some type of military discipline, but don't you think 75 lashes was to strong a punishment for what Newman did.

Hadn't Moses Reed already been tried for desertion and dismissed from the military? He could have been charged by a civilian court, not by a military court-martial. Even 70 years later they still had to wait for a hanging judge to charge civilians.

As to 75 lashes? I think 1 was inhuman. However, it was probably a bit light for the times for the charges he was found guilty of. I was reading a book in BN about flogging and other punishments during the Civil War. Moses Reed got off lightly.

I wonder, too, about the "first white man" as the French fur traders travelled deeply into the northern part of the United States. I suspect this is from the diaries, though, and the word is from whatever Indian tribes they met.

On the West Coast, Oregon, for example, it was not just whales, but also fur. maybe. The Russians may have been trading other furs in the area. I'm not actually certain about the timing of the Russian exploitation of sea otters and seals and sea lions of this area, though.

Kleo

It is mentioned by Ambrose that slaveholders were use to the idea of flogging since it was one of the ways used to punish slaves.

Oh, I had not thought of that, or connected the two, as Lewis was a slave owner flogging humans would not have been out of the ordinary for him. I think it was stopped some time after the civil war for soldiers because of all the stories that came out of the Civil War about the unjust punishments meted out so arbitrarily. Just so many reasons to be glad to be born so late in the modern era.

The book I had been reading about Civil War punishments is Hardtack and Coffee: The Unwritten Story of Army Life by John D. Billings with illustrations by Charles W. Reed.

Kleo

Kleo I will write down that title. I think you mentioned another title I wrote down. I hope it is not the same title. I am going to write it down again.

I suppose this was always salt pork, or how would it be kept eatable?

Can you tell i'm obessed w/ food at the moment? Just mixed up a cucumber and onion salad, you know the one w/ sugar and vinegar. Can't get much more non-fat, etc than that, but it's also delicious.

It seems to me that there had to a kind of physical punishment for discipline, there was no way to isolate/jail someone who misbehaved, other than sending them back, but then they would be down a man, or two. Flogging, or that much flogging, does seem excessive, but we live in different times when any physical punishement is not as accepted. I can't think of anything else that might work to inhibit others in their bad behavior........jean

Hats, I did not mention the title before because I could not remember it. This book is in BN remainder shelves, good price.

Jean, the book does mention an alternative: icky duties. A time honored military tradition, that one--if one messes up, one gets to pull latrine duty, heavy labor duty, whatever those who toe the line would least like to do.

The book does make me think a lot about the food they eat on the journey, its lack of variety in the midst of plenty, all the available plants and river fish.

I make costumes sometimes for reenactors. One of the fringe groups is survivalists who want to authentically survive like a fur trapper or something. Even Lewis went hungry without recourse to meat and foods of his times. They don't seem really, other than the hunting, to be able to live off the land.

Microwave and can-opener,

Kleo

If the men wanted to desert, it wasn't like being in the army was it? Going on an expedition seems like it should have been like a voluntary decision. I suppose it's different because you are serving the government.

I can't remember. Did Benjamin Rush give any nutritional advice to the men?

Hats, most of the men ARE in the military. Those in the military are subject to military laws, so it's not just like it, it IS deserting from the army. It may have been voluntary to join, but once joined to it, the expedition IS their military unit.

Kleo

I find myself, also, losing track of the overall picture, when in the details of this book. I suspect this is a book one could read many ways, different times, and take away completely different things.

Kleo

On Aug 18th. a court martial was held for Pvt. Moses B. Reed, who had deserted and was tracked down, captured and returned to camp. He was expelled from the permanent party and ordered to return to St. Louis from the Mandan villages in the spring - in addition, he had to run the gauntlet four times through.

Running the Gauntlet involved lining the entire crew up in two lines about 4 feet a part each with a stout stick The Prisoner ran as fast as he could in the lane between the two rows, as each man swatted him with his stick as he ran by. Reed had to repeat 4 times. Believe it or not when I was 10 years old I became a member of a Boy Scout preparatory organization known as the Junior Yanks of America, First Texas Regiment. For some minor violation of their strict disciplinary code, I ran the gauntlet several times at camp that summer.

Reed was certainly involved in instigating the mutinous talk that brought about the Oct 13th Court Martial of Pvt. John Newman but only Newman was tried. The only thing I can think of that would exempt Reed from further prosecution was the previous verdict expelling Reed from the permanent party. Perhaps Lewis could have made Reed’s expulsion retroactive to his return to St Louis thereby leaving his bare back exposed for further lashings.

In any case, Newman was found guilty in an Oct 13th Court Martial and sentenced to 75 lashes on the bare back and banishment from the permanent party. Further, he was condemned to perform only menial tasks and no soldierly duties like standing guard from this point onward.. I suspect this lashing was more severe than the gauntlet.

Sergeant Ordway does not say much in his journal about this trial. On Oct 13th he writes , “we halted a court Martial was held which detained us for 2 hours. We then proceeded on.” On the next day he added we halted at 12 oClock on a Sand bar the proceeding of the Court Martial was read & put in to Execution. Newman is never mentioned by name.

This was the last Court Martial of the expedition.

Kleo I agree with you. I would love to read this book again with a different focus. There is so much to become interested in. I would love to just focus on the flora and fauna. Then, I would like to focus on medical angle, the Indians, etc. I would like to read the journals.

Haroldreading about the expedition this time, are you interested in an angle different from your past readings of the expedition?

"The buffalo which the Mandans hunted played an important part in Mandans rituals; calling the buffalo near to the village being one of the main objectives of the Okipa ceremony at the beginning of each summer. In addition to eating the flesh, the Mandans used all remaining parts of the buffalo, so nothing went to waste. The hides were used for buffalo-fur robes or were tanned, and the leather used for clothing and other uses. The Mandans were known for their painted buffalo hides that often recorded historic events. The bones would be carved into items such as needles and fish hooks. Bones were also used in farming, such as the scapula, which was used as a hoe-like device for breaking the soil."

"On December 7, a Mandans chief came to the fort to report that there were great numbers of buffalo on the hills a couple of miles or so away from the river. The chief offered horses for the soldiers and asked if the Americans would like to join the Mandans on a hunt.

Lewis gathered a party of fifteen men and, on the borrowed Mandans horses, went out to join the hunt. The Indians as riders put the Americans in the shade, even Americans from Virginia. Riding bareback at break neck speed chasing the fleeing buffalo, they could guide their horses with their knees, leaving their hands free to shoot their arrows, which they did with such force that often an arrow would go right through the buffalo. Squaws came after, to butcher the animal before the wolves could get to the carcass.

Using rifles, Lewis and his men killed eleven buffalo that day. He enjoyed it so much he stayed out all night, apparently sleeping in a buffalo robe in below-zero weather. The next day, the Americans killed nine more buffalo. They ate only the tongues, the wolves got the rest. "We lived on the fat of the land," MacKenzie wrote. "Hunting and eating were the order of the day." (p.190)

I once read somewhere that the Native Americans were the first environmentalists and seeing how they kill the buffalo makes me think that they believed in killing not for the sport but to sustain themselves for the coming winter. Whereas the Americans seemed to think of killing buffalo as merely a sporting activity for the most part. I wonder what the Mandans thought of the Americans when they ate only the tongues of the buffalo leaving the rest of the carcass for the wolves.

Kelo wrote in post #46:

The Book, in general I find myself, also, losing track of the overall picture, when in the details of this book. I suspect this is a book one could read many ways, different times, and take away completely different things.

I certainly agree the book can be read in many ways. I first read it in 1996 after it first came out. I read it again in 1998 when I led my first seniorsnet discussion of this book. I read it again on the occasion of the current discussion. The expedition described by the book can certainly be interpreted in different ways other than the traditional U.S expansionist view. I think Ambrose in his book at least notes the existence of the different interpretive viewpoints in a way that leads readers to see at least the existence of different interpretations. In this respect I think it eleads its readers to do further reading about the expedition and its aftermath.

This has led me to read most of the books listed in my bibliography clickable from the heading. In particular James P. Rhoda, “Lewis and Clark Among the Indians” offers a different interpretative view of the expedition looking at it more from the viewpoint of the Indians who saw L&C more as diplomats from a foreign power. They saw the councils as diplomatic conferences among equals. In contrast the overtone of L&C argument, positioned them (L&C) as heralds sent to announce the change of sovereignty, ie, that the U.S. had replaced France, and their new “Great White Father who was now the United States.

My reading of “Undaunted Courage ” also lead me to the primary sources including my acquisition of most of the Enlisted men’s journals. I have the Journals of Sergeants Floyd, Ordway, Gass, and Pvt. Whitehouse. ’Their accounts of principal events sometimes reflect their differing perspective that I sometimes have posted here.

Another interpretation of the L&C expedition as Hats has pointed is to view it as a scientific expedition Mapping, with precise geographic positioning of the rivers and other geographic features as well as botanical, mineral, and other scientific descriptions and specimens: all of these goals were certainly a prime purpose of the expedition.

I think another thing that my first reading of the book gave me was its graphic picture of American Society, as it existed in the early years of the 19th century. This includes the planter class and the common people; the differing position of the people in the old eastern settlements and the new settlements in the West; finally the political contrasts inherent in the difference between the Federalist and Jeffersonian Democrats.

Kelo wrote in post #46:

The Book, in general

I find myself, also, losing track of the overall picture, when in the details of this book. I suspect this is a book one could read many ways, different times, and take away completely different things.

Wow, Harold, with all that reading you have a wonderful background to lead this discussion. I'm really enjoying your posts. I struggle in my reading all the time whether to read more on the current subject or go on to the next project - I could see myself doing what you did and collecting all the private journals, etc. I didn't realize you led a 1998 discussion of the book!

I'm a map person and appreciate all the maps in the book but sometimes still get a little lost when they mention places not on any of the maps. On good days of walking they might walk 25 miles a day - quite a walk in rugged terrain for sure. They had a lot of confidence that they could handle whatever came and didn't seem to fear that they would get stuck out somewhere and not be able to get back. The grizzly bear seemed to be their first formidible opponent, LOL! Lewis has a colorful encounter with one in our next segment!

Harold reading back over the Archives I see you mentioned Alexander Mckenzie's expedition in that discussion too. You have given us a good link this time for that expedition. Before our next chapters could you tell us more about Alexander Mckenzie? I think you did discuss him a bit this time. I will do a search for that post.

Scrawler also posted some information about Alexander Mackenzie.

From the link Mackenzie travelled to the Arctic Ocean and to the Pacific Ocean.

" He made two trips; one to the Arctic Ocean in 1789, and another to the Pacific Ocean in 1793."

He did not have all the celestial equipment that Lewis and Clark had gotten from the man in Philadelphia.

Mackenzie, did he make it all the way to the Pacific Ocean. I think, from the link, he didn't make it all the way to the Pacific Ocean.

The photos on this link are beautiful. The country looks totally untouched by man.

This is written by you, Harold, in the Archived discussion.

"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. "

Do you feel that A. Mackenzie's expedition excited some interest in starting an American expedition? I feel this is what you are saying. It is all very exciting.

These are fictional accounts of the Lewis and Clark expedition. Some people would like to read the fictional accounts rather than the nonfiction accounts. Maybe some people would like to read both nonfiction and fiction accounts of the expedition.

I have the books. I hope to read each one day.

Lewis and Clark

Sacajawea

Hats asked:

Do you feel that A. Mackenzie's expedition excited some interest in starting an American expedition? I feel this is what you are saying. It is all very exciting.

No question about it! Jefferson read the Mackenzie Journal in the winter of 1800-01 while waiting to hear the outcome of the election. He correctly realized that if the US was to have a claim to a share of the Pacific Northwest an American claim must be established by exploration.. I feel TJ had already decided on the Expedition with Meriwether Lewis as its leader when he selected Lewis as his secretary.

Did you all notice that the initial TJ plan called for a single squad of just a dozen soldiers led by one officer. It was to be modeled after the Mackenzie plan. During the planning stage TJ and Lewis saw the weakness of the small group. It could not carry enough trade goods, scientific instruments, return specimens and etc. McKenzie’s 28 ft birch bark Canoe could only carry 3000 lbs. How many pounds was it that the Keel Boat could carry, was it 10 tons? In addition each of the large pirogue could carry as much as the Mackenzie canoe.

Mackenzie had and advantage the captain did not enjoy. First he had a head start from his Company’s advanced base West of Lake Michigan, Second the mountain pass that now bears his name was not so high, As a result he was able to go all the way to the Pacific spend several weeks exploring and trading with Indians and return in a single season to spend the winter at his starting base. His disadvantage was that he simply reached his objective, planted his flag and returned. He did not return with the mass of scientific knowledge of his route as the Captains had done.

TJ was correct about the need for an American expedition to establish a U.S. claim. A few years later U.S. and English negotiators divided the Pacific Northwest as the boarder now stands. The US got the mouth of the Columbia while the English (Canada) got the northerly area explored by Mackenzie.

Prior to his Pacific Expedition in 1789 Mackenzie made similar trek using the Great Slave Lake and the north flowing river that today bears his name to travel to the Artic Ocean. For more information click the Mackenzie Web Page on the Web resource page, and/or read his Journal linked in the L&C Bibliography.

What do you think of shortening each of the four remaining week discussion periods to 5 days each instead of 7 days as they are now planed? I do think 5 days is sufficient to cover these divisions and I think it might lessen our tendency to post ahead of our present schedule.

I know it is difficult not to compare a current event to something that we know occurred later, but its also confusing when different discussion threads have different time settings. I know I am guilty too Please everybody do vote yes or no to reducing each of the 4 remaining periods from 7 to 5 days. That will mean we will begin the Mandan Winter discussion, Period 3) on Tuesday, Aug 15th and end it Saturday, Aug 19th. Period 4 will then begin on Sunday Aug 20th. And etc. If you approve this schedule change I will edit the schedule in the Heading. Let me Know.

Hats regarding your comment on reading historical fiction, rather than non-fiction. Unfortunately all too often the fictional author alters the character of the historical figures to fit the needs of his particular plot. These are most often people who are long dead and unavailable to defend their record.

I guess it doesn’t have to turn out this way; I though Gore Vidal did a pretty good in his fictional account of the Emperor Julian, but the 1930’s writing team of Charles Nordhoff and James Hall really did a real hatchet job in their slander of Captain Bligh and in the process didn’t really accurately portray Fletcher Christian either. The unfortunate fact is that many of the people who read the fictional account never really know how accurate it is.

were provided in the Audubon book, remember our complaint about that at the time.

Niemcewicz provides interesting pictures of the "ordinary" folks and the wealthier people at the time we are reading about. I'll give you a bit of that at another time, don't have the book beside me at the moment..........jean

As much as I love discussing this book, if you want to shorten this discussion it is fine by me.

History: Origins and early history: "Like all Native American peoples, the exact origins and early history of the Mandans is unknown. Early studies by linguists gave evidence that the Mandans language may have been closely related to the language of the Ho-Chunk or Winnebago people of present-day Wisconsin, which has given rise to the theory that they may have settled in the region at one time. This idea is possibly confirmed in their mythology, where reference is made to having come from an eastern location near a lake.

Ethologists and scholars studying the Mandans subscribe to the theory that, like other Sioux people (possibly including the Hidatsa), they originated in the area of the upper Mississippi River and the Ohio River in present-day Ohio. If this is the case, the Mandans would have migrated north towards the Missouri River valley and its tributary the Heart River in present-day North Dakota, where Europeans first encountered them. This migration is believed to have occurred possibly as early as the 7th century but probably between 1000 CE and the 13th century.

After their arrival on the banks of the Heart River, the Mandans constructed nine villages, two on the east side of the river and seven on the west side. At some point during this time, the Hidatsa people also moved into the region. Mandans tradition states that the Hidatsa were a nomadic tribe until their encounter with the Mandans, who taught them to build stationary villages and agriculture. The Hidatsa continued to maintain amicable relations with the Mandans and constructed villages north of them on the Knife River."

I wonder what happened to start the migration of the Mandans to the Missouri River? Any idea what the reference to an eastern location near a lake may mean? I have to wonder who it was that taught the Mandans agriculture and to build stationary village as opposed to being a nomadic tribe like the Hidatsa.

I'm fine with the schedule as is, it will be hard for me to speed it up. I think there is more to talk about in each section than we have actually discussed.

However, I won't whine if everyone but me wants to speed up the reading schedule. I'd rather not.

Kleo

I think the current schedule is a good one. We've had lots to discuss. I don't feel we need to speed things up.

I think we will leave the schedule as we had it. It really was never broke so why try to fix it! In any case we can now begin the third week that covers the Mandan Winter of 1804 – 05.

Click Here for an outline of Mandan history. When the Expedition lived with them at Fort Mandan in the winter of 1804 – 05 the tribe had already been much reduced by repeated epidemics of smallpox, whopping cough and other European diseases. These epidemics continued during the post expedition years until in 1837 –38 when a particularly severe outbreak left only 150 Mandan alive. The survivors joined surviving Hidatsa and Arikara individuals to form a new tribe that has made it into the 21st century/

I'm reading a biography of Andrew Jackson and today read about something that caused chronic health problems such as dysentery for many in 19th century America - internal parasites. Ambrose hasn't mentioned anything about parasites that I recall, but the men certainly had plenty of intestinal problems on their journey. Perhaps it was due to more than just their poor diet.

Clark was also plagued by what he called rheumatism. He was practically bed-ridden at one point when his neck was so sore. He was a relatively young man for rheumatism.

The Mandan historical link is very interesting. Thank you.

During the Mandan winter of 1804-05 the Captain had considerable opportunity tp practice their medical skills both in treating their own men and the Indians.

The late L.J. Klien was a principal founding father of our Seniorsnet Books group, He was also a Physician who participated in the 1998 discussion. II am going to copy certain of the L.J.’s posts relative to medical issues here

L.J. Llien, May 12, 1998 PT Post #28

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

Harold Arnold - May 12, 1998 PT Post #30

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

LJ Klein - May 13, 1998 PT Post #32

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).

Other Examples of Medical Practices at Fort Mandan include treatment both Indian and among the men for frost bite including the high profile case of the Indian boy whose toes had to be amputated to save his life. Another common Indian complaint involved an eye complaint probable resulting from drying. The Captains applied some homeopathic eyewash that seemed to help. This complaint became more common as the expedition moved west

Some of the west Texas (Rio Grande and lower Pecos) tribes use hard drug induced hallucination during Religious ceremony(Click Here), but I still know of no primary source mentioning the use of Marijuana by plains Indians. Actually Indian tobacco was much stronger than modern versions today. It was perfectly capable of producing real intoxicating effects

I think tobacco today can cause intoxicating effects. I used to smoke - then stopped for a long time - then started again. I noticed it definitely gave me a sort of high when I wasn't used to it. Thank goodness, I quit again and haven't smoked now for many years. What a terrible habit.

I think some Indians used mushrooms as a hallucinogenic and some used peyote, or mescaline.

Here's an interesting article about Indian use of hallucinogenics.

http://www.maps.org/media/pi111703.html

I found an online book about HALLUCINOGENIC PLANTS which has some fascinating info about various Indian tribes' use:

"MEDICAL AND RELIGIOUS USES of hallucinogenic plants are particulaly important in primitive societies. Aboriginal people attribute sickness and health to the working of spirit forces. Consequently, any "medicine" that can transport man to the spirit world is considered by many aborigines to be better than one with purely physical effects.

Psychic powers have also been attributed to hallucinogens and have become an integral part of primitive religions. All over the world hallucinogenic plants are used as mediators between man and his gods. The prophecies of the oracle of Delphi, for example, are thought to have been induced through hallucinogens...."

"...OTHER ABORIGINAL USES of hallucinogens vary from one primitive culture to another. Many hallucinogenic plants are basic to the initiation rituals of adolescents. The Algonquin Indians gave an intoxicating medicine, wysoccan, to their young men, who then became violently deranged for 20 days. During this period, they lost all memory, starting manhood by forgetting they had been boys. The iboga root in Gabon and caapi in the Amazon are also used in such rituals.

In South America, many tribes take ayahuasca to foresee the future, settle disputes, decipher enemy plans, cast or remove spells, or insure the fidelity of their women. Sensations of death and separation of body and soul are sometimes experienced during a dreamlike trance.

The hallucinogenic properties of Datura have been thoroughly exploited, particularly in the New World. In Mexico and in the Southwest, Datura is used in divination, prophecy, and ritualistic curing.

Modern Mexican Indians value certain mushrooms as sacraments and use morning glories and the peyote cactus to predict the future, diagnose and cure disease, and placate good and evil spirits.

The Mixtecs of Mexico eat puffballs to hear voices from heaven that answer their questions. The Waikás of Brazil and Venezuela snuff the powdered resin of a jungle tree to ritualize death, induce a trance for diagnosing disease, and thank the spirits for victory in war. The Witotos of Colombia eat the same powerful resin to "talk with the little people." Peruvian medicine men drink cimora to make themselves owners of another's identity. Indians of eastern Brazil drink jurema to have glorious visions of the spirit world before going into battle with their enemies...."

http://www.zauberpilz.com/golden/g01-10.htm

There were plenty of herbal remedies capable of curing intestinal parasites used by early settlers in the Americas. Certainly Lewis's mother taught her son about these.

Marijuana is an Asian plant, so I don't imagine the Indians traditionally used it, and I doubt it was brought west by early settlers in the early 19th century. I don't know.

Kleo

Golly, I was just reading more from that online book about hallucinogenic drugs. Wysteria and nutmeg are poisonous plants that cause hallucinations. I've got wysteria hanging from my garage.

It made me think about the L&C expedition. We've discussed their diet - mainly meat and flour while they had it. They were in unknown territory. They couldn't just necessarily traipse out into the wilderness and eat any greens and other vegetables and flowers they came across. Some would have been poisonous. They either had to get info from the Indians or use trial and error by tasting.

Lewis was trained to some extent in use of herbs in the East. I wonder if this knowledge helped him to identify on the trail what might be edible of the new species they found?

Kleo: There's a section about cannabis in the online book I've been checking out. I don't see anything about its use by Indians in the New World. Apparently, the Pilgrims used hemp but for things like rope.

http://www.zauberpilz.com/golden/g31-40.htm

Click on the following and scroll half way down to get to the part of the online book about New World drugs used by Indians in North, Central, and South America.

http://www.zauberpilz.com/golden/g51-60.htm

Well I found I made a mistake the other day when I said the Newman Court /Martial was the last one. I had forgotten about Pvt. Thomas Howard who drew a Court Martial while at Fort Mandan. It seems Howard returned to the Fort late one night (probably from an Indian visit). Finding the gate locked he climbed the wall and snuck in. An Indian observed this entry and made an illicit entry in the same manner. The guards caught both the Indian and Pvt. Howard.

Lewis interviewed the Indian and impressed upon him the danger inherent in his act and let him go. Charging Howard with “Setting a pernicious example to the Savages” a court Martial was ordered too try Howard. The verdict was guilty and Howard was sentenced to 50 lashes, a punishment that Ambrose describes as “heavy punishment for an offence that amounted simply to thoughtlessness.” Perhaps the Court thought so too as they recommended Mercy and Lewis agreed sparing Howard the lashing. Also Howard remained a member of the permanent party.

This was the last Court Martial of the Expedition.

That was one of my favorite episodes in the book so far, Harold. Can you just picture that Indian spotting Howard going up over the wall and thinking to himself, "Ahah!" I was glad, though, that they decided not to give Howard the lashes.

Marni

I liked how Lewis thought it necessary to explain the reasoning behind the punishment.

Marni, thanks for the ethnobotany link.

Kleo

In the book, Ambrose discusses how Lewis and Clark figure Longitude without a chronometer (they don't) and mentions the calculations kept then later compared to Greenwich, however, I don't believe that Greenwich would have been the Prime Meridian for Meriwhether Lewis in 1804. It was probably Washington DC listed in the references later used to calculate longitude for the expedition with the raw date the Corps of Discovery collected.

It's interesting because people don't often think of some of the differences between latitude and longitude, namely that the former can be easily calculated because of the earth's tilt on its axis as it revolves around the sun through the year, and is based on distance from something real, the equator, while the latter is based on something defined by humans, the Prime Meridian. Currently, and since the mid 19th century (post Lewis and Clark) the PM has been the Greenwich Meridian, by definition at 0 degrees 0 minutes 0 seconds longitude. On the other side of the world, 180 degrees 0 minutes 0 seconds away is the International Date Line.

The book also explains that Lewis used the octant in the summer (it is good for up to 1/8th of a circle) and the sextant in the winter (good for more of a circle, up to 1/6th, and necessary for more extreme positions of the sun depending upon your distance from the equator. A sextant might not be necessary for measuring latitude in the southern part of the United States in the winter.

Kleo

"In 1796 the Mandans were visited by the Welsh explorer John Evans, who was hoping to find proof that their language contained Welsh words. Evans spent the winter of 1796-7 with the Mandans, but found no evidence of any Welsh influence."

"The theory of the Mandans/Welsh connection, now discounted, was also supported by George Carlin. As the Mandans encouraged conjugal relations between their women and European and American explorers and fur-traders (probably in an attempt to incorporate their perception of a cultural advantage over enemy tribes), a "lighter skin color" would in time be a natural consequence. The Journals of Lewis and Clark often refer to members of the expedition being invited to spend the night in the Mandans lodges, and it was likely there that several of these men contracted venereal diseases."

"Aside from the frozen skin and extremities, the most common medical problem the captains faced was syphilis. Few details come down in the journals, but it is possible that nearly every man suffered from the disease. As for the captains, they never mentioned taking the standard treatment themselves.

"That treatment consisted of ingesting mercury, in the form of a pill called calomel (mercurous chloride). The side effects of mercury could be dangerous; the phrase "mad as a hatter" referred to hat makers who used mercury in the process of their work and became a bit crazy from breathing in all those fumes. But it was sovereign for syphilis, and Lewis knew this and administered it routinely." ~ (p.197)

It is amazing that given this treatment "routinely" that the men in expedition didn't go as "mad" as a hatter. Remarkably except for the two court marshals and a few incidents of discipline the men of the expedition managed to get through their situation unscathed so to speak. It certainly shows the leadership of both Lewis and Clark in this respect.

I couldn't find any reference that Lewis administered the "cure" to any of the Mandans Indians that might have been infected even though he and Lewis were doing a good deal of doctoring for the Indians.

I found it interesting that the Mandans offered their women in the hopes that they would become "lighter in skin" over time and felt that this would be an advantage over their enemies.

Inhaled mercury acts differntly in the body than mercury in a compound. Someone once explained the whole thing to me. I wound up thinking one could drink a thermometer, but not a warm day. There must be information on the web about this.

Kleo

Click Here for page 1 of 5 pages relative to the L&C calculation of Longitude. Unless I am misinterpreting my browsing read of this site (perfectly possible) it appears they did have a chronometer. Also I remember seeing one on a list of Items purchased for the trip. I remember it as the most expensive purchase at $250.00. I was not inclined to follow the Mathematics described on the linked site but it too refers to their chronometer.

Page 119, "Determining longitude was almost impossibly complicated. If Lewis knew it was high noon in Greenwich, and he knew exactly what time it was where he was, he could figure out his longitude. But to know the time in Greenwich required an accurate chronometer. Though Lewis had bought the best available in Philadelphia, it was not reliable."

A chronometer is simply a highly accurate clock, and an unreliable chronometer is not accurate enough to tell longitude. Lewis would have probably relied on high noon in Washington DC, not Greenwich, though.

At this early point in the expedition Lewis would have been able to check the accuracy of the chronometer based on local times. This is probably how he learned the chronometer lost or gained time irregularly making it useless as a chronometer. I haven't done any research on this, I'm just going by what Ambrose says. As Ambrose didn't seem to know that Lewis probably wasn't using Greenwich Mean Time in 1804, this may be as inaccurate as the L&C chronometer.

I glanced at the site and it also lists Greenwich time. I still wonder about this, because the listing compared to is in nautical tables. See, I need the actual diaries, too, it seems. It also lists a time deficiency from the chronometer and a difference between that from calculations based on local time and that from calculations based on known points.

This is one of my issues with Ambrose, he's not an historian, he's a story teller, and he does not have the historian's attention to details, because he does not always go to original sources--sometimes he just gets what others have gotten.

Great website, Harold.

Kleo

I will defer to you on the navigation subject. I once took a surveying course and one of the requirements was to run a true North - South line through observation of Polaris (the North Star). The stars all have a way of all looking alike to me. Fortunately we were a three-student team so my group ran an accurate enough line and we all past that requirement for the course.

I remember watching a PBS TV program a number of years ago about the 18th century push to develop an accurate, rugged chronometer sponsored by the Royal Navy. If I understood that program correctly such an instrument had become available before the end of the 18th century. Maybe they were too expensive for the L&C budget, maybe the rigor of Missouri river travel was greater than on a sailing ship at sea, or maybe the Captains just got a lemon

Well, Harold, you probably don't want to defer to me. If we got lost, I can find our way out, armed with a compass and maps, I guarantee it, but I can almost guarantee we will get lost in the first place, also. I've had to do it a couple of times, well three times.

HOWEVER! Should we need to do complex calculations IN THE FIELD in order to find our way, I will be ready.

I'm still not sure of the whole story. I would like to find out, though. Chronometers are fascinating instruments, especially the older ones. Still, beyond the scope of this discussion, no matter how fascinating. There is a book about Longitude that my mom gave me, but I have not read it, yet, just glanced through it.

My grandfather could dead-reckon, guide himself by the stars, and find his way throughout Siberia with primitive navigational instruments he made himself, which, eventually saved his life. Stalin personally disappeared him for it, for saving his own and others' lives. I think it's fun to be descended from someone who escaped Stalin, and I know it's lucky, also. I am fascinated by celestial and star navigation, but have never bothered to learn it. I can't believe what these men did in the early 19th and 20th and other centuries, mapping the world with geometry.

Kleo

The L&C Journey of Discovery site has information about their mapmaking and use of cartography instruments.

"Early in the second year, the chronometer ran down, which further complicated things by making it impossible to determine longitude. Gary Moulton notes that: some of these scientific instruments may have been used in establishing distances between widely separated points, but for routine measuring it seems likely that the explorers used estimates or the time-honored method of 'dead reckoning.' The fact that various journals give differing mileage figures for the same area traversed supports such a conclusion. John J. Peebles, who has examined the route of the explorers in Idaho, found that for river travel the journalist's mileages are generally short of true figures, while for land travel the reverse holds. Exaggerations of land mileage figures occur more often when the party traveled over difficult terrain. In fact, the mileage estimates are of little help in determining specific geographic points or expeditionary campsites. Journal entries and geographic landmarks on the maps are more reliable guides. Clark, then, probably based his mileage figures on the time of travel or his skill and experience as an outdoorsman (see page 4 of Volume One)."

http://www.nps.gov/jeff/lewisclark2/TheJourney/Mapmaking.htm

"...Establishing longitude required the use of a chronometer, an instrument that was in limited production in 1803 and extremely costly. A malfunction of the chronometer or, more often, neglecting to wind it affected the men's calculations, since they could not reset it with the necessary accuracy in the field. Lewis received three weeks of instruction in the use of the chronometer and in surveying from Andrew Ellicott and Robert Patterson. Even so, the accuracy of his and Clark's observations is open to question. Patterson provided Lewis with a handwritten manual for taking astronomical observations, and he and Ellicott recommended some published works that were carried with the expedition....

The chronometer was invented in 1735 by Harrison. Lewis purchased the "Arnold's" chronometer, of "the most improved construction," from Philadelphia watchmaker Thomas Parker, and carried it in a special case. It was of English construction; the maker is not known, but it was commonly referred to as "Arnold's" because John Arnold of London was then one of the best-known makers of chronometers. Sighting sun and horizon simultaneously through a reflecting sextant, in conjunction with the use of a chronometer, could give the explorers their position on the earth. The artificial horizon was a device that provided a reflecting surface that was always parallel to the natural horizon and was used when the latter was obscured. It was employed primarily to measure the angle of elevation of heavenly bodies. The expedition had three artificial horizons, one using water, another a glass pane mounted on a wooden ball and the third a mirror attached to a panel. A tripod stand was provided, and a spirit level was essential for adjusting the device...

What is Longitude? Mapmakers think of the earth as a huge sphere divided into 360 equal parts. The lines between these parts run from the North Pole to the South Pole along the outer surface of the earth, and are called meridians. Each meridian is represented by a line of longitude on a map. Most nations start counting longitude east and west from an imaginary line, the prime meridian, which runs through Greenwich, England, a suburb of London. Greenwich lies at 0 degrees longitude. A place half way around the world from Greenwich lies at 180 degrees longitude....

The space between meridians is greatest at the equator, and narrows as the lines approach the north and south poles. For example, a degree of longitude at New Orleans is 60 miles wide. At Winnipeg, Canada, that degree is only 45 miles wide. Any point on the earth's surface passes through a circle - 360 degrees - in a 24 hour period. In one hour, 1/24, or 15 degrees of the earth passes beneath the sun. Therefore, one hour of time equals 15 degrees of longitude. Each degree of longitude is broken down into 60 parts called minutes. Each of these minutes is also divided into 60 parts called seconds. These degrees, minutes and seconds are used to measure distance rather than time, and can tell the explorer where they are in relation to Greenwich on the globe.

But time is crucial in determining longitude. As Lewis and Clark progressed westward, their chronometer could be set at Greenwich Mean Time, the point at which the sun reached its highest point over Greenwich, England. Tables in their books could also tell them the equivalent points for New York, Philadelphia, and other established cities and locations. Their position could be figured by observing the sun's position from any given point in the American West and subtracting the hours from Greenwich mean time, which they kept track of with their chronometer. Say the sun reached its zenith at the confluence of the Yellowstone and Missouri Rivers. The chronometer read 19:45, the time in Greenwich, England while Lewis stood at the mouth of the Yellowstone. There was a 7 hour 45 minute difference in time, which meant the Yellowstone River was 7¾ x 15 degrees of longitude, which made the Yellowstone 104 degrees west of Greenwich, or 30 degrees west of New York..."

http://www.nps.gov/Jeff/LewisClark2/TheJourney/More%20Information%20on%20Surveying.htm

"I can't believe what these men did in the early 19th and 20th and other centuries, mapping the world with geometry"

One of my favorite most astonishing facts from teaching WEstern Civ I is an ancient Greek astronomer, Eratosthenes (c.275-194 B.C.), determinied that the earth was round and calculated the earth's circumference at 24,675 miles, w/in 200 miles of the actual figure!!!

jean

I have been ill with some kind of muscle and/or back pain which has prevented me from being here for this wonderful discussion. I hope to return soon but will know more tomorrow after seeing the doc. I feel so bad that I have missed so much but will try to read the 146 posts that are here since I last posted. Thank God that I actually feel well enough to read today. Here's a little poem for those of you who have become familiar with using a computer in your later years, even you, Harold!

Received from my sister! May you all enjoy it!!

THE COMPUTER SWALLOWED GRANDMA

The computer swallowed grandma. Yes, honestly it's true. She pressed 'control' and 'enter' And disappeared from view.

It devoured her completely, The thought just makes me squirm. She must have caught a virus Or been eaten by a worm.

I've searched through the recycle bin And file s of every kind; I've even used the Internet, But nothing did I find.

In desperation, I asked Jeeves My searches to refine. The reply from him was negative, Not a thing was found 'online.'

So, if inside your 'Inbox,' My Grandma you should see, Please 'Copy, 'Scan' and 'Paste' her And send her back to me!

This is a tribute to all the Grandmas who have been fearless and learned to use the computer........

They are the greatest!!!

Ann we have missed you, and we are all relieved to hear your are back on track to feeling better. You come back when YOU are ready with or without reading the back posts.

The computer Swallowed Grandma is quite a poem. Here at this Chandler Senior's apartment Complex where I live, there are a number of grandma's who are about to become exposed to the computer since the Management has set up a computer station for residents who do not have one of their own. They are providing training for basic Internet an E-mail use. Perhaps I will get one or more in our books discussions

Click Here for the Home Page of the Royal Greenwich Observatory.

Click Here for the Home Oage of the U.S. Naval Observatory.

The Greenwich Observatory during the 18th century was in the forefront of the developing Navigation technology. Thus its longitude was established as the starting point and the Longitude of any point was measured in degrees west or east of Greenwich. Our central time zone is 6 hours west of Greenwich. The Israeli-Lebanon war zone is two hours east of Greenwich making in 8 hours ahead of our central time zone.

The US Navy Observatory is the U.S equivalent. Among other things it broadcasts precision time signals on multi radio frequencies (WWV) that have bee a great help to navigators.

Marni, thanks for the great post distilling the most interesting part of the sites. Thanks for the links, too, I'll check the site out.

Jean, yes, it's amazing. And, yes, folks knew the earth was a sphere~ for quite some time. The flat earth stuff is a recent myth.

I still want to know what time Lewis and Clark used, Washington DC or what. These books and sites keep mentioned Greenwich Mean Time, a concept established for the world in 1884. A bit late for Lewis and Clark. It was earlier established as the Prime Meridian, maybe 1850ish. I know that some early cartographers in the Eastern US used the time at Washington DC and others Philadelphia, although I think they're the same time.

Ambrose mentions that Lewis sent back the first natural history specimen from west of the Mississippi. This also is not correct as one of the most famous voyages of botanical discovery was on the west coast of North America in the late 18th century. Or possibly Ambrose should better deliminate his first by saying the first sent overland from west of the Mississippi to Washington DC or for American collections.

I find myself interested in these little details and wanting to know more.

Kleo

"The discovery of how to measure accurately was among the important discoveries of the 1600s and 1700s. The first effective solution for mapmaking was achieved by Giovanni Domenico Cassini starting in 1681, using Galileo's method based on the satellites of Jupiter.

The tragic wrecking of the British fleet led by Sir Cloudesley Shovell led to the British Longitude Act, which created the Longitude Prize for anyone who could devise a practical method of determining longitude of sea. This was eventually achieved by John Harrison with his chronometer; the timepiece in question was the one later known as H-4.

Harrison's son led a voyage aboard a ship from Portsmouth, England to the Caribbean port city of Bridgetown, Barbados with the H-4 aboard. Harrison demonstrated a method of determining longitude by keeping the exact time of day for Britain, while using astronomical observations to find the exact local time on the ship as it sailed to the island of Barbados. In this way he was able to determine the position of the ship relative to Barbados whose longitude was known. The calculation of the ship's position was only 10 miles in error when it arrived."

Thanks, Scrawler. The book is Longitude: The True Story of a Lone Genius Who Solved the Greatest Scientific Problem of His Time by Dava Sobel.

Kleo

Click Here for more information on "Longitude: The True Story of a Lone Genius Who Solved the Greatest Scientific Problem of His Time," by Dava Sobel

This is a link to the Book in the B&N Catalog with information from the publisher and others concerning the book. .

What are some of the things (work and recreation, etc) that the crew and the captains did at Fort Mandan that have not so far been mentioned or discussed?

Thanks for the info about Harrison and longitude. It brought back to mind a History Channel program about him and his chronometer.

-----------------------

I just read something interesting. Nicholas Biddle - who edited the L&C journals working with William Clark, leading to the publication in 1814 - became president of the 2nd Bank of the United States when he was only 36 years old. He was the bank's president when President Jackson vetoed the bill to renew the bank's charter in...1832, I think it was.

Back to Fort Mandan - I loved the way the Indians and the Corps played sports together and shared stories of their cultures through the winter. They had a wonderful relationship and they became friends. The Mandans were very good to the men of the expedition. The groups bartered with each other. If I recall correctly, William Clark traded doctoring skills for food and one of the men with blacksmithing skills made iron hatchets that were traded for food.

The team and Indians also shared good times together. Each group of people shared their type of dancing and music instruments like tambourines, drums and rattles. York danced among the Indians too. It's really fun to read how the Indians and the team shared such a good time with one another.

The team also shared what it was like east of the Mississippi. The Indians shared what they knew about the west.

"From January 3 to 5, the Mandans held a nightly dance of their own. They invited the garrison to join them. When the men arrived, they were ushered to the back of the communal earth lodge. The dance began. To the music of rattles and drums, the old men of the village, dressed in their finery, entered the lodge, gathered into a circle, sat down, and waited. Soon the young men and their wives filed in, to take their places at the back of the circle. They fixed pipes for the old men, and a smoking ceremony ensued.

As the drumbeat became more insistent and chanting swelled, one of the youngsters would approach an old man and beg him to take his wife, who in her turn would appear naked before the elder. She would lead him by the hand and - but let Clark tell it, as only he can: "the Girl then takes the Old man (who very often can scarcely walk) and leades him to a Convenient place for the business, after which they return to the lodge."

In the event that the old man failed to gratify the wife, the husband would offer her again and again, and throw a robe into the bargain, and beg the old man not to despise the couple.

"All this," Clark noted, "is to cause the buffalow to Come near So that They may kill them." In the winter, the herds migrated far and wide in search of windblown bare spots where they could get at the grass. The buffalo dance was thought to be a magnet to the wandering herds.

There was a second purpose to the dance. The Mandans believed that power - in this case, the hunting abilities of the old men - could be transferred from one man to another through sexual relations with the same woman. To the good luck of the enlisted men, the Mandans attributed to the whites great powers and big medicine. So, throughout the three-day buffalo dance, the Americans were said to be "untiringly zealous in attracting the cow" and in transferring power. One unnamed private made four contributions. Sure enough, there was a good buffalo hunt a few days later." (p.195)

"One notable feature of the Mandans' religious life was the Okipa. The ceremony opened with a Bison Dance followed by a variety of torturous ordeals through which warriors proved their courage and gained the approval of the spirits. The Okipa began with the warriors sitting with smiling faces while the skin of their chest was pierced with sticks. Using the sticks to support the weight of their bodies, the warriors would be suspended from the roof of the lodge and would hang there until they fainted. After fainting, the warrior would be pulled down and the men (woman were not allowed to attend this ceremony) would watch the warrior until he awoke, proving the spirits' approval. After awakening, the warrior would sacrifice the little finger on both hands, each finger being severed by a medicine man with a knife. Finally, the warrior would be taken outside where he would run around the central plaza of the village a number of times. Those finishing the ceremony were seen as being honored by the spirits; those completing the ceremony twice would gin everlasting fame among the tribe."

Does the white man have similar ceremonies like this? To the Mandans these ceremonies were considered part of their pre-Christian beliefs. Do you see these ceremonies as superstition or part of a ritual? Or both?

Scrawler: That was so interesting about the religious ceremony and tortuous ordeals. I must have skimmed or skipped that part and didn't remember it. Somewhere we read another situation where some Indians cut off part of a finger - as a part of mourning when a relative died. Apparently, some Indians felt they had to suffer physically to display their grief. I don't remember which tribe it was, though.

Scrawler like Marni I find the Okipa very interesting. What a painful event. I can't imagine seeing those men hanging from their skins or the cutting off of both little fingers. I would think the loss of the fingers would make it hard for the warriors to ride a horse, to hunt or to use a bow and arrow.

Did any men die from these torturous events?

George Catlin describes Mandan Religious ceremonies in detail with illustrations in his letter 22 in Volume I of his “Letters and Notes on The Manners, Customs and Conditions Of North American Indians.” His opening sentence of Letter 22 describes his feeling when the ceremony ended

Oh! Horrible visu ---et mirabile dictu! (is that latin or French?) Thank God it is over, that I have seen it, and am able to tell it to the world.

The letter is illustrated by several paintings. The reproductions in my Dover paperback are black and white but I have seen a hard cover edition in which they are in color. The self-torture illustrated in the pictures and described in the text made it difficult reading and study for me. I think Hats is correct in noting frequent deaths must have followed from infections resulting from the self-inflicted wounds. I tried to goggle the Mandan torture paintings on the internet. Though there are many Catlin paintings out there, I did not find the Mandan torture paintings.

On a lighter vein I too noted the particular opportunities older Mandan males seemed to have available in Mandan society that are certainly unavailable to old guys today.

I agree with Marni and Hats both of whom noted the close friendly relationship between the Mandan and the Expedition personnel. But such good will and friendly relationships were not unusual particularly following a new contact between a tribe who previously had not known Europeans. In the Mandan case they had known French and English Europeans, but the Americans were something different and the Mandans were excited that good things were comming. In this case the expected good things included woven wool blankets, Metal cooking pots, iron knives, hatches and ultimately firearms.

The Captains did not seem to notice that in their dealings with the Mandan they were talking out of both sides of their mouths. As Ambrose pointed out, on one hand they were telling the Mandan to make peace and to avoid war as a matter of basic tribal policy. Yet they were selling the Mandan custom-made war clubs manufactured by the expedition blacksmith to the individual Indian’s custom specifications.

But surely hatchets have a lot of practical use not related to war. Well, they do.

I studied the Mandan Okipa ages ago and have not heard of it since, although occasionally it pops up in a nightmare. I did see a film or photograph of it, maybe a reenactment, I don't know, because it was so incredibly horrifying for me to see. It is also mentioned in a couple of works of fiction about the West, and it is in a Western movie--again, I don't know which or remember, because of the horror.

Do whites have similar rituals? Modern day whites? Probably, somewhere.

There are some rituals that are just horrifying to me as a human being, and I can't really get beyond this.

Kleo

While the team waited for harsh winds to stop, the men kept themselves busy. Ambrose writes that the team dried damp items in the sun and also made moccasins. My father sewed all the time. He was a tailor. I thought of him while reading about the men making moccasins. Were the moccasins very durable?

I also see that the men loaded the piroques with their writing desks. What did those writing desks look like? They had to be small, only big enough to fit in the lap.

What is the difference between a tomahawk and a hatchet?

What happened to the keelboat? It seems I am reading more about the piroques. I might have missed some information.

A tomahawk IS a weapon, although technically I think it comes from an Indian word meaning cutting tool. A hatchet is a tool, that may also be used as a weapon. However, the primary purpose of a hatchet, by definition, is a short axe for cutting wood--probably close to the definition in a Native tongue for tomahawk. 'Hatchet' is also used to mean 'tomahawk,' though. I'm not at this part yet, so I don't know if this is an ambiguity in Ambrose's writing. He can be frustratingly nonclear at times. If he means they made tomahawks for the Indians he should say that. In California a metal axe was an invaluable tool. Not all Indians were equally as war-like as the Plains Indians, and non-Indians didn't take a lot of time getting pre-contact Native histories that would enable an unbiased evaluation of the war-like tendencies of the Indians. It's amazing how war-like people become when you come in and take their land and kill their people.

Both a tomahawk and a hatchet are short-handled axes, the hatchet generally has a curved handle, the early pre-contact tomahawks generally had straight handles and stone heads. Both are thrown as weapons.

Kleo

That's true. I feel that the Indians were told some untruths, not dealt with in a completely honest way. At first, the Indians were told that the teams goal was to further commerce between the East and the Indians along the Missouri. The taking of land for settlement was never mentioned to the Indians.

Kleo and all

But surely hatchets have a lot of practical use not related to war. Well, they do.

Very true, every woman had her kitchen hatchet that she used for a variety of purpose from butchering a fat dog for a ceremonial feast to meat tenderizing. These be they with a flint or iron head were quite different from a war club. But the Expedition was making custom made tomahawks especially designed for War purpose.

The Expedition resorted to providing this service after Indian demand for repairing iron blade hoes ran out of customer. They then began to make the war clubs, as continuing trade was necessary to obtain the corn and other food the expedition needed to survive the winter.

A great example of the magnitude of the western Indian trade network is the fact that in the late summer and fall of 1805 the expedition found their custom made war clubs among tribes west of the Rocky mountains, The fact is that the Mandan were ordering extra custom made war clubs intending to trade them to the western tribes for profit.

Another great example of inter tribal trade is the “Medicine Bow.” This was a short bow with great power used by the Missouri River tribes for hunting buffalo from horseback. Its composition much puzzled George Catlin who finally properly concluded that it was made from Whale bone that had been put in trade by Pacific Coast tribe, passing east over the Rocky mountains to the Mandan and other prairie tribes. Most of our native Indians were first and foremost traders!

Regarding the writing desks I think Hat's conclusion is correct. They had to be small, just enough to provide a necessary flat writing platform.

Regarding the boats, the Keel boat went back to St Louis with Corporal Richard Warfington in Command. I will say more about this return as this week concludes. The As the keel boat departed for the east the pirogues and newly constructed dugout canoes with the permanent party departed for the West. Again more comment on the breakout from the winter quarters at Fort Mandan will follow. Do note the problem the expedition had in freeing the Keel boat from the winter ice as that winter was ending.

Finally Hats in message #517 AKS A PARTICULARLY GOOD QUESTION :”

What goals did the Indians think the team wanted to accomplish

Obviously they had no idea of the great transformation implicit in the visit. I really think that to them they saw only the short-term opportunity to trade for goods they really needed. I don’t think even the Captains could foresee the extent of the transformation. Their view was limited to the short-term fur trade expansion and the benefit it would bring to both the Indians and the U.S. Economy.

Almost three decades later in 1833 George Catlin certain realized that the Indian way of life was doomed to extinction and certainly other American were realizing it also. Yet all seem to view this as the inevitable march of civilization in which they were proud to be participants. All that Catlin was willing to do was to record the culture and preserve the knowledge of it for future generations.

Does anyone want to add to my above answer or offer other answers to the question?

Also one of the most important work projects (of the Captains) of the Winter Camp has not as yet been mentioed. Does anyone want to kick off the discussion on this most importment task?

Harold thank you for taking the time to answer all questions. All of your answers are very thorough and easy to understand. I am excited to hear what you have to say about the keel boat later next week.

I do remember the keel boat being cut out of the ice. I couldn't understand why the men left the boat out in the very cold water instead of pulling it up on the bank. I think Ambrose brought up this mystery too.

I am going back to the winter camp. I might have read too far along.

You ask what else happened at the winter camp. Sacagawea gave birth to her baby. Lewis was there during Sacagawea's labor pains. It seems he was more than helpful using the advice given him by Jessaume. Jessaume said that rattles from a snake would cause the baby to come quicker. The rattles of the snake seemed to work.

Lewis said "she had not taken it more than ten minutes before she brought forth."

The baby was named Jean Baptiste Charbonneau. I think the birth of the baby must have been a very happy event. It did make the men think of their own children and/or siblings. I think it's all very exciting.

"The Mandans survived by hunting, farming and gathering wild plants, though some food came from trade. Mandans' gardens were often located near river banks, where annual flooding would leave the most fertile soil, sometimes in locations miles from villages. The gardens were owned and tended by women, and they would plant corn, beans, and squash, usually enough to last a single year.

The buffalo which the Mandans hunted played an important part in Mandans rituals. Besides buffalo, the Mandans trapped small mammals for food and hunted deer. Deer antlers were used to create rake-like implements used in farming. Birds were hunted for feathers, which were used for adornment."

It seems to me that the Indians must of thought the white men as member of another tribe. They probably saw white men as superior because of their weapons and the metal objects that the white men had.

Also when Lewis spoke to the Indians he made it clear that if they didn't do as he said that no white man would come to them again. With the purchase of Louisiana, the Americans would probably take over the French and English trade and thus this was probably a threat that could have been exercised. It was an extreme threat because without European trade goods, the Indians would suffer a severe setback in their living conditions and would be seriously vulnerable to their neighbors who had access to guns and powder.

I was disappointed that Lewis didn't get to use his specially designed boat for his trip. One of the big problems was when he got ready to assemble it there were no pine trees at the assembly point, and so there was no pine pitch to seal the seams. And yet Ambrose mentions that there were pine trees just 8 miles up the river. I wonder why Lewis didn't send out a party to prepare pine pitch and bring it back, or move on up the river?

I was surprised to read about Sacagawea's difficulty giving birth and that Lewis, a man, helped her with her labor. It seemed more of a woman's role to help with the birth. Was she isolated from the Mandan women in her role with the expedition?

I wonder if the snake rattle acted to speed up contractions. I was given....hmmmm....can't think of the the drug (began with p) that I was given to speed up contractions when my labor went on and on.

Or maybe the timing was right and Pomp would have popped out anyway. Kleo, what do you think?

I love the way Clark loved the baby. I read somewhere he called Jean Baptiste "Pomp" and "Pompy" because he danced when he learned to walk. Pomp - short for Pomp and Circumstance, I read. I haven't read Clark's journal about that yet, though.

I never read anywhere that Lewis felt anything toward the baby one way or another. This was another area where I could see how different Clark and Lewis were from each other.

Ambrose said that having a baby around made the men homesick, reminding them of relatives back home.

Pitocin - I think that was the drug.

Oh, by the way, Meriwether Lewis' birthday was today - August 18. (It's my husband's birthday.)

I bought an antique 19th century writing desk years ago. It's a wooden box made of mahogany. It has a top that closes and locks. When you open the box, the top flips all the way back. Inside is a wooden writing surface covered with felt or velvet. There is space for writing utensils, ink bottle, etc. Stationary can be stored under the writing surface. My writing desk can just sit on one's lap. But somebody built a case with legs for our box to fit into so it makes a tiny table.

Here's the closed writing desk:

Maybe L&C had writing desks something like this.

Marni

Here's the writing desk open. You can see the felt or velvet covering is very worn. The ink bottles are still there. You can see the silver tops.

Here's a child's tomahawk that my husband's grandfather brought back from the West. He painted Navaho and Apache, but I don't know what tribe this came from.

Here's an Indian battle club that Bob's grandfather brought back from the West. It's made out of wood and looks like a very gnarled twisted tough tree branch or tree root. It's smooth and hard and looks quite lethal. Both the battle club and the tomahawk have long handles, but I couldn't fit them in the pictures.

Marni I bet your writing desk is beautiful. It is the way I pictured the one Ambrose wrote about in the book. I thought of a shiny wood and big enough for the lap. Sadly, I can not see your links.

Scamper that is interesting about the Pine Pitch for the boat.

I love horses. Even wild horses are beautiful. Reading about the Mandan's care of their horses is surprising. Lewis noticed the tired horses which belonged to the Mandans. He tried to give wet corn feed to the horses. The horses would not take the feed. The Mandan horses were use to being fed bark from the cotton wood. The amount of bark given was very small. On this small diet the horses were worked hard on a hunt for Buffalo.

This surprises me. I always think of the Indians as having a spirit of compassion towards animals and the earth. I always have believed that the Indians never over hunted only gathering as much bird, Buffalo or deer needed for survival.

Do we know what kind of horses lived in the Missouri wilderness?

I think Charbonneau became pretty nervy. He knew Lewis and Clark needed the skills of Sacagawea. Therefore, he started trying to call the shots. His contract terms were way out there. He didn't want to work or stand guard. After Lewis and Clark stood up to him and moved the family out of the fort, he changed and became more sensible.

I bet Sacagawea gave him a mouth full of words. She wanted, I bet, to go on the journey badly. For one thing it was a chance for her to see her people, the Shoshones, and to show off her new baby.

I wonder if Charbonneau will cause trouble along the way.

Marni your questions about Sacagawea are good ones. Where were the women? Did any Indian women help Sacagawea give birth? I believe there could have been Indian women there to help Sacagawea. I believe this because there is mention of some stories being left out of the journals written by Lewis and Clark.

For example, Sacagawea on a walk one day found some white apples. Lewis took five hundred words to describe the roots in his journals but "He never mentioned Sacagawea's contribution..." Clark did write about Sacagawea and the root in his journal. So, I have a big questionmark whether Indian women were there and helped in the birthing of the baby.

Although Lewis and Clark were very close, I feel there is a big difference in the characters of the two men. Is there a huge difference between the personalities of these two men?

Horses

I hope this is a worthwhile site. Further down in the article there is mention of the tribes we are reading about and the Missouri and Plains.

Thank you Scrawler for mentioning the fact that the Mandan and other Missouri sedimentary tribes (Arikara & Hidatsa) traded food products with nomad buffaloe hunters. Typically the nomad buffalo hunters traded buffalo meat and hides for the farmer’s corn and other agricultural products.

Scamper, we will be talking more about the failed skin covered boat frame next week when the expedition makes its potage of the great falls. How about comment on the yet unmentioned events while at Fort Mandan. The most important thing the Captains themselves did during the winter is yet unmentioned.

Marni & Hats- many early writings indicate Indian women often delivered their own babies. Catlin and I think Parkman too mention incidents when the tribe is on the trail where the woman drops from the march, delivers her baby, and later rejoins the tribe with her new baby in its cradle board on her back. With more normal at home births, though I know of no writings describing the presence of midwife help, yet it seems likely some help would be available from other women of the household. In any case the general message from the early writers is that Indian women had a generally easier childbirth experience than European women. Sacagawea does seem to have had a pretty rough beginning but a relatively quick successful ending. I doubt the dose of ground rattlesnake rattle had anything to do with the quick delivery that followed.

Sacagawea died Dec 22, 1812 a few months after the birth of a daughter. The following site notes the cause of death as a serious health problem that she had through most of her adult life that might have been aggregated by the daughter’s birth. (Click Here)

Hats- as we move on to the remaining phases of the expedition, please comment further on the developing friendship between Clark and Sacagawea and her children. No other member of the party seemed as close, certainly not Captain Lewis and to the other men who kept Journals she was just occasionally mentioned as the “Shoshone squaw”

Harold: I have read that there is not a clear picture of when or how exactly Sacagawea died - that there are different opinions on what happened. Some think she died when her daughter was older. Some think that a woman said to be Sacagawea who died was actually another woman and that Sacagawea lived longer.

I read somewhere that Clark adopted both Jean Baptiste and the daughter, but when they were somewhat older - not babies, not shortly after her daughter was born.

I'll find some articles and we can discuss this towards the end of the book.

---------------------

I thought I had my pictures set up in a new place in Yahoo so that anyone in the public could see them. They worked last night. But this morning they are red x's. I made them smaller so they met the SeniorNet requirements. I don't know what happened. I'll try something else.

Marni

"Fort Mandan grows by the hour on the east bank of the Missouri River. The men hew large cottonwood slabs [puncheons] for interior walls and flooring. They chink the logs with pieces of turpulin, grass and mud. They split enough large cottonwood to cover the exterior of the huts as well but find it too difficult and give up on the idea. Although there is an abundance of cottonwood, it is, writes Clark, "heavy Containing an imence quality of water.

While this is hardly desirable in construction timber, it makes cottonwood limbs an acceptable winter diet for horses. The Mandans horses are brought into the Indians' homes every night and each given an armful of branches. "Horses, Dogs & people all pass the night in the Same Lodge or round House, Covd. with earth with a fire in the middle," Clark writes on the November 9th."

I'm going to try to show the writing desk, tomahawk, and war club photos again. (I couldn't get into my regular photo site because I had the wrong password.) Hope this works. Here goes....

Here's the writing desk, closed:

Here's the writing desk opened for use:

Here's the child's tomahawk:

Here's the warclub:

Marni good pictures. Thank you for sharing.

Harold,

I thought the boat situation and the pitch were in this week's segment, sorry. They fit within the page numbers given, but perhaps my book's page numbers don't match the one listed. I'll look forward to hearing some ideas about it next week!

Scamper and all; , My book is the old initial hard cover 1996 edition. I suspect that many of you are using the paperback. I had mentioned before that while the chapter numbers should be the same the page numbers will be different. Incidentally, this will be my last use of my 1996 book as it is now literally falling apart. It has been a great book and I will certainly replace it for my permanent library.

And please everyone I appreciate and admire the enthusiasm you have shown for this book and this discussion. In the past three weeks since the official beginning, we have had some 400 posts. My only interest is focusing attention on issues that are in danger of being passed, and to keep the discussion in some reasonable chronological order. My thanks go to all of you for your participation.

Contrast your response to the current discussion to the 1996 archive. To begin with, the procedure for setting up a discussion was much different in 1996. We just announced that the discussion would begin on a certain date. When that day came we had no idea if any one would respond. In that case we ended up with 4 active people counting my self plus one or two occasional posters. The total number of posts was a few short of 100. Actually that was not much below the average for discussions at that time though most would achieve over 100 generally under 200. That is because we were less inclined to bring up extra-book issues, alternate web resources, and individual participant interpretation of the issues. Appropriating a common expression to our Books experience, We’ve came along way baby!

Harold I have the hardcover 1996 edition too.

Marni is correct in mentioning that there are several alternate version of Sacagawea's death date. One version mentioned in the links has her living until 1884. Though the issue is subject to different opinion, I think the academic community as come to view her 1812 passing at Fort Manual Lisa as the most likely to be correct.

Marni, thank you for the pictures that are now showing up fine. I too have a problem getting my pictures down to meet the seniorsnet size requirements

Harold you asked us about what the men did during the winter among the Mandans. Did we mention writing and research done by Lewis? He constantly wrote letters back and forth to Jefferson about conditions west of the Mississippi River. I hope this is not a repeated post.

In my view the most important work project achieved while the expedition was in Winter camp, was the preparation by the Captais of a comprehensive report to the President on the achievements of the Expedition through the end of the 1804 –05 winter. Ambrose devotes an entire Chapter to this report in Chapter 17 entitled, “Report From Fort Mandan, March 22 –April 6, 1805."

This written report was based on the tremendous amount of information that the Expedition had acquired concerning the geography, soil, flora, fauna, minerals, climate, the Indian tribes and the Captain’s recommendations on the economic future of Louisiana. It was supported by scores of specimens (even live animals) that the expedition had acquired. Ambrose described it on P 205 (hard cover Ed.) in this way:

Put together, and correctly and properly organized and labeled, all this information would constitute the first systematic survey of the trans-Mississippi West, and would thus provide an invaluable contribution to the world’s knowledge—and (be) equally invaluable to the United States government and American businessmen, frontier farmers, fur traders, and adventurers.

This report had been programmed into the plan for the Expedition. It was to be returned by Corporal Warfington who was charged with the responsibility of getting it back to St Louis where it would be forwarded ultimatily to Washington. Had the Expedition been wiped out by the western Indians this report would have constituted the surviving record of the expedition.

What are your thoughts on the importance and value of this interim record? How was its information gathered? In your opinion what were its strong points and its weaknesses?

"As the men went about their work, the captains wrote. So much writing did they do that Clark complained he had no time to write his family. Lewis managed to work in a letter to his mother, but most of it was unoriginal - he just copied passages from his report to Jefferson.

The captains worked with passion and dedication. For several weeks, Lewis did nothing but write, eat, and sleep. There was so much to say. He felt he needed to justify the expedition. He wanted to please Jefferson, to be able to report that they had discovered what he had hoped they would, to answer his questions, to promote his program for the development of Louisiana.

Even more, the captains wanted to be accurate in all their observations. They were men of the Enlightenment, dedicated to collecting facts and then putting the new knowledge to work for the good of mankind. So, in addition to describing the geography, the soils, the minerals, the climate, they had the responsibility of describing the tribes, and of making recommendations on the economic future of Louisiana. They needed to make available in permanent form as much as they could of what they had learned." (pp. 202-203)

"In April, some members of the expedition were sent back home from Mandan in the ' return party '. Along with them went a report about what Lewis and Clark had discovered, 108 botanical specimens, 68 mineral specimens, and Clark's map of the United States."

"The first week of April is consumed with preparations for the departure from Ft. Mandan. The documents, artifacts and specimens gathered by the corps following their departure from Camp Wood in May 1804 are packaged and stored aboard the keelboat. Corporal Richard Warfington will command the small detachment assigned to return the big boat to St. Louis. From there the materials will be sent on to President Jefferson."

A few things jump out at me concerning Lewis and the report he wrote to Jefferson. First of all: "he felt he needed to justify the expedition" and second of all: "he wanted to please Jefferson, to be able to report that they had discovered what he had hoped they would, to answer his questions, to promote his program for the development of Louisiana."

Which leads me to believe that perhaps Lewis may have slanted his report so that he wrote what Jefferson wanted to hear. Certainly the 108 botanical specimens and 68 mineral specimens speak for themselves, but what about the information on the Indian tribes in the area and his recommendations for the economic future of Louisiana?

Did Lewis give an accurate description of the tribes and of Louisiana? Keeping in mind that he always wanted to please those in authority did he embellish on what he actually found?

Both he and Clark were dedicated to collecting facts, but how did they put these facts into helping mankind? Or was the "mankind" that they were thinking the "white" settlers and not the Indians? Did his report perhaps influence the future policy towards the American Indians?

Lewis and Clark may have been good at collecting minerals and botanical specimens, I'm not sure that they really understood the Indians and therefore may have given an inaccurate picture of them.

Not only might Lewis and Clark and all of the expedition have been wiped out, but the report they sent down river might have easily been lost with all of their valuable information and the men. They had go go back down past the Sioux. It's amazing to me that the report and exhibits made it back to Jefferson.

Back East, different people had different agendas. From a political point of view, Jefferson was interested in finding out about trade possibilities and a waterway to the Pacific. He had to provide a rationale for spending the money for the Louisiana Territory. The Federalists were on his back. They wanted the power back from the Democratic Republicans.

From a personal point of view, Jefferson was also interested in the flora and fauna, the Indian culture, etc. He presented information from the reports he received to the Philosophical Society as well as to Congress. Some of the information in the reports made it to the public through the newspapers.

I still am surprised that Jefferson didn't personally see to the publication of an official report based on the information he received from Lewis.

I thought it was interesting and important that the expedition didn't pay more attention to advice from the Indians re an appropriate waterway to travel west. Apparently, this was partly due to Jefferson's instructions to follow the Missouri to its source. Ambrose tells us in chpt. 18 that if the expedition had abandoned the Missouri River and followed the Yellowstone River to continue across the Continental Divide at Bozeman's Pass, they might have saved themselves weeks or even two months.

The comments this afternoon by Scrawler and Marni are really great. Their specific thought and interpretation on the expedition are exactly what we are looking for from participants. Regarding pleasing Jefferson, I am sure they would go all out to follow his orders, but I think the evidence indicates that this stopped far short of reporting as fact things that did not exist. There were two things that I think TJ really hoped that the Expedition would show. One of these would be long running tributaries of the Missouri coming from the distant north. The existence of such rivers extending deep to the north would support a US claim to northern territory also claimed by England. The second TJ hope was that the Expedition would find a short, and easy rout to the Pacific Northwest. Neither of these hoped for geographic features existed. The captains of course made no effort to disguise this fact in the report and based solely on the non-existence of these great hopes, the expedition would have to be judged a miserable failure.

Regarding the shorter Yellowstone route I do not remember when the Captains first heard of this possibility from the Indians. If it came to them before they reached the mouth of the Yellowstone I suspect their previously conceived plan to follow the Missouri would have taken precedent as a plan approved by Jefferson.

Again if I remember correctly on the way back after crossing the Mountains by the same trail they took the preceding fall, the group was split with Lewis taking a group north through Blackfoot country and Clark and his party taking the a southern course to pick up the Yellowstone.

Marni makes a good point when she expresses surprise that TJ did not see that a final, all inclusive report on the expedition was written and published. It seems strange to us today that all of the enlisted men were quickly discharged. Only the Sergeants and Pvt. Whitehouse had journals later published. To day every one returning would have spent months of debriefing by a committee of experts and scholars.. A final comprehensive report would have been published.

Isn't it a pity that this, the man charged with the responsibility of returning the first year's report and specimen to St Louis, did not keep a journal of the return voyage. As a result we know little or nothing relative to the return. Really all we know is that he was successful. The only real negative was that most of the living specimen (but not al) died,

Warfington probably snuck through the critical Souix country at night. This is what Catlin did. He had went up the Missouri in a Fur company steam boat. Coming down stream he was in a small canoe with only one companion.

'I will be out of pocket all day tomorrow but will return in the evening. All of you are welcome to make further final comment on the Mandan Winter Chapters, the break up of the winter camp, and corporal Warfington's down river mission. Tuesday Morning we will begin our Week 4 discussion that will take the expedition over the mountains down the Columbia to the Pacific. The first big event will be the portage over the great falls of the Missouri.

I think a prairie dog made it alive back to Jefferson. They must have thought it was so cute. But the poor little thing must have been so frightened.

"Corporal Richard Warfington was a native of Louisburg, North Carolina and was born in 1777. He joined the Second Infantry in 1799.

He successfully brought the keelboat, the journals and the scientific discoveries (including four live magpies and a prairie dog) back from Fort Mandan to St. Louis in the spring of 1805. From there the materials were sent back to President Jefferson.

Accompanying Corporal Warfington were four privates plus Newman and Reed, Mr. Gravelines acting as pilot and interpreter, and four Frenchmen. Newman had conducted himself admirably since his court-martial and discharge. He had volunteered for the toughest jobs and impressed the men so much that they urged Lewis to meet Newman's request that he be allowed to rejoin the expedition. Although he later had some words of praise for Newman, Lewis would not reinstate him, and he returned to St. Louis with the deserter Reed.

They were well armed and adequately supplied. "I have but little dought but they will be fired on by the Sioux," Lewis wrote, "but they have pledged themselves to us that they will not yeald while there is a man of them living.

Corporal Richard Warfington received a bonus for returning the keelboat, men, and scientific information as well as the journals back to St. Louis." (p.209-210)

In my opinion it was no small miracle that Warfington managed to survive the trip back to St. Louis. If the Sioux wanted to over power them, they could have done so easily. Than there was also the question of the deserter Reed to consider. He could have scuttled the boat. I'm sure Reed was in no hurry to get back to St. Louis. Newman, on the other hand, seemed to be trying his best to get back in the expedition. Do you think that Lewis was right in not letting him return?

It seems that both Lewis and Clark had excellent sense for selecting "the right stuff." Nearly all of the men they chose displayed amazing courage, endurance, teamwork, loyalty, skills required, and fortitude. Newman apparently had a personality that could be manipulated; at least he showed at one point that he could be brought over to "the dark side" and be mutinous.

I think Lewis and Clark needed to see this only once. Despite Newman's hard and excellent work to bring himself back into the fold, L&C probably realized that problems could happen again. They knew that the most difficult road for the team still lay ahead. The needed the best of the best.

It may have seemed harsh, but I think they made the right decision about Newman.

I know that when Shackleton returned from his voyage, he recommended all but 4 of the men for medals for their endurance during the voyage--4 were omitted due to various infractions. This seemed harsh to me. I discussed this with my brother and a couple of military officer friends of his. They pointed out that surviving the ordeal had branded the men as possessors of raw courage for life, Shackleton guaranteed that no other leaders would make the mistake with the same 4 men. Lewis may have felt he had to do something on this order--he certainly knew what the rewards would be for any who successfully completed the full journey. This was something Newman had chosen to forego. It seems harsh to me, still, but I think it says something also to the other men about their value and the cost of them messing up.

Kleo

I think from a military officer’s view Lewis did the right thing in not allowing Newman to remain with the party.. I note form the personnel site that I linked earlier that at least one of the men signed up for the return party was transferred to the permanent party to replace Newman.

One final word concerning the Captains detailed report on Eastern Indians that they completed at Fort Mandan and sent to Jefferson with Warfington, is that James Rhoda, in “Lewis and Clark Among The Indians” lauds L&C as early ethnographers. Yet he distinguishes between them and modern ethnologists. While he understands that L&C would have shared a modern ethnologist’s desire for accuracy, they would not have understood the modern passion for impartiality. The Captain’s entrench belief in their own culture’s superiority left them unable to judge the Indians against any standard except their own. Any disinterested purely scientific observation was impossible for them.

For me this does not negate the continue value of the L&C reports. The facts they include were honest and accurate though their recommendations and judgments surely reflect their entrenched cultural prejudice.

After leaving Fort Mandan the Expedition in their small boats resumed their daily routine of forcing their way against an increasingly strong current. It must have been hard, boring, repetitious work. One this that impressed me about the country up to and beyond the Great falls all the way to the Three Forks and beyond, was the absence of Indians. I don’t recall a single tribal contact until they finally found the Shoshone deep in the mountains. The native population density of this country was extremely low and at that time of year the tribes were away from the river hunting buffalo.

Also it took longer than they expected to reach the Great Falls that was their first objective. When they finally reached the Great Falls, they proved again a more formidable obstacle than they expected. The portage took more time than planned. This is where they found they had carried their several hundred pound Iron boat frame for nothing since they had no effective way to seal the seams between the skin coverings. It immediately filled with water and was abandoned. I think also after the Great Falls the Captains had realized that their hope of getting to the Pacific that summer in time to return back across the mountains and perhaps make it all the way back to Fort Mandan for the winter of 1805 – 06 would be impossible.

Some things to talk about this week will be the several incidences mentioned by Ambrose that mark a developing special platonic friendship between Clark and Sacagawea. Also in what particular ways was Sacagawea’s presence with the Expedition helpful to the achieving of its goals. Note Sacagawea’s experience in going with other members of the expedition to see the Great Falls up close and later to go to the Pacific beach to see the whale washed up on the shore

Also concerning the use of the Yellowstone River instead of continuing on the Missouri as a shorter easier route ti the west, looking at the maps included in the book, I really doubt that it would have been shorter. The source of the Yellowstone is just maybe a hundred miles south of the source of the Missouri, Had the Captains taken the Yellowstone the captains would have had a longer overland trek that would have taken them to the same Lemi pass that they used. It appears top me that if they had diverted up the Yellowstone they would have been in a worst position facing a longer trek over the mountains through the same pass.

I don't know when Rhoda wrote his book, but scientists today are generally acknowledging the inability of humans to remove their biases from their observations. The current trend, and I suspect it is a keeper, is to try to be as aware as possible of one's own impartiality and to include it openly in the observations. Rhoda may be more aware of his biases but he's human and no more capable of doing away with them.

Kleo

"Lewis and Clark met Sacagawea when she was sixteen. Needing someone to interpret the Hidatsa language, Lewis interviewed Charbonneau for the job. Although the captains were not impressed with him, the deal was sealed when they discovered Sacagawea could speak Shoshone.

Sacagawea offered some geographic guidance and confirmation in the Three Forks area where she had lived as a child. For example, she advised Clark to take the Bozeman Pass on his separate return journey. She also instructed Lewis on which plants were edible and she translated when they met the Shoshone and served as a goodwill ambassador.

In one noted act in 1805 as the expedition moved up the Missouri River, Sacagawea rescued items that had fallen out of the capsized boat, including the notes and records that Lewis and and Clark were keeping. The corps commanders praised her action and later named a river in her honor."

Was there a romantic liaison between Lewis and Clark and Sacagawea? There is no reliable historical information in this regard. Sacagawea I think to the captains was very much like York was to Clark. York and Sacagawea were reliable and trust worthy, but they were still considered servants and not an equal to the commanders. Besides which Sacagawea was married.

Have we any reason to look for a romantic liaison between Lewis and Clark and Sacagawea?
IMO, such speculation gets off the main topic, which is to understand American history and the L&C adventure.

On page 256 (paperback), Ambrose mentions that L&C did not even want to take Sacagawa
along when they made an initial approach to the Shoshones.
Ambrose says: perhaps their males chauvinism [over road] their common sense.
But why suggest chauvinism? L&C apparently did not want to take a male translator, either.
The two of them thought they could handle Indians without any help.

Mippy I read that part too. At first I had a hard time understanding why L&C didn't take Sacagawea along in case they came upon the Shoshones. Maybe if Sacagawea had went along, the Shoshones might have jumped to the conclusion that she was being held captive by the white men. Harold does that make sense? If not, why didn't L&C take her along?

I think it would have been very hard for any romantic liason to happen between Lewis and/or Clark. Wouldn't that situation have involved Charbonneau?

Both Lewis and Clark, I think, showed deep concern for Sacagawea. When she became ill, I think both men wanted to help and get her back on the feet. Of course, one reason is that they needed her skills.

It is bothersome that Lewis did not have empathy for Sacagawea's time as a prisoner of the Hidasti people. He describes her as having no emotion about the event. Was it so hard to believe that an Indian woman must have felt fear and other emotions about being taken captive by another tribe, an enemy tribe?

"I cannot discover that she shews any immotion of sorrow in recollecting this event.....if she has enough to eat and a few trinkets to wear I believe she would be perfectly content anywhere."

I think in any century this is either a less than intelligent remark or a prejudicial remark against women of any color.

Ambrose writes "One wonders if Lewis was comparing Sacagawea with the young black female slaves he had known, or with white women of his own class."

I assume they will repeat it thru the week. It was interesting, talking about using flint and steel to start a fire; "roundups"; eating buffalo; reading the "clues" of the environment, etc. etc.I assume a lot of what they talk about were things that L&C had to know, or learned. The scenery is beautiful also......jean

I enjoyed reading about the five falls. So beautiful. I hope my posts don't seem negative. I do think of Lewis and Clark as very brave men. Like Mabel said reading about the country is very exciting. The beautiful of the rivers, and cliffs and birds are just fun to read about and picture during that time.

They were the first men to see Montana, right?

Mabel thank you for mentioning the program. I would like to see it.

I felt for Sacagawea, too. What a life. Kidnapped when she was....what, about 12? Gambled away to Charbonneau who seems like a man of not much merit, as Lewis said. Forced to work as a drudge, as it appears all of the Indian women were from what I've read in this book.

She almost died, it seems, at least once - maybe twice with the terrible labor before Jean Baptiste was born. Lewis acted as doctor for her both times. Ambrose comments that she may have had a pelvic inflammation from having gonnorhea. The poor Indian women were passed back and forth among Indians and among white men, forced to provide them with sexual favors, catching venereal diseases along the way.

The Indian women's role in society reminded me of something I read in the newspaper. There is currently an ongoing series written by the female Christian Monitor journalist who was kidnapped and held for ransom for months by a Middle Eastern terrorist organization. Do you all have it in your newspapers? It's a national story. Anyway, at one point she described the women who lived in a house where she was held captive. The women fixed a large dinner for the men and sent it out to them on a platter. When the men had eaten, they sent the platter back with the bones and a few scraps. Then the women ate their dinner - the bones and scraps that were left over.

I'll tell you, as a female, I'm glad I live today in America.

I've started reading the L&C Journals again. I'm going to type something here that I found very interesting.

Have you noticed that every once in awhile there's a fire on the prairie? Sometimes it seems they are deliberately set by the Indians to send a message. Sometimes they seem accidental. I was wondering about them because a prairie fire can travel so fast and be so dangerous.

Here's a quote from Clark's journal about a fire when the Corps was staying with the Mandans. It shows something about what the expedition saw that is not in our book:

"The Prarie was Set on fire (or cought by accident) by a young man of the Mandins, the fire went with such velocity that it burnt to death a man & woman, who Could not get to any place of Safty, one man a woman & Child much burnt and Several narrowly escaped the flame. a boy half white was saved unhurt in the midst of the flaim, Those ignerent people say this boy was Saved by the Great Medison Speret because he was white. The couse of his being Saved was a Green buffalow Skin was thrown over him by his mother who perhaps had more fore Sight for the pertection of her Son, and less for herself than those who escaped the flame, the Fire did not burn under the Skin leaveing the grass round the boy. This fire passed our Camp last night about 8 oClock P.M. it went with great rapitidity and looked Tremendious"

I feel the same way. The Indian women were not treated at all well by their Indian men. How degrading just to be handed off to any man who came around. The women had no say at all. I think this is some sort of sexual abuse the Indian women suffered. If the Indian woman protested having sexual intimacy with a man, how was she punished by the Indian men? I bet the punishment might have been pretty harsh.

I remember reading about one of those prarie fires. I am glad you have written some of the journal out for us to read. I didn't realize how dangerous those fires were to the people nearby.

I don't know, Hats, her life at home, had she not been kidnapped, sounded pretty darn harsh. I'm not sure Lewis is being all that disparaging. On the other hand, Lewis did not have a neutral views towards those he considered his inferiors--and they numbered many. He does not strike me as a man who could have looked at a black man or an Indian and see the potential for them to be equal to whites in any way, because he defined superiority strictly on his own terms, the life he lived was superior to all, the traditions and customs he held dear were superior to all others.

I think that Lewis and Clark, ultimately, gained respect for Sacagawea for her intelligence and abilities. Even the most biased men, if they themselves are intelligent and capable, might see the talents of a woman in those times. Soon, as the West was settled, women would be held in much higher esteem. This fluctuates through time.

Kleo

Kleo, then Sacagawea suffered a double dose of abuse, abuse from her people and cruel care from her captors. Therefore, she must have felt deep emotions of pain and sadness, a longing for something she had never experienced. So, I think the men just couldn't read this Indian woman's feelings. However, I don't blame Lewis and Clark or the other men. Whether woman or man or racially different it is very hard to read the feelings of another person, when the feelings are buried deep inside.

Here's another interesting picture from Clark's journal of how Indian women were treated. This is still when the Corps was with the Mandans:

"I was allarmed about 10 oClock by the Sentinal, who informed that an Indian was about to kill his wife in the interpeters fire about 60 yards below the works, I went down and Spoke to the fellow about the rash act which he was like to commit and forbid any act of the kind near the fort. Some misunderstanding took place between this man & his wife about 8 days ago, and she came to this place, & continued with the Squars of the interpeters, (he might lawfully have killed her for running away) 2 days ago She returned to the vill'ge. in the evening of the Same day She came to the interpeters fire appearently much beat, & Stabed in 3 places. We Derected that no man of this party have any intercourse with this woman under the penalty of Punishment. he the Husband observed that one of our Serjeants Slept with his wife & if he wanted her he would give her to him, We derected the Serjeant [Ordway] to give the man Some articles, at which time I told the Indian that I believed not one man of the party had touched his wife except the one he had given the use of her for a nite, in his own bed, no man of the party Should touch his squar, or the wife of any Indian, nor did I believe they touch a woman if they knew her to be the wife of another man, and advised him to take his squar home and live hapily together in future,"

Kleo: It seems there are 2 plants that are mentioned again and again in this section of the book - the Cottonwood tree and the prickly pear cactus which caused so much trouble for the expedition. (Their poor feet!)

Can you tell us anything about these 2 plants? Thanks!

I would love to know about those nasty prickly pears. Clark really suffered with his feet.

Here are a couple more interesting tidbits from Clark's journal:

York got frostbite on his feet and his penis.

"a number of Squars & men Dressed in Squars Clothes Came with Corn to Sell to the men for little things."

The footnote says: "These are 'berdashes,' that is, homosexuals; the Indians believed that they had been directed by a medicine vision ot dress and act as women and they suffered no loss of status."

Marni, I'm a bit behind, so I'm not up to these plants, yet, just the huge cottonwoods on the river as they go upstream.

Cottonwoods, also called the poplar, or Populus spp. are members of the Salicaceae or Willow Family. The grow in riparian ecosystems, lands that border rivers that sometimes flood. They're deciduous. A common poplar on the Great Plains is Populus angustifolia, eastern poplars include Populus deltoides and Populus grandidentata. Another tree called the poplar by some is the quaking aspen, Populus tremuloides. These trees, cottonwoods and aspens, are beautiful in the breeze because their petioles are flat allowing the leaves to move in the lightest of breezes. They put down very strong root systems that help them stand and reach great heights on marshy lands with occasional flooding.

I don't know much about the ethnobotany of cottonwoods, the unopened buds are used to make a yellow dye by some Plains tribes. The bark is probably used by tribes that make bark houses.

Prickly pears or Opuntia are members of the cactus family. The north Central Plains prickly pear might be Opuntia macrorhiza. Prickly pears are used extensively by Indians of the Americas for food and medicine. Prickly pear jam is a mild, delicious jam made from the fruit of prickly pear cacti, excellent with crumpets and racotta cheese. The cactus pads are eaten. Prickly pears have dangerous prickles called glochids that are tiny and get in the skin, and are almost impossible to see and pull out while causing tons of pain. This limits the number of students who choose to study them.

The prickly pear is the host plant of Dactylopius coccus, the famous cochineal scale insect of the Americas from which a beautiful crimson dye is made. This is one of the most important products that early explorers and colonists sent to Europe, a dye fit for royalty.

The prickly pear is a dangerous pest in Australia, destroying millions of acres of range lands.

Kleo

Well, I have some pictures somewhere of beautiful California cottonwoods along a riverbank, and some gorgeous ones of the leaves in the breeze. Here's what I could find:

Poplar Leaf

I just upload mine to my myspace page. It makes it easy, even though I don't get to choose the size. I would like the one of the leaves overlooking a reservoir and abandoned mine in California's Gold Country to be larger. Still, it's fast.

Kleo

Thanks, Kleo! Interesting about those glochids in the prickly pear. I was wondering what was different about that cactus. At one point Clark had blisters and sores on his feet from the prickly pears and he couldn't walk for awhile. They were a plague on the Corps for a long time. They seemed to be all over the place.

I had my picture taken in front of a cottonwood in Arizona. It was below a cliff with ancient cliff dwelling ruins. I was excited to see a cottonwood because they're in so many books about the west. The only reason I knew it was a cottonwood was because there was a sign! I had been wondering why they were called cottonwood. I noticed that the bark had interestng white markings. The bark is very unusual looking. Maybe people thought it looked like cotton? The bark must have been nutricious and tasty because that was the food of some of the Indians' horses.

Here's a link to the photo of the cottonwoods in Arizona. I whited myself out because it was a terrible picture!

Cottonwoodbark

Sacagawea I think to the captains was very much like York was to Clark.

Try as I might I just can’t see it that way. Clark and York always seemed a master/servant relationship. With Sacagawea and Clark there is much more a sincere friendship; so it seems to me.

I just cant see Clark looking after and educating York’s children as he did Sacagawea’s. I do not observe anything like a romantic relationship between Clark and Sacagawea. As for Lewis is concerned, to me all he saw in Sacagawea was her ability to speak the Shoshone language and provide translating service. Also he was not above using her geographic knowledge.

The question is sometime raised; did the captains ever engage in sexual liaisons with Indian women as the men certainly did? There is not a hint of positive confirmation in the journals or other records. What do you think?

I don’t attach any special significance to Lewis not taking Sacagawea with his small advanced party seeking Shoshone contact. It seems the common order of the expedition march. It was already August some four months after leaving Fort Mandan. As the summer progressed Sacagawea more and more was attached to Clark. I think that here we are seeing also a certain implied seniority of Lewis in the Command structure. Clark was bringing up the main force while Lewis took the small advance group to make the initial contact.

Yes, I think Lewis would have been wise to take Sacagawea with him except he could not speak directly to her because of language difference so he probably concluded her presence would not help.

Note also that when the Shoshone and Lewis finally met the Clark party, Sacagawea was not immediately recognized as Shoshone. Only after the meeting had begun did a teen age Shoshone woman recognize Sacagawea. Finally even later Sacagawea recognized Cameahwait, the Shoshone Chief, as her brother and her identity was realized.

I didn't really see much of a relationship between Clark and Sacagawea in the Ambrose book. It seemed more between Clark and her son. He seemed to love the little guy right from the start. I wonder if I'll see more of a friendship between Clark and S. as I continue reading the journals?

I understand it was Cottonwood tree bark that sustained Indian horses during the winter when the prairie grass was unavailable. It is certainly a prominent tree in Northern New Mexico. It grows quite large along river and creeks and turns a beautiful golden yellow in the fall. Pperhaps it is not so spectacular as the aspen, but its color come later in the season after the aspen foliage has fallen.

The Prickly pear cactus was a great source of food for the Indian. Though it is not sweet enough to entice the European taste, in South Texas it sustained some tribes during the mid and late summer months. The little Indian kids would grow plump and fatwhile it was available. It was probably their only source of Vitamin C

Prairie Fires were very common in Indian times. They were most often from natural causes, lightening I suppose. These fires played an important ecological role in keeping the Prairie truly Prairie. Fire kept the prairie in grass. Today much of our South Texas prairie is now brush and prickly pear cactus instead of the waist high sea of grass that it was two centuries ago.

The Expedition during the summer of 1804 set prairie fires to attract Indians to council. I am also sure Indians too purposely set prairie fires for various reasons including driving game animals out of hiding.

I have never heard what happened to Toussaint Charbonneau’s second Shoshone wife. The initial account of his seeking to join the Expedition mentioned two Shoshone wives, Sacagawea and another. Yet except for the initial account the second wife was never mentioned again. Ambrose says on P187 of the Hard Cover edition::

So on the spot they signed up Charbonneau and one of his wives to go on with us. He chose Sacagawea who was about fifteen years old and six months pregnant.

That sounds to me like the captains made his taking of only one wife a condition for his employment.

Just wanted to comment about their "name" since so many of you have mentioned that people you have talked with prefer "Indian." Since i assume they named their own organization, i tho't it was interesting that they used N...A.......jean

What a lot of posts! Marni and Kleo thank you for the links and photos. I felt pain reading about the prickly pears. With the Cottonwood it seemed always useful.

Mabel your comment is very interesting, worth thinking over.

I would think Lewis and Clark did not engage in sexual intimacies with the Indian women. This is because they are the leaders of the group. Leaders try to set a right example. Keeping themselves healthy, not catching a contagious disease, would have been the one of their priorities. I also would think they were too busy trying to plan the next move in the expedition. Also, it took a great deal of time to go over land trails, design boats, etc. The men of the team, like men in the military, who are farther down in rank would have far more time for leisurely pursuits than their leaders.

Harold ~ How interesting to talk about the functions of prairie fires.
Here are some links. In the first, a more general reference for teachers, the fires are mentioned if you scroll down.
In the second, there's a brief explanation of how the plants survive though fires:

Prairies

Prairie Fires

I think if we look at the actions of these men through the eyes of someone living in the 19th century we would have to say that the captains did indeed have as close a relationship with the female Indians as did their men. 19th century men thought differently about women than men did in subsequent centuries.

And sexual intercourse was thought of differently in the Indian culture. If you go back to their dances where the men gave their women to the old men in the hopes that they would get some spiritual help in hunting the buffalo, doesn't it make sense that the Indians would also give their women to the white men. And if the Indians thought the captains were the most superior they would want their wives to sleep with the best. This is of course all speculation since I doubt they ever wrote anything down in their journals one way or the other. It was just a natural thing to do in the 19th century.

Up the Missouri: "The men pulled and sailed their boats up the Missouri River through what is now Montana. They encountered fierce grizzly bears which attacked them. The bears were so tough that even several rifle shots wouldn't kill them. The grizzly bears were truly the kings of the western plains. The men also investigated other animals they had never seen before, including pronghorn sheep, antelopes and black tailed deer. They were fascinated with the little prairie dogs who built huge underground villages. They saw so many buffalo that at one point they recorded that they had to "club them out of the way." They saw huge cliffs of which the rock reminded them of castles and huge stone buildings."

It must have been unimaginable to see all these animals for the first time. I know when my husband and I traveled in the 1960s over the Rockies I remember seeing all sorts of animals in the mountains and being a city gal I was really taken back with the abundance of them.

Oops, why are they called cottonwoods? I assume because their tiny seeds have hairy, cottony looking plumes attached to them that help the plants disperse on the wind. In the west, when the cottonwood fruits are ripe, they're blown off the seeds, and you see plumes of cotton all over the riparian areas. I have a picture, too, of the cottony plumes on grass, with some bugs, at a nearby park:

Cottonwood Duff

Kleo

if the Indians thought the captains were the most superior they would want their wives to sleep with the best

I think Scrawler hit the nail dead center when she wrote the above. There was no need for this fact to be supported by written records. Their action speaks for itself.

The Indians had great admiration for these strange white men and their technology and all the good things they brought with them; intuitively the wanted to incorporate these apparently superior people into their gene pool, about which of course they knew nothing I think this is a common characteristic of primitive people, who somehow through intuition senescing the danger of inbreeding were always open to new additions to their gene pool.,

Regarding the Captains participation, I think had it occurred the enlisted men’s journals would have mentioned it, yet nowhere is it mentioned.

Somewhere I have heard the suggestion that Lewis’s post-expedition mental deterioration might have been 3rd stage syphilis that he acquired from the Indians. I don’t know, but according to LJ’s comment on the 1998 discussion that I quoted above 19th century medicine should have been able to control it. Also I thought it usually took longer than 5 or 6 years to reach the critical third stages. Yet many prominent people including Winston Churchill’s father died of it throughout the 19th century and through most of the first half of the 20th century.

Well, I'm catching up with the reading.

I am offended with Stephen Ambrose's use of the word "squaw" in his book. I thought he was just quoting the journals when using this word, but he is not. Ambrose actually uses it in 1996 to refer to female Indians (and, yes, some still use Native American, or AmerIndian, California Indians seem to exclusively prefer Indian).

I don't think it's being too PC to ask an historian who studies ethnographies to be more careful in his word choice.

Currently it is the fad to say that the word carried no derogatory connotations until early 1970s Indian activism arose. This is not correct, as the word is used in mid-twentieth century American Westerns to refer demeaningly to American Indian women, and was used derisively for decades before that by Americans, particularly in the West.

There is also some activism among American Indians to reclaim the word. However, as the word is originally Algonquin, I'm not sure this is necessary for speakers of various Algonquin languages. It's like the Poles trying to reclaim the word "Polak," which is a word in Polish already. If I use it while speaking English, I am being offensive. But, there is only one word in Polish to mean a Polish man, and if I use it while speaking Polish, I am simply speaking Polish. The word for a female Pole does not, like the word for a male Indian, carry as negative a feeling with it, it simply makes you want to dance (Polka).

Very unpleasant of Mr. Ambrose, imo.

Kleo

Many American Indians already had practices that would prevent inbreeding. I don't know much about the Plains Indians, though, only the Blackfoot.

I suspect there will always be speculation about Lewis's death. He died after accomplishing so much, but with so much promise for more it seems. It may have been tertiary syphilis, sure, that led him eventually to his death (by other means). More on this at the end of the book, though.

Kleo

I agree with Scrawler's answer about the Indians wanting their women to sleep with the white men. They would have felt the white men owned superiority because of their knowledge, their weapons, etc.

I do want to know are we working on the same question? Did I misunderstand the question? This is Harold's question. I might have missed seeing a later question.

"The question is sometime raised; did the captains ever engage in sexual liaisons with Indian women as the men certainly did? There is not a hint of positive confirmation in the journals or other records. What do you think?"

OH, I wasn't aware of how Lewis died. How old was he? I did know about his mental depression.

Hats,

Let's discuss it at the end of the book, we'll hold Harold hostage for long enough to debate the issue.

Kleo

Marni, your picture is not of Populus bark but rather of Platanus bark, or sycamore bark--another tree of the riparian ecosystems of the west. I'm pretty sure about this, but don't know everything. Maybe you know the species? It really doesn't look like any poplar bark I'm familiar with.

Kleo

Navigating the Upper Missouri became more difficult after the Expedition left Fort Mandan because of increasingly rapid water and but little actual knowledge of the major tributary rivers some of which were large enough to make the choice difficult.

At the junction of the Maria’s River a curious difference of opinion occurred as to which branch was the true Missouri. The Captains thought it was the south fork but Pvt, Cruzatte the most experience Missouri river man had convinced the men that the Missouri was the North fork. The Captains were not about to take a vote, but to be sure they decided that Captain Clark would remain at the mouth of the Maria’s river while Lewis with a mall party would explore overland along the south fork that the captains believed was the true Missouri. While waiting Clark was to cache significant heavy cargo and reserve food supplies where they could be recovered on the return. Ambrose takes this cache as evidence that the Captains never really considered hitching a whaling ship on the coast to return.

Also according to Ambrose Lewis had come to consider Clark the better river man and decided that Clark should oversee the main party’s progress up the river. Lewis liked to hike so it was he who would take an overland scouting type missions. Accordingly Lewis set out with several men overland to find the great Falls that were thought to be nearby. Again I see from the tone of the Maria’s River decision further evidence of Lewis as the senior on the leadership team. Three days later on June 13,1805, the Lewis team reached the Great Falls proving the South Fork was the true Missouri. Lewis sent a man back for Clark to come on with the main party which reached the Falls June 16 from which point the portage began.

I don't agree with Ambrose that a cache for a return party indicates they were fully decided that no one would return via ship. This is just smart thinking.

I also don't agree that Lewis going overland and Clark on the water meant that Lewis considered himself the primary leader. I see no evidence yet that Lewis ever held any insecurities about Clark's leadership abilities. The only place, in my opinion, Lewis is clearly the leader is in diplomatic situations. Lewis sharing the expedition leadership so fully with Clark irritates me because of the way Lewis insists the Indians must have a single leader from all their chiefs, whether that was their way or not. If Lewis has no issues on it with the expedition, why does he expect the Indians can't do this?

It's not necessarily the case that overseeing the main party's progress up the river makes one the second-in-command. There were other times when Clark went ashore to do things while Lewis was in charge. However, as Clark was clearly, from the outset, the more experienced river man, it makes sense that he be in charge of this. I like working with people who put the best in charge of what they do best, working like a collage. Everyone differs in their skills.

Kleo

On the question of a politically correct vocabulary, since the terminology relative to our current subject was determined two centuries ago and since social outlooks change, I agree vocabulary changes are in order. I try to follow the example of my South Texas Indian associates. The problem is that there appears to be wide local variation (Even individual Variation) and words are that are acceptable in one section of the Country, may not be acceptable in others. Also the problem can become quit complex as when a research paper must quotes a primary source. When it comes to “Political Correctness” it’s a tangled web we weave!

Regarding Lewis’s death I agree let us postpone the details until our last week when it comes up in the Ambrose book. For now I will just say that he died young in 1809.

Kelo makes a good point when she writes:

I don't agree with Ambrose that a cache for a return party indicates they were fully decided that no one would return via ship. This is just smart thinking.

At least some of the stuff cached at tha Maria’s River was heavy and under the circumstances not likely to be used (like the forge). In any case they realized quite possibly there would be no boats available when they arrived at the mouth of the Columbia in which case they would have to return overland. When they left Fort Mandam in the Spring the Captains thought they might get to the Pacific, Spend several weeks there and return over the mopuntains before making Winter camp. They even thought making it all the way back to Fort Mandan was a possibility. A combination of delays made that dream impossible.

Mippy: Thanks for the prairie info. It reminded me of something I meant to mention. I read in some Tony Hillerman novels that today some prairie dogs carry the bubonic plague. I read on the web that they acquire the plague from fleas infected with plague bacteria and the plague can wipe out whole colonies of prairie dogs. Anybody know anything about this?

For a very short video of prairie dogs, click here:

http://www.desertusa.com/dec96/du_pdogs1.html

Kleo: Thanks for the info about the cottony look of the seed of the cottonwood tree and the photo. That makes sense. It does look like cotton.

Re my photo not being a cottonwood tree....the only thing I can say is it was in a garden site below ancient cliff dwellings in Arizona. A number of the plants were identified with signs. These trees were identified on their sign as cottonwood trees. I don't remember the Latin name. I was excited to see what I thought was a cottonwood tree. Could someone have made a mistake?

Re the word "squaw"....Clark uses it frequently in his journal entries which I am now reading apart from the Amrose book. What I thought was most interesting about it is that Clark, who spelled phonetically, spelled it "squar" which seemed to display again his Kentucky accent. I just figured Ambrose was using the word because it was used in the journals, as was the word "indian." I thought the poor Indian women had so many demeaning things happening to them in their lives that being called a squaw was probably the least of their worries.

Mippy thank you for the Prarie fire links.

Marni thank you for the Prarie Dog links too. I know nothing about either subject.

This is a magnificent and beautiful country, America. I have been involved in looking at some of the scenic wonders of this country. I bet Lewis and Clark felt in awe of what they were seeing.

I would like to put the Columbia River link here. It is so beautiful.

Columbia River

I think the Prarie Dog is pretty cute. If he's cornered will he bite?

Beautiful picture of the Columbia, Hats! I've only seen the mouth of the Columbia where it flows into the Pacific.

Marni I would like to see that much.

I had not heard of the prairie dog being a carrier of the bubonic plague. Here in South Texas our armadillo has been identified as a carrier of the leprosy virus or what ever it is that causes that disease. It has not presented any real public health problem because leprosy does not easily infect human beings. I remember when my nephews were teenagers on family outings they would chase them down. I have pictures of them hand holding their catch.. The armadillo has now migrated north, east and west. I know they are in Louisiana and I think New Mexico and as far north as Kansas. Have the appeared yet where you live? If not look for them; they are on their way!

The Cottonwood tree that sometimes grows along rivers and streams in south Texas appears a bit different from the New Mexico cottonwoods. They are somewhat smaller and not so stately. A few grow along the Riverwalk in downtown San Antonio. On the days when they release their cotton tipped seeds there are a lots of sneezing tourists on the Riverwalk.

Regarding inappropriate Indian vocabulary in the 17th and 18 century a synonym for Indian was “heathen,” or “infidel.” This was the common designation of the Spanish Colonial writers and also the French and English through most of the 18th century. I suppose it may have appeared in some of the Lewis & Clark records but I am sure that a common synonym for Sacagawea was “ Indian sq__. Today “Indian” would be acceptable in many localities but the other terms mentioned in this paragraph would be unacceptable unless it was clearly marked as a quotation from a primary source.

"In the 1960s and 70s a small but vocal minority in the United States began to question our use of certain words that may be offensive to specific groups or individuals. In some cases these questions were justified but the impossible task of trying to purge our language of all possible offensive terms has caused the movement to grow beyond all reason. Many perfectly acceptable words have been branded as offensive or sexist by the movement. The political correctness advocates then proceed to try to get them eliminated from public use. Among these is the word 'squaw.'

'Squaw' has a perfectly acceptable definition: it means 'woman' or 'wife' in the Algonquin language where it originated. The radical American Indian Movement (A.I.M.) has fairly successfully attached a false meaning to the word and spread the lie nationwide. They have then been able to use this fallacy to support a systematic removal of all place names that use this word. Phoenix is a recent victim of this offense." For further information on this subject see the following: http://www.tomjonas.com.

Marias River vs. Missouri River:

"By early June they reached a place where two rivers met. Lewis and Clark were confused. The Indians did not tell them about such a large river meeting the Missouri and they had no idea which river - the right fork or the left fork - was the right one to take. The only clue they had was that the Indians had told them that the Missouri River had a huge waterfall on it.

If they found the right river they would see the waterfall. If they didn't, they might not get to the Pacific Ocean in time for the winter, and would have to spend another cold season away from home, this time in the wilderness without Indian friends like the Mandans and Hidastas to help them. Lewis and Clark knew they needed to find the correct fork of the river, and time was running short. They led small groups of soldiers up each river.

When they returned, both Lewis and Clark had made up their minds about which was the river to take, even though neither party saw a waterfall. They asked their men what they thought. After all, most of the men has spent a lot of time on the rivers. Labiche, Cruzatte and Lepage were all experienced French voyageurs. All of the men felt that the right fork was true Missouri. It was muddy like the Missouri, while the left fork was clear.

Both Lewis and Clark disagreed with all their men. They felt that the left fork was the true Missouri. They told the men they would go up the left fork, even though neither party had sighted the great falls which would prove once and for all which was the correct fork. The men said they would follow Lewis and Clark no matter what, even though they thought the captains were wrong. So they started up the left fork, calling it the Missouri and naming the right fork the Marias River after a cousin of Meriwether Lewis."

To me this was like the "point of no return." "If they didn't [take the correct fork], they might not get to the Pacific Ocean in time for the winter, and would have to spend another cold season away from home, this time in the wilderness without the help of friendly Indians."

It seems to me that deciding which fork to take has a significance in whether or not the expedition would be successful. Which makes the decision on the part of the captains that much more interesting.

What I don't understand is why did the captains ask the rest of the men which fork to take when they had already made up their minds. Personally, I think the men who were after all experienced voyageurs had a good idea. They all pointed out that the right fork because it was muddy like the Missouri was the correct one to take. Doesn't it seem to you that a well travelled river would be more muddy because of the mud etc that the boats would churn up?

But it does show the extent that the men trusted Lewis and Clark when they all went against their own better judgments to follow their captains. It also shows the leadership qualities that both captains had.

Scrawler, your link is not to anything about the use of the word "sq---." However, this does not change the fact that this word is offensive to a lot of Indians, and was used with a derogatory meaning for a long time. There are not many Algonquin speakers in the United States. And, as I pointed out in my post, 'Polak' is a perfectly acceptable word in Polish. When Americans speaking English use it, they are not speaking Polish. When Americans use the word "sq---" while speaking American English they are not speaking Algonquin. In Algonquin its apparent acceptable meaning is woman, however, it is not used to mean this in English, it is used to mean Indian woman, or in a derogatory manner. So, sure, if speaking Algonquin, or using it for its Algonquin meaning. But that is not what is happening.

Harold, thanks for your post on the topic.

Yes, Harold brought up most of this information about the decision making at the fork on the Missouri. It is interesting that they surveyed the men, but I think this was just because they knew at least one of the men had some experience in the area. Maybe the new men did, also.

Sedimentation in a river is not a property of the mud being brought up by boats, its a property of the river's velocity, source sediments, channel shape and size, curves on the river, topography of the bottom and type of bottom.

The Columbia is a magnificent river. My mother lived in the Tri-Cities area on a house across the street from the Columbia, a short drive from the Snake, and an equally short drive from the Yakima. My son and I stayed with her for a summer when he was about 3 or 4, and every day we had to decide which river and where on the river, the rocky Snake with a dock and public beach of cobbles, the huge and mellow Columbia just across the street, or the Columbia up-river with a big sandy beach, or the Yakima with its lovely and cool wooded banks. Life was tough.

My mother got her masters degree in geology when I was a teenager. She mapped the Columbia River Plateau. I used to go with her when she spent time in the field mapping. It is lovely county. I also picked apples summers in Eastern Washington in an orchard overlooking the Columbia River. It is beautiful country. My sister lived in Astoria for a while. We would drive down from Seattle, then turn right onto the Lewis and Clark Highway, where we would be passed by lumber trucks doing 80 on our way out to the mouth of the Columbia.

It's lovely country.

Kleo

Kleo what a memorable experience with your mother. I can just imagine how beautiful that part of the world was and is now. Thanks for sharing that personal experience.

"Re my photo not being a cottonwood tree....the only thing I can say is it was in a garden site below ancient cliff dwellings in Arizona. A number of the plants were identified with signs. These trees were identified on their sign as cottonwood trees. I don't remember the Latin name. I was excited to see what I thought was a cottonwood tree. Could someone have made a mistake?"

I think the appearance of the bark on the trees you showed is actually characteristic of mature bark on plane trees or sycamores. Yes, it's possible the sign was wrong due to someone making a mistake. I had to correct a world-class website that had a picture of a cycad identified as a palm tree on it, once. They sent me a nice thank you and free admission tickets should I ever be in the neighborhood.

Sycamore trees are known for the bark flaking off in plates, revealing yellowish patches underneath, which change color to gray and then darker gray as they age. I have a picture of one from my neighborhood that I will find and upload today.

Columbia River Country

Yes, Eastern Washington, Oregon and Western Idaho is some of the most beautiful country I have ever in my life seen. Someone was commenting about they'd be bored living in the country with nothing to do. I could not, in a million years, do everything there was to do in those boonies. Every day was a new one of beauty.

Kleo

I would never find that pretty country boring. I have friends who talk about the "boonies."

I noticed something while reading the L&C journals. Both Lewis and Clark refer to Sacagawea nearly always as "the squaw" (or "squar") or "the Indian squaw" or, several times, as "Charbono's wife" until the incident when the pirogue tipped over. This event must have brought her much more to their attention and seems to have changed their opinion of her.

Lewis' description of the event when the boat and its cargo and passengers were nearly lost was very interesting. Lewis' description of Charbonneau, who was at the helm, was very amusing:

"It happened unfortunately for us this evening that Charbono was at the helm of this Perogue, in stead of Drewyer, who previously steered her; Charbono cannot swim and is perhaps the most timid waterman in the world.....the Perogue was under sail when a sudon squawl of wind struck her obliquely, and turned her considerably, the steersman allarmed, in stead of puting, her before the wind, lufted her up into it, the wind was so violent that it drew the brace of the squarsail out of the hand of the who was attending it, and instantly upset the perogue and would have turned her completely topsaturva.....

....the perogue then wrighted but had filled within an inch of the gunwals; Charbono still crying to his god for mercy, had not yet recollected the rudder, now could the repeated orders of the Bowsman, Cruzat, bring him to his recollection untill he threatend to shoot him instantly if he did not take hold of the rudder and do his duty...."

Lewis' next day's journal entry includes a remark about Sacagawea's role in saving some of the cargo, in great contrast to the portrait of her husband: "the Indian woman to whom I ascribe equal fortitude and resolution, with any person onboard at the time of the accedent, caught and preserved most of the light articles which were washed overboard."

Now Sacagawea is a woman of fortitude and resolution to Lewis. Several days later, Lewis names a river after her. "this stream we called sâh-câ-ger we-âh or bird woman's River, after our interpreter the Snake woman."

As I understand Ambrose regarding the decision as to which fork was the Maria's River and which was the true Missouri, even after the captains had made their decision, just to be on the safe side, they decided Clark would hold the main party at the junction and cache the heavy and surplus baggage while Lewis scouted the left fork. They reasoned that if it was the true Missouri the great falls would be but a short distance up from the junction. So three days later when Lewis found the Falls the left fork was proven to be the Missouri. At that point Lewis sent a man back to tell Clark while he inspected the falls and planned the portage.

The portage plus the preparation of a skin cover for the portable iron boat frame took a whole month. It ended when the buffalo tallow glue used to seal the seams failed. Rather than waste more time they made the necessary decision to abandon the iron frame boat and to push on, though more days were required to build Cottonwood log dug out canoes. It was mid July before the Expedition was again moving up the Missouri.

I wonder why they did not make glue by boiling down the high protean core of buffalo hoofs. The Indians used this concoction to glue strips of buffalo sinew to the face of their wood bows therebyt greatly increasing their power and for other general household purpose. It seems that it would be better than the tallow that they used but maybe it was not sufficiently water proof. Bufalow were certainly available to supply the hoofs..

Sacagawea and others in the party should have know of it. Ambrose mentioned that a short distance further up the river pitch was found that might have sufficed. In any case the iron boat frame was a failure and the expedition moved on without it..

We have already discussed the first contact with the Shoshone but I might bring up another angle to the Shoshone meeting and Sacagawea’s options at that point. I wonder if it ever occurred to Sacagawea and her Shoshone family that, she might stay with her people? But from all appearances this was not an option. Was it Charbonneau’s property interest (as strange as it sounds to our ears today) that seems to have been accorded universal recognition among the Indians? I guess the presence of the baby supported that conclusion, and in any case it appears that in their minds Sacagawea now belonged to Charbonneau; her place was with him, and she was no longer subject to the tribe.

I think we can now continue to discuss the Expedition’s crossing of the Mountains to the point where there was a west flowing river where they might again build dugout canoes to take them tp the Pacific.

Every year, I teach a book called Streams to the River, River to the Sea, a novel of Sacagawea, that my students love (by Scott O'Dell). One student from the Ukraine wanted to read another book about Lewis and Clark, and I lent him my copy of Undaunted Courage. When he finished it, the first thing he said was, "Why was the book called Undaunted Courage? Isn't all courage undaunted?" Of course, I explained that undaunted meant something to the effect of after repeated difficulties and painful experiences. But he stuck to his original understaning of the two words, that there was an inherent redundancy.

Lewis and Clark while in the Northwest allowed Sacagawea and York to take part in the voting process about which lay of the land to journey down. Ambrose writes

"This was the first vote held in the Pacific Northwest. It was the first time in American history that a black slave had voted, the first time a woman had voted."

I have been reading about the Pacific Northwest. The Pacific Northwest includes a great amount of territory.

Regarding your students point regarding his interpretation of the word “Undaunted” modifying “Courage” in the title of the Ambrose book, I can understand how he sees an element of repetition or even redundancy in the title. I think, however that Ambrose wanted to emphasize the degree of courage of the Expedition personnel. Their courage in the Author’s mind went beyond ordinary courage; their's was a special courage that Ambrose chose to describe as “Undaunted Courage.” Emphasizing words of this type are tools that make English prose highly definitive and descriptive giving it its particular strength and color,

Again thank you for your comment. You and others who are not active participants here are always welcome to post your comment on any phase of the discussion.

Spunky24 Welcome!

When the Expedition crossed the Continental Divide over the Mountains they entered a new world far less suited to their subsistence. There was no Buffalo west of the mountains. The principle food source of the columbia river Indians was salmon that they caught in large numbers in season to preserve by drying for consumption through much of the year. A second food stable was a root that the Indian woman dug. Neither of these western stables agreed with the expedition personnel. It often made them sick; I supposed classic cases of the grippers.

While crossing the mountains where there was no game animals the expedition began to use the portable soup eventually using all of it. On the trek down the Columbia their practice was to trade with the Indians for fat dogs that they came to prefer over dried salmon. Once on the coast they had an ample supply of elk, which they found less than satisfactory because of the absence of the fat that gave meat its flavor. Also on the coast they harvested their share of a whale that had washed up on the beach. Of this blubber they could not complain about lack of fat . The Expedition personnel in 18-4-05 at Fort Mandan with great quantities of Mandan corn and buffalo faired far better than they did at Fort Clatsop in 1805 – 06.

I have lost my place in the reading. What pages are we on? Sorry for losing my way.

This is Week 4. Per the heading the assignment is Chapters 20 - 25. Page numbers will depend on your edition; the numbers in the heading are from the 1996 hard cover edition. The current paperback pages will be different.

I guess I wouldn’t attach too much significance to the universal suffrage example in which both York and Sacagawea participated with their vote. It does illustrate how close all individuals of the expedition had become. Each had his or her role to play: each individual had the confidence of all others. Ambrose so far as I know is the only writer who chose to emphasize the incident to the extent he did. A year later back on the Mississippi I am sure all had forgotten the example.

Harold thank you. It's written so clearly. Excuse me.

Spunky: Re redundancy in the phrase "undaunted courage"......I don't agree with your student.

One thing you might tell your student is where Ambrose got the phrase. Nicholas Biddle asked Jefferson to write a memoir of Meriwether Lewis to be included in the publication of the Lewis and Clark journals that Biddle was working on for publication.

In his memoir Thomas Jefferson wrote: "Of courage undaunted; possessing a firmness and perseverance of purpose which nothing but impossibilities could divert from its direction; careful as a father of those committed to his charge, yet steady in the maintenance of order and discipline; . . . of sound understanding, and a fidelity to truth so scrupulous that whatever he should report would be as certain as if seen by ourselves—with all these qualifications, as if selected and implanted by nature in one body for this express purpose, I could have no hesitation in confiding the enterprise to him."

According to some dictionaries, the definition of daunt is "dash, scare off, pall, frighten off, scare away, frighten away, scare."

I think UNdaunted is NOT scared off, NOT dashed, NOT frightened off. In other words, his courage was unflagging. Another way to say it might be "unwavering courage."

Courage is not always unwavering. People might show courage under certain circumstances and cowardice under others. Jefferson is saying that Lewis never lost his courage no matter what the circumstances - and the fearful circumstances were many and nearly constant as we see in Ambrose's Undaunted Courage. Jefferson describes Lewis' undaunted courage perfectly in his paragraph above.

What a guy! Both Lewis and Clark and the entire Corps of Discovery!! Perfect phrase for them!!

"They set out westward once more, paddling upstream. Soon they entered the Rocky Mountains and saw incredibly beautiful scenery with tall evergreen trees. By August 17 they reached the three Forks of the Missouri, which marked the navigable line of that river. At this spot the Missouri was fed by three rivers, which they named the Jefferson, Gallatin, and Madison after government officials in Washington. They turned up the river named for President Jefferson and finally reached its headwaters where once the mighty Missouri could be easily straddled by a man. Now they had reached the crest of the Rocky Mountains. Jefferson, Lewis and Clark had all hoped that the trip would be easy from this point on. It was hoped that the headwaters of the Columbia would be nearby, and that the men could float and paddle their way downstream to the Pacific Ocean."

Imagine how disappointed they must have been to realize that there was no easy water way to the Pacific Ocean. I know how felt the first time I drove across the Rocky Mountains. In the 1960s my husband and I crossed the Continental Divide in a beat-up old Rambler that just barely made it up over the top. At the time I was so nervous about making it over the Continental Divide that I didn't realize what a spectacular view it was until I got out of the car - it literally took my breath away!Nothing but mountains stretching off as far as the eye could see.

What was equally remarkable was the huge number of foreigners from all over the world that were also enthralled with the sight. Because I live in the Pacific Northwest I sometimes take the mountains like the Cascades and the Pacific Ocean for granted and don't realize what a sight it is to those who have never seen it.

I have always heard the Pacific Ocean is much rougher than the Atlantic Ocean. Is this true?

Yes, Spunky, your student was right that "undaunted courage" has an "inherent redundancy." However, as Harold points out, this is sometimes a tool of speaking in English, using two words that mean the same thing, or near the same thing, as a means of emphasis. This title came from a description of Lewis by Thomas Jefferson, also.

But "undaunted" has a hint of something else, that undaunted courage would have, but ordinary courage (as if courage could ever be ordinary) would not have to have, a sense of something wild or feral in the man who displays it. So the word, as a modifier of courage, is both redundant and not. It is a wonderful description, imo, of Meriwhether Lewis the explorer.

I disagree with you a bit Marni, because when people are showing cowardice or wavering in their courage they are not displaying courage. But I agree with you in another way, because Lewis could not allow his courage to waver in any way on the trip. He had to hold this from beginning to end. So, in this sense of the word, the meaning is not redundant.

Thanks for posting this comment, Spunky, as I had not caught this about the title, and it's an interesting insight into the sort of man that Lewis was, and now is a good time, with the evidence of the book, to look at this.

Pacific versus Atlantic roughness? One probably does not think this if one lives on the hurricane coast of the Atlantic. I don't think oceans themselves display a particular roughness, rather the currents and weather effects created in them are a measure of roughness. I have never heard this, has anyone else? Plate tectonics wise, the Atlantic is a passive margin, while the Pacific is an active one (earthquakes, ring of fire volcanoes, trenches, subducting slabs).

I have lived on both the Pacific and the Atlantic Oceans. The Atlantic beaches are gentler, imo.

The mouth of the Columbia is where the US Coast Guard trains its most expert crews for dangerous high seas rescues. It is a ferocious river mouth, still cutting down to sea level, unlike the gentle ones where the Mississippi or the San Joaquin enter the oceans under miles and miles of deltaic sediments.

Kleo

Kleo: Re "when people are showing cowardice or wavering in their courage they are not displaying courage"....That's exactly the point.

I'm smiling to myself thinking about Toussant Charbonneau. I said Lewis and Clark and the Corps had undaunted courage. But I take it back regarding Charbonneau. I think he's included in the "Corps of Discovery"?? When I think about the time Charbonneau was at the rudder and the boat nearly capsized and he was crying to his god, getting the other men angry because he couldn't do his part to save the boat. Lewis and Clark didn't have much good to say about him. I guess you couldn't say Charbonneau had undaunted courage.

Author Nathaniel Philbrook wrote in his book Sea of Glory (about the American 1838 sea "Voyage of Discovery") that the mouth of the Columbia was the most dangerous river in the world because of its turbulence as Kleo describe above. I wonder if that's true.

I met some folks who claimed to be descendants of Charbonneau, but spelled their name with an 'x' at the end. I pointed out this discrepancy, to which the husband responded, "well, if you knew anything about Charbonneau, you would spell your name with an 'x,' too."

Yes, the man was dangerously uncourageous. I intensely dislike people like him who would kill others because they are in a panic. I once was rowing across a boat with a friend when she freaked out, in the middle of the lake, and stood up in the small plastic inflatable rowboat and started jumping up and down and caused the boat to flip. I just about had to let her drown to right the boat, retrieve the oars, and get us rowing across the lake again to shore. I don't understand this sort of self-centeredness that Charbonneau displayed, the sort that will kill him and others due to his hysteria. And that's exactly what Charbonneau was doing: trying to kill himself and others out of his own fear.

The Columbia is a huge river flowing into the Pacific Ocean. Sometimes its volume is greater than the Mississippi, although a couple of other eastern rivers are also larger than it is. Nonetheless, it is one big river. It is a beautiful river. The country it flows through from its headwaters in the Canadian Rockies to its mouth at the Pacific Ocean is a stunning assortment of wondorous scenes of the Pacific Northwest, from ancient mountains, through dark, old forests, to the Columbia River Plateau flood basalts with its scablands channeled by the Missoula floods when the Pleistocene glaciers melted, through the Columbia River Gorge, to the Willamette Valley, to the mouth of the Columbia.

Is the mouth of the Columbia the most dangerous in the world? It could be, because of the geological arrangement of the river, the age of the mountains, and the subducting coastline.

Kleo

Kleo: What's a subducting coastline?

The more I am reading about the expedition, the more amazed I am that more people didn't get killed. East of the Continental Divide they contended with all of the grizzly bears, rattlesnakes, and charging buffalo, the prickly pear thorns and the "mosquetors," the rapids and sudden squalls on the water, extreme heat and cold, unfriendly indians and a poor diet. Now they're facing huge mountains, snow and cold, more rapids, more unknown indians, a diet of fish and undigestable vegetables, and RAIN, RAIN, and more RAIN.

I saw in the journals that L&C had told Jefferson in the correspondence they sent back down the Missouri River that they were going to send another man back from a point farther on in their travels. They changed their mind about it because they needed everyone. When nobody from the expedition arrived in civilization and time passed and passed, the rest of the country thought that the members of the expedition had died.

A subducting coastline is a place where two tectonic plates meet and one is now moving under the other. This is the case along the coast of western coast of North America from Cape Mendocino in California to Vancouver Island (although the extreme N and S portions have names as subplates) where the Juan de Fuca Plate is subducting or moving under the North American plate. This subduction is what causes volcanoes all around the Pacific Ocean, as one plate moves under the other and the overlying crust is melted and magma moves up causing volcanic eruptions on the surface. The Cascade Range of the Pacific Northwest from northern California to southern British Columbia is a volcanic chain formed by the subduction of the Juan de Fuca plate under the North American plate.

All historic eruptions of volcanoes in the lower 48 occurred in the Cascade Mountains of the Pacific Northwest. Along the Columbia River Lewis and Clark saw plenty of these volcanoes as they travelled. I believe you can see Mt. Hood, the Three Sisters, Mt. Adams, Mt. St. Helen, and Mount Raineer from the river.

Kleo

Thanks, Kleo. I didn't even realize all of those mountains were volcanoes. I knew about Mt. St. Helen, of course, but not the others.

Yes, Lewis and Clark are heading for the land of volcanoes, the Pacific Northwest. I think only living out here on the West Coast do you have an awareness of volcanoes in the United States (well, Alaska and Hawaii, too, they're west and volcano heavy). In California Mount Lassen, the southernmost of the Cascade volcanoes, began erupting in 1914, and continued doing so through most of WWI. Volcanoligst compare the restoration of denuded ecosystems in the Mt. St. Helens' area with those of Mt. Lassen to look at what nature can do in 70 years.

I am looking forward to hearing what Lewis and Clark have to say about seeing these volcanoes. I know there is a Mt. Jefferson in Oregon, in addition to--did they name it? What about Mt. Adams, one of the ones right near the Columbia, it's right beside Mt. St. Helens. Mt. St. Helens used to be the most beautiful peak in the Cascades.

They're all volcanoes--that's what the Cascade Range is, a volcanic mountain chain.

I'm becoming intrigued about these western place names. A lot of them are from Indian languages, and I recognize many of these, but I never thought about the other names. Of course these mountains were named after presidents. But when?

It will be nice to have more familiar Indian tribes, too.

Kleo

I saw a National Geographic Channel Program on volcanoes recently. It had information on several of the NW volcanoes including one close to Seattle that has had fewer eruptions than St Helena but its eruptions when they occur are more powerful. This mountain is deemed particularly dangerous because of the high population density in its range.

As I remember it from 3rd grade geography, when Ballboa first viewed the Pacific he was so impressed by its calm appearance that he named it Pacific, which means peaceful. However I know the Pacific has its share of violent storms. I personally remember a typhoon in 1946 on Guam that tore up the Commander of the Marianas headquarters pretty bad. I think we can conclude that all of our oceans, Gulfs, seas, etc at any time are capable of producing violent storms.

While at Fort Clatsop the Captains sent a detail to the coast to produce salt by boiling down seawater. Over several weeks operation they produced a significant quantity of necessary salt. They had cached salt at the Maria’s River and apparently were near exhausting the supply they had brought with them. There was one serious accident at the salt site. Was it an accidental knife cut or an axe accident? In any case the victim healed.

I am amazed at the good luck the Expedition had when they arrived at the mouth of the Columbia. At the time of the election to choose the site for the winter quarters every man and woman was continually wet by continued rain and in 35 - 40 degree temperature. Yet not one contacted fatal pneumonia (Remember Lewis’s Father), and at this point I don’t recall even the mention of a bad cold.

When we followed the L&C trail in 2003, we ended up at Astoria, the mouth of the Columbia, and the replica of Fort Clatsop. (It has since burned, and been re-replicated

.) The structure that is there now is located by guess - they don't have the details that on location that is available for the other forts east of the Rockies.

We had to laugh at ourselves. We went looking for the site of the salt works. It's a ways south of Ft. Clatsop. We parked the truck, and went walking down the path to the beach. We were frustrated because we thought the site should be marked, and easy to find. We finally gave up and headed back to the truck...only to finally look around and find that we had parked directly in front of the very well-marked site of the salt works. It's back a block or so from the beach, and in the middle of a residential area. What a joke on us!

I wonder where Ambrose got the information that York and Sacagawea participated in the vote regarding the site of the Winter quarters? None of the three enlisted men’s diary for Nov 24 1805 mention York or Sacagawea by mame as participants Private Whitehouse comes the closest when he writes, “In the evening our Officers had the whole party assembled in order to consult which place would be the best, for us to take up our Winter Quarters at. The greater part of our Men were of the opinion, that it would be best, to cross the river,& ---." Ordways mearly says, “our officers concluded with the opinion of the party to cross the River and look out place for winter quarters.” Sergeant Gass wrote, “At night the party were consulted by the Commanding Officers, as to the place most proper for winter quarters; and the most of them were of the opinion, that it would be best, in the first place, to go over to the south side of the river ---.” Again there is no mention of Sacagawea and York as active participants. My copy of the Captains Journals edited by Bernard de Voto does not have an entry from either Captain for November 23 through Dec 24, 1805.

What do you think? Are these reports sufficient to support the Ambrose positive conclusion that York and Sacagawea participated?

I think it always helps, when reading history, to hear from more than one author, get another viewpoint.

I do remember now learning at some time that "Pacific" means peace. I had forgotten. All of the information about the volcanoes is interesting too.

De Voto as Editor does not include any Journal entries from either Lewis or Clark from Nov 22nd through Dec 24. On Dec 25 there is an entry from the Clark Journal. By that time they were under a primitive shelter at Fort Clatsop.that was smoky and probably far from water tight.. Clark describes a dinner of spoiled elk meat that they ate not for enjoyment but of necessity. (Whitehouse and Ordway says the meat was without salt) There was no alcohol but the Captains gave tobacco to each man who used it and a handkerchief to the remainder. Sergeant Ordway says the handkerchiefs were silk.

Clark added, “I received a present of Capt. L. of a fleece hosrie (hosiery) Shirt, Draws and Socks, a pr. Mockersons of Whitehouse, a small Indian basket of Gutherich, two Dozen white weazils tails of the Indian Woman (Yes Clark uses the word, woman) & some black roots of the Indians before their departure.

Clark does not mention what presents he gave in return. I wonder what he did with the weasel tails he received from Sacagawea and particularly what he gave her.

Between Clarks Journal entry on Nov 22 1805 and the next entry on Dec 25th. Bernard De Voto includes an editorial comment that notes that the day after the party left the north shore campsite where the Nov 24th vote was taken, an American ship entered the Columbia passing close to the former campsite. De Voto notes that the Indians did not tell the Expedition of this ship’s arrival; neither did the Indians tell the ship’s Captain that the Expedition was near by.

Had Lewis and Clark made contact with the ship even though their decision might have been to continue their overland return, contact with the ship would have been invaluable since they could have replenished their supplies and stock of trade goods. Unfortunately the Expedition slightly inland at Fort Clatsop remained ingornt of the ships nearby presence.

In 1803 a few miles up the coast from the Columbia at Nootka Sound an American trading ship had been attacked by their dissatisfied Indian customers. A single survivor, John R. Jewitt, was held by the Indians some two years as a slave. He had been rescued a few months before Lewis and Clark arrived in the summer of 1805 by another ship who bought his freedom. Actually he did not get back to the east coast America 1807, a year after the L&C return, since the ship stayed on the cost trading with the Indians for another year after which it sailed to China where it sold is cargo of furs..

Had Jewitt still have been at Nootka Sound in the winter of 1805 - 06, it is doubtful the Expedition would have heard of him, but if they had heard an americian was there, I am sure the Captains would have sent a rescue party prepared to use military force to rescue him.

I have a recent re-print of Jewitt's Journal

Saltworks

Fort Clatsop

I have lived most of my life near the Pacific Ocean. There are times when the Ocean is as clear as glass [or there was when I was a child] and there are times when it can be treacherous like only mother nature can show her power. As a child I lived only a few blocks from the ocean near the Cliff House in San Francisco. My friends and I used spend a lot of time at the beach. I could see the freighters out in the ocean from my bedroom. Now I'm not as close the ocean, about a two or three hour drive, but I don't know what I'd do if I couldn't at least hear the sound of the ocean once and awhile.

I can understand why the explorers were unhappy with all the rain at Fort Clatsop. I feel the same way, which is why when the sun does shine about three months out of the year you'll find all us Oregonions outside. The first time I came up to stay in Oregon was the day they had the worst rain storm in 15 years. When I left California it was 95 degrees and I stood waiting in a driving rain for my daughter to arrive at the airport with two screaming cats. I gave her 15 minutes and if she hadn't showed up by then I was taking the next plane back to California.

Here in the Pacific Northwest we have the best spring and summer [what we have of it] but you better like the rain if you want to stay here. The most spectacular sight I ever saw was watching snow fall on the beach in Astoria one November.

"In December the explorers built Fort Clatsop on the south side of the Columbia River (present-day Astoria, Oregon), and settled in for the winter. Lewis and Clark accomplished considerable scientific work, and gathered and recorded information regarding the country and its inhabitants. The winter on the Pacific coast was not a cold one, but the weather was dreary, with rain almost every day for months on end and several types of biting insects, like fleas.

One day, an Indian reported that a dead whale had washed up on the shore and Clark led a group of men who were curious about seeing the whale near the ocean. Sacagawea begged Clark to take her along too, saying that she hadn't traveled so far to miss out on seeing the ocean and a whale. Clark brought her along on the little adventure.

The men spent most of the winter making clothing and moccasins out of elk hides, and trying to hunt for food in an area which seemed to have very little game. No contact was made with any trading ships, and Lewis and Clark knew that all the men would have to return to the United States by an overland route."

Note that next Tuesday we begin the Week 5 schedule that includes five day break for the Labor day week end that I thought desirable when I made the schedule. Is this break desirable for you? Alternately we might continue through the week and begin the final week 6 the Tuesday after Labor day. Participants can participate or interrupt as their own labor day schedule requires. Let me know your preferences?

About 6 years ago wife and I happened to stop overnight in Salmon, ID. I noticed that the map showed, about 20 miles south via a paved road, there was a dirt road over Lemhi Pass.

The dirt road was very narrow, winding and spooky with many blind curves and dropoffs. We had a 4 wheel drive and made it o.k. We got to the saddle back pass and could see that within 50 yards, either way, the whole L & C group walked right by us in 1805. A great thrill!

Looking east we could see a similar dirt road winding up from near Dillon, MT. Looking west, we saw mountain after mountain and could see how L & C were discouraged to see how far they yet had to go. No development except a sign telling about their passing this spot.

If ever near Salmon be sure and take the trip to the pass. I imagine the road is much improved by now.

In July of 1996 I took an E/hostel put on by the University of Great Falls, in Montana.

A highlight was a field trip to the draw where L & C pulled the boats ashore, camped for many nights, and started the portage. We were able to traverse the entire portage, except where modern roads and buildings prohibited it. Prickly Pear cactus was still in great evidence.

Another great field trip was to the Giant Spring and Roe River, the shortest river in the world according to the Guiness book. It's only 201 feet from the Giant Spring to the Missouri river via the Roe. A gust of wind blew my hat into the Roe river. I dashed to the mouth of the river along a concrete path and was able to lie on my stomache, with someone holding my feet and one hand, and reach out into the Missouri and retrieve it as it floated by.

The rest of the E/hostlers who witnessed it had a good laugh!

Ah, what a fun thing to be able to relate" dropped my hat in one river, retrieved it from another.

I've never been to Idaho, just the Eastern Washington/Eastern Oregon part. Next time I'm in Colorado I want to road trip it up through Wyoming and Montana.

Kleo

Wow! How clever.

Had never thought of that. But you can be certain I will use it in the future.

Thank you very much!

Thank you Seldon97 for the story of your Great falls and Lemhi Pass experience. The falls must be quite a sight, even today. Your account of crossing over the Lemhi Pass in a 4-wheel; drive vehicle interests me. A few years ago I did off Road 4-wheel drive vehicle driving in Northern New Mexico looking for a certain hot spring on the Rio Grand in a very isolated spot neat Taos New Mexico. I found some vague directions on the Internet and my brother who knows the area very well was able to find it after some 5 miles across the desert to a particular spot on the Rio Grand canyon rim where the remains of an old 19th century stage road switch back and forth down to the river near the spring. Click Here

Regarding the schedule - Whatever the group wants to do is fine with me. I'm caught up on the reading and will be around for part of the weekend. Will poke my head in once in awhile.

I'm behind with reading, but am enjoying myself and don't care which way. If anyone has a strong preference one way or the other, that's fine with me.

Kleo

It seemed to me that much of the winter at Fort Clatsop was not particularly pleasant to the Corps. It rained every day except for about 12 days. Their clothing rotted from the damp and they were plagued with fleas which kept the men from sleeping. Once they finished building their fort, the big excitement of the winter was making salt from the sea water which, apparently, was quite successful. A beached whale provided a diversion for some and a chance for the team to eat some blubber and oil from the blubber. Mainly they subsisted on elk and fish and some roots. I would imagine that Sacagawea's baby boy, Pomp, provided some amusement or diversion; but I didn't read anything about this.

The Indians, although friendly and helpful, stole often from the Corps and the men had to be always on the lookout. It seemed the Clatsops on the south side of the Columbia were much friendlier than the Chinooks on the north side. The Indians were excellent bargainers. One of their prime trade goods was sea otter furs for which they particularly wanted blue beads. At one point, Lewis and Clark wanted two very fine sea otter furs. They made Sacagawea give up her blue bead belt to trade for the furs. I bet she wasn't too happy about having to do that.

As the winter went on, the team ran out of things. They were very low on trade goods such as the beads and uniforms which they needed to obtain horses for the trip back. They had long since run out of liquor, or "sperits." For Christmas dinner, they had only rotten meat to eat, although often they were lucky at finding meat. They looked forward to being home. Many of the men contracted veneral disease from the Indians which Lewis continued to treat with mercury. Lewis tried to get them to promise to be celibate. The Indians themselves didn't have a treatment for the disease.

Do we know for a fact that Lewis and Clark themselves did not participate in the readily available sex?

I certainly can symphathize with those young men so long gone from the company of young females. I arrived in the European Theatre of Operations during WWII in early April 1944 as a young inexperienced 20 year old male.

Hadn't seen my girl friend in six months (no "all the way" sex in those days for most), and wondered if I ever would see her again. I survived and we married in July 1946 and are still married.

But, in England, France, Belgium and even into Germany, I witnessed this overwhelming urge to be close to a young female was too much for many to overcome, married or single.

Harold, great pictures!

On reaching such a place it is mandatory for a skinny-dip.

Yes, I enjoyed the pictures too.

Marni is right in noting that there is no mention of Pomp during this period. He would have had a first birthday during this period.

I have already mentioned the Xmas party Christmas Day at Fort Clatsop that listed some of the presents exchanged, Yesterday I noticed that on Page 424 at the end of Chapter33 of the hard cover edition there is a B&W reproduction of an 1807 Watercolor portrait of Capt. Lewis in Indian garb that includes what might be the white weasel tails Sacagawea gave Clark for Xmas 1805 at Fort Clatsup. .

It appears that the Expedition had a less comfortable winter at Fort Clatsop than the year earlier at Fort Mandan. I think this was principally the result of the less abundant resources of the country as well as the fact that the Expedition was far less well supplied with trade goods. It is indeed fortunate that they made the decision to winter on the south Oregon shore since there they were able to harvest a substantial supply of elk, albeit they found it in no way the equal of the buffalo and copious supply of Mandan corn that had sustained them the year before. Also I suspect the Fort Clatsop living structures were less water tight than at Fort Mandan. At Fort Mandan the water was hard frozen in solid ice; at Fort catsop it was most often liqyud free to flow through the many roof cracks. The only real comment from the Journals is that the rooms were smoky. A warm fire was certainly necessary but with the relatively warm 30 - 45 degree outside temperature, it was less essential than the –30 degree mornings the year earlier.

I think all these inadequacies led to the relative early break out from their winter quarters on March 23. This early departure did not really save time since when they reached the Mountains they had to wait several weeks for the snow to melt sufficiently for them to cross. Had they been able to stay on the coast another 3 weeks perhaps a ship would have appeared from whom they could have at least obtained new supplies. Though they had but limited trade goods, they had TJ's, U.S. Government Letters of Credit that would quite likely have been accepted by the trading ships. It doesn’t seem to me that the early departure was desirable.

In general the Indians who lived along the Columbia River, the Chinook (including the Clatsop) lived relatively comfortable lives because of their dependence upon the historically huge salmon runs along the river. They dried the salmon, also, so there was food even when the weather was too much to go outside. I don't think they were as rich in ceremonies and material wealths as the coastal tribes of the region. They were already sophisticated traders with their dealings with the British merchant vessels, so they would be unlikely to be satisfied with the sort of limited overland trade goods that the expedition brought along.

Kleo

http://www.plankhouse.org/

It's only about 25 miles north of Portland, OR in Washington. We visited it earlier this year and found it quite amazing.

Too bad L & C didn't attempt to duplicate this building rather than the structure built at Fort Clatsop.

We've visited both structures and feel they would've been much more comfortable in the plankhouse.

It's been a long time since I read Undaunted Courage and can't recall whether the plankhouses were mentioned. I seem to recall reading someplace that they visited them traveling both westbound and eastbound.

They are about 40 miles upstream from Fort Clatsop.

This answers my question;

http://www.plankhouse.org/lewis_clark/lewis_clark.htm

Wow, that plankhouse is a beauty! That must have been interesting to visit. Thanks for the pic!

The L&C journals did mention something about the Indian's houses. I remember being surprised that they built house of wood that looked very much like whites' houses in the east. There was something mentioned about how the Corps had left the tipis behind.

Fort Clatsop did not seem uncomfortable as far as shelter from what I've read. It seemed the Corps knew how to build a fairly comfortable dwelling that kept them from the elements. Also, some in the Corps knew how to make wooden furniture. It looks like they wanted a military-type fort. They even had a place to practice drills between the rows of buildings. I think that no matter what type of building they were in, they would still have had trouble from the fleas. They were on their blankets and clothing and would have been brought in anywhere. Imagine the fleabites and itching!

L&C also mentioned that these Indians didn't drink spirits - that apparently the white traders had not introduced them to the Indians and how that was a good thing.

"Jean Baptiste Charbonneau was the son of Toussaiant Charbonneau and his wife Sacagawea. He lived from 1805 to 1866. He was only 55 days old when he traveled with Corps of Discovery when he left Fort Mandan strapped to his mother's back.

It seems that Capt. William Clark gave him the name of Pompy. He lived with Clark in St. Louis and attended school from age 6 to age 18.

When he was 24 years old he went to Europe as a guest of the German prince Maximillian of Wied-Neuwied.

After returning to the United States in 1829, he worked as a guide and mountain man, and was known to recite Shakespeare around the campfires. He also worked with Kit Carson and guided John C. Fremont.

He died of illness on his way to Montana to join its gold rush and was buried in Oregon."

I guess my biggest question is why did Captain Clark take such an interest in the boy to care for him and send him to school. Even his trip to Europe must have been influenced by Clark.

Don't forget that Clark was in the Mandan camp when Pompy was born and saw him every day for two years or so.

He observed his growth and development. And, babies can be cute and attractive---even to many males.

In June 2000 we took a E/hostel in Red Lodge, MT. One field trip was to Pompy's pillar. We got to climb it and saw Clark's name that he etched into it. To protect it from sensless vandalism it was covered by a heavy clear plastic.

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=3553

A few years back I saw Alexander Hamilton's grave about 20 miles south of Saceramento, CA. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=2521

At the timeof his death, March 6, 1865 they thought he was the last survvivor. But it turned out to be Patrick Gass; died April 2, 1870 in Wellsburg, Brooke County, West Virginia at age 98.

Info from "The Fate of the Corps - What happened of the Lewis And Clark Explorers After The Expidition" by Larry E. Morris. Call letters 917.804 M867f 2004

Click Here for a short Web Biographical Sketch of Patrick Gass he was definitely the longest survivor of the Corp of discovery. He rejoined the Army as a private for the War of 1812 and lost an eye. He married late was widowed, and brought up a large crop of young children. The Biography linked above has his death date as April 2, 1870 when he was 99 years old.

Seldom's link given in Message #672 above refers to Alexander Hamilton Willard who was a menber of the L&C Expedition..

For more detailed information on the Cathlapotle people and their Chinookan society as it existed along the Columbia River in L&C’s time, Click Here

They appeared to exist in somewhat greater numbers than the plains Indians. This suggests that their means of subsistence, Salmon and roots, were easier to acquire than the buffalo on the Plaines. Another character difference was their lack of honesty. The L&C people had to watch their loose possessions closely lest their valuables suddenly disappear.

I remember reading reports that the interior of their houses were often infested with fleas but I cannot find references of this type in Ambrose or the journals that I have available today. The “Living Arrangement” section of the link given above says that a household occupying one of the plank houses might range from a score of people to over 100 constituting a complex society of both free people and slaves.

"Another character difference was their lack of honesty. The L&C people had to watch their loose possessions closely lest their valuables suddenly disappear."

Their lack of honesty compared to the Plains Indians or compared to the expedition members who lied their way across the plains to their homeland marking out their territory to be ready to boot them off their lands in 45 years and take possession of every square inch, every root, every stone, and even the air?

The Expedition did not deal honestly with any of the Indians they encountered, to expect the Indians to be on the moral high horse in comparison seems a bit unfair. And this honesty is weighed by our own values. What's it weight in theirs? And what should the Expedition have come to give before settling on their lands? How much rent were they paying?

It bothers me to see the stereotypes of Indians so common in American culture: they were dirty, they fought wars all the time (compared to us?!?!), they stole. I would prefer if it was just said factually that the local Indians stole possessions from the Lewis and Clark Expedition without saying that they were entirely culturally more dishonest than other Indians, implying something uncivil about them.

I assume they had the same bugs the Expedition had in their houses.

Yes, coastal peoples of the Pacific Northwest and the Chinookians were among the wealthier tribes in the United States with plenty of time for leisure and to build their elaborate houses. This is why the art of the Pacific Coast Indians (north of the Chinookians) is so extravagant and so familiar: lots of leisure, due to relatively consistent food sources.

Kleo

Tomorrow I will again be out of pocket until the late afternoon or evening. Also tomorrow we will move to the Week 5 schedule that includes Chapters 26 – 30. Leaving the Expedition poised to begin the return trip, Chapter 26 digresses to discuss Jefferson’s vision for the trans-Mississippi west. You can begin with this chapter tomorrow. And I will follow up when I return in the evening. Some aspects for discussion might include your Interpretation of TJ’s plan for the West? Regarding the place for the Indians distinguish between the short term and the long term goals. In the long term was there a place for the Indians? To what extent if any does the Indian position in today’s U.S. society reflect the Jefferson vision?

From what I can understand Thomas Jefferson wanted to assimulate the Indians in to the American culture. First, the Indians had to become civilized. If not willing to become civilized, the Indians would have to move further west leaving the East for American settlers.

Did Thomas Jefferson have any ideas about how to civilize the Indians? What was Thomas Jefferson's definition of civilization?

Long ago I remember reading about missionary schools. Were missionaries the ones who became responsible for the civilization of the Indians? The Indians would have to face cultural shock. Did Thomas Jefferson have only a short term plan for the Indians? After all, as president TJ did have other probable plans for America that needed implementing.

Seldom97 thank you for the interesting links and talk about your historical trips. I never knew what happened to Jean Baptiste Charbonneau. The story is interesting.

A good question. The schools Indians in America were forced to go to were not for civilizing them but for destroying their culture. Most people resent this, being told your culture is ugly, your parents worthless, and the like. There are plenty of American Indians alive today who went to these schools--although I think of them as a 20th century phenomenon. In California in the 19th century the Indians were simply hunted down and killed like animals, with bounties paid.

I'm not sure the Indians thought people like these were very civilized, people who tried to make you forget your identity, stole you from your family, and killed other human beings for "sport."

Kleo

I've read that Jefferson believed that if the Indians east of the Mississippi did not take on the ways of the white man they would be annihilated completely. He thought idealistically that if all Indians moved west of the Mississippi to the Louisiana Territory or elsewhere, they'd have their own space and the whites would have theirs east of the river. Then the Indians could retain their own culture. Jefferson did not believe the Indians and whites could live together. However, when Jefferson expressed these opinions, he was already neglecting the fact that whites were already moving into the Louisiana Territory. They were on the move west and would continue to be - and fast.

I read that Andrew Jackson believed the same thing. At some times what I've read sounds like he and Jefferson were being humanitarian and truly meant to save the Indians. At other times, you can't help but think but think, of course, that they had purely selfish motives in mind - to create more land for the white man and get rid of Indian troublemakers.

When I think of Andrew Jackson, my mind thinks of the Trail of Tears. Did this happen during his administration? Weren't those Indians forcibly moved from the east out to the West? Maybe I am incorrect. I see Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson seeing the East as very developed country, at least, explored and safe country. While the West, even after Lewis and Clark's expedition, was very wild and still not fully explored. Therefore, it doesn't seem like a kindly act, at the time, to send or leave anyone out West as a reward for becoming civilized. At this time, I don't think the West was very "choice" country or real estate.

Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson and all Founding Fathers did much for this country. I think America was and is made great by the help of many ethnic groups. I like to try and remember all ethnic groups that brought something great to the melting pot of America. I don't want it to appear as though I am beating up on one person more than the other person in the building of America.

Hats: You're right. Andrew Jackson is the president associated with the Trail of Tears when the Cherokees were forced to leave their land and move west of the Mississippi. Jackson signed the Indian Removal Bill into law in 1830. (He was president 1829-1836.) The Indians were moved in 1838 and 1839, I believe.

Here's an article about their removal and the Trail of Tears:

http://ngeorgia.com/history/nghisttt.html

Here's a painting of the Trail of Tears:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h1567.html

Marni thank you for the links. What a sad day in American History. I would love to talk more about the Trail of Tears. I know it is getting off topic. What were all those people told to make them gather all their belongings and move??? In the painting the Indians look so passive and hopeless.

"Coastal Indians are people who lived in the Pacific Northwest. They hunted for whales. They lived in Longhouses because they didn't move around from place to place like other tribes in Eastern Washington. Well built and decorated ceder canoes became a price trade item.

The leaders of groups were usually always rich. Wealthy meant having slaves, canoes, tools, weapons, etc.

Wood carving, the result of centuries of practice, was one of their skilled talents. They used beaver teeth and shell bones as tools and to help make their art.

Animism was one of their religions. They believed that both living and non-living things had spirits and could help them. They had a big passion for and enjoyed weaving baskets. Sea hunting was the most common food source. They used baited hooks on kelp lines to catch salmon."

"For the Clatsop and Chinooks, neither the weather nor the diet had an adverse effect. To the contrary. They were thriving tribes before the smallpox hit them, still vibrant when Lewis and Clark came to spend the winter. With few enemies and fewer wars, they were rich, enjoying an abundance of fish and furs and first access to European trade goods. They loved the food and the climate, had perfectly adjusted to them, and rightly thought of the Pacific Northwest as a bountiful provider, almost paradise." (p.326)

To the captains and the men, it was a miserable place that they couldn't wait to get out of. Lewis expressed one major reason for that point of view: "I expect when we get under way we shall be much more healthy, it has always had that effect on us heretofore." (p.326)

I think the key to the success of the coastal Indians was that they were able to adjust to the climate and the food and also that that they didn't move around. They had few enemies and fewer wars which also attributed to the coastal Indians becoming more civilized than other tribes. Whether or not Lewis and Clark saw them as being civilized or not is a difference of opinion. In my opinion I think they certainly showed signs of being civilized because of their arts, religion, and living conditions.

I would imagine had Lewis and Clark arrived sometime in the spring or summer they probably would have had a different opinion of the Pacific Northwest. Also the diets of the men of the expedition consisted of meat rather than fish which made a difference in the health of the men as compared to the Indians.

Other Indians could not have this level of success simply because of where they lived. The coast did provide a richer, healthier, steadier and more abundant food source. In the Levant, people had to move to agriculture to gain this stability and leisure in order to start producing great art. Nomadic peoples, peoples without the engineering skills for irrigation after the climate became drier and other groups, for whatever reason, who did not attain a steady and abundant food supply had no chance for this type of success.

I'm sure it is easier to adjust to abundance than to scarcity in food resources. The climate is probably what they had to adjust to over time. I loved moving to California as a teenager and finding sunny ocean beaches as I was used to the gray, wet and wind and salt-spray swept coast of Washington State along the Pacific.

I do wonder if there is some physiological difference in people who are fish eaters. I know that high altitude peoples, like the Peruvians and Afghans have somewhat different blood cell compositions that allow them to live comfortably at higher elevations.

We studied the coastal tribes in school, but I find myself wondering where they came from. In California many of the Indian groups initially came here thousands of years ago from the Eastern US, or the Great Plains. The migration patterns of the Americas are complex.

Kleo

When we visited Vancouver and Victoria, we saw many wonderful totem poles made by the Indians.

Wherever we've visited Indian museums or art displays, such as in the Northwest or the Mashantucket Pequot Museum in CT and the annual Schemitzun powwow, we have seen the most exquisitive artwork.

Here are some pictures of British Columbia Indian totem poles:

http://www.seestanleypark.com/totems/page6totems.htm

Thanks to all of you for your serious well thought out comment on TJ’’s Indian policy. I think the short-term aspect, which essentially related to trade is rather clear. TJ’s goals were simple to exclude other nations, particularly the British leaving the trade in the hands of only American traders who would take American trade good to the many western tribes and bring back in return a generous profit of furs. Such trade would of course be beneficial to both parties bring the Indians much needed goods like woven cloth blankets and clothing, metal cooking utensils, Iron knives and hatchets, and even firearms. In return Americans would profit from the furs that they could sell in both the domestic and World markets.

TJ’s long-term plan was much more invidious.. He speaks of civilizing the Indians. Such civilized natives would it seems be incorporated into American society. In this he seems to be thinking that the process would be a melting pot rather than the multi-cultural inclusion of Indian culture to co-existent status with the general American culture. Tribes who abandoned their native culture and replaced it with the American one would take their place as equal Americans. Tribes who insisted on keeping their cultural identity intact would be moved west of the Mississippi.

The result of this policy was quick to materialize under TJ’s successors with a series of Indian wars leading to the several trails of tears mentioned in today’s posts. As the European frontier advance westward the space left for the Indian tribes quickly became inadequate. Within 20 years after the return of L&C the effect of the policy is apparent from the situation in Spanish/Mexican Texas where by the mid 1820 segments of at least 6 major U.S. tribes, Delaware, Shawnee, Cherokee, Alabamans, Coushatta, and Kickapoo, had been driven from the United States to take refuge in Spanish/Mexican Texas. There presence their greatly upset the delicate economic-social balance leading to poverty and general social decline of all the tribes both native and immigrant. . Later after U.S. annexation of Texas the U.S. moved most of these tribes as well as the native Texas tribes to Indian Territory, better known today as Oklahoma

I am grateful for the line of British Columbia Indian Totem Poles. Each one is intricately carved and very different and colorful too.

The "migration patterns of the Americas" are, from the little I know, "are complex." I have read about the Bering Strait. Did all of the Indians travel over this "bridge" to reach the Americas?

Harold thank you for the additional information. It is more than I ever knew about the Indians arrival in the Okalahomas.

As far as trading, didn't Thomas Jefferson also hope to find the Northwest Passage? I think the Northwest Passage would link the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean by way of Canada.

Northwest Passage Today

Did Thomas Jefferson have no idea what the Northwest Passage was like? In his eyes what did the Northwest Passage look like? I guess it would help to know more about the maps of that day, during the Lewis and Clark expedition.

Most certainly TJ's great hope was that L&C would find an ease river passage across the continent to the Pacific. Unfortunately an easy route did not exist; this was a geographic reality that had to be accepted. If the success of the L&C Expedition was solely finding an easy River Road to the Pacific, the Expedition was a failure. Fortunately the Expedition was broad enough to discover many other positive realities that brought it a great measure of historical success.

Actually the Canadian River system provided an better River route than the U.S. rivers. This was because the major Rivers from the west into the Great Lakes were Canadian. The Great Lakes gave them a further West starting point, a head start of a sort. Also the Elevation of the mountain passes over the divide were not so high or so long. Even so for the Canadians too, the passage was not an easy one.

Harold it is all very fascinating. Geography plays a great role in how well a country can trade with its neighbors. Thomas Jefferson had this vision. Therefore, he bought Louisiana, sent Lewis and Clark out on their expedition. Thomas Jefferson had great foresight.

Another thing Jefferson was interested in finding out was the northern boundary of the Louisiana Territory. His understanding was that the territory included all of the land around the rivers that drained into the Missouri River. He thought there might be rivers farther north in what was Canada that flowed into the Missouri. If L&C found their source, maybe the U.S. northern boundary could be moved farther north into what was Canada - great fur trading territory.

This part of the book - about Lewis' measurements regarding the 49th?? (45th???) parallel - was a bit confusing to me. (I forget which parallel it was. Sorry.)

The word "Parallel" in Geography always confuses me. I am hoping for a lot of help during the discussion.

Would going farther into the North, Canada, caused trouble with Britain, the French or both?? Would this have led to another war?

One of the problems that Jefferson and his successors had with dealing with the Indians was that most Indian tribes believe that the land they lived on was not anyone's to keep. They believed that they were custodians of the land and that the land must be shared with all. So you can see where this might be a problem with the government who wanted to own the land.

February 19-22, 1806: "Clark and Lewis order the salt camp to be demobilized and send Sgt. Pryor and a crew to do the job. The saltmakers have by boiling ocean water for over a month produced two kegs of salt for the return trip. Having been defeated by the wind on the 18th in their attempt to take a canoe as close to the camp as they could, Ordway and crew leave the fort by foot on the 19th. But once they leave the forest near the coast the SW wind blows sand and sleet so hard it stings their faces and hands. Finding an "old Indian house" after wading a river in waist deep water, they start a fire and hunker down in for the night.

On the morning of the 20th, they continue south into the wind, arriving at the salt camp around noon. They return to the fort on the 21st, but are forced to wade creeks, bogs and marshes again. Ordway is "verry Sick" when he returns and is admitted to the Ft. Clotsop "hospital." Gibson, who was so ill he had to be carried to the fort in a blanket is doing better but Bratton grows weaker with a bad back pain and Goodrich is suffering again from syphilis. Lewis continues to administer Jesuit's bark [quinine] to Gibson."

I wonder what was wrong with Bratton? He was terribly terribly ill. I think they thought he was going to die. He had terrible pain in his lower back. I was wondering at first if he broke his coccyx or something like that. But it seemed worse than that. I don't remember what L&C thought was wrong with him. I read somewhere that a 20th century doctor thought he had an abdominal infection.

It's always easier to start off on a journey. Returning from a journey is harder: supplies have been used up, fatique sets in and some people become sick. Some people thought Lewis and Clark should have been picked up by the Navy avoiding an overland journey. This was not possible. The Navy was involved in the war against the Tripoli pirates. This war was taking place in the Mediterranean.

Terroism

Pirates

I do remember the 49th Parallel.

John Shields said he had "seen men in a similar situation restored by violent sweats."

So they dug a hole for a make-shift sauna and started a fire in it. Removing the ashes they lowered Bratton, "stipped naked," into it and had him pour water on the hot rocks to "create as much steam or vapor as he could possibly bear,"and drink copious amounts of a "strong tea of horse mint. After 20 minutes they removed him and plunged him into the cold Clearwater river.

Then into the hole foor 45 minutes. Again removing him, they wrapped him in blankets and allowed him to cool gradually. The next day Bratton was cured.

Bruce Patton, author and physician wrote in "Lewis and Clark: Doctors in the Wilderness,";

"The primary problem, whatever the diagnosis, was in Bratton's lower back, within the spinal canal, or adjacent to the vertebral column, thus irritating the nerves going to the legs. Neither a malignant nor a benign tumor could have been cured in a sauna..... Many conditions cause lower back pain, but there a few problems that would go away spontaneously.

After consulting with several orthopedic and neurosurgeons, the best conclusion is that Bratton had a herniated disc with muscle spasms. The heat relieved the spasms and the disc relocated spontaneously."

Another example of a truly remarkable group.

I always remember the 49th parallel because I get it mixed up with the 42nd, a completely different parallel, but the title of the John Dos Passos book, which I always think is title the 49th Parallel, but is actually The 42nd Parallel. The former is the Canadian/US border, the latter the Californian and Nevada/Oregon and Idaho, and Pennsylvania/NY borders. I'm not sure why he uses this title for the first book in his USA Trilogy. I've read and discussed the book in book club, but it didn't jump out at me.

Lines of latitude are called parallels because they slice parallel planes through the planet earth, and each point on a parallel is an equal distance from a point on another parallel, hence, they're parallel. If you look at various map projections of the globe you can readily see that lines of latitude are all parallel to each other.

Kleo

A herniated disk. Ahah!

Hats: I was wondering why Jefferson hadn't at least sent one ship to the mouth of Columbia to pick up the group. I forgot about the Barbary Wars. Thanks for the links.

I got very interested in Stephen Decatur awhile back and read about him. The burning of the Philadelphia was where he first became a huge American naval hero. He was very heroic in the War of 1812, too. Bob and I visited his home in Washington, D.C. Decatur and his wife built a beautiful house on Lafayette Square across from the White House. It's now a National Historic Site and museum. I think he meant to pursue a political career. But, what does he do? Get killed in a stupid duel. He left his wife with no children and all the bills. She had to sell their home to pay them. What a tragic end to a brave hero.

Eaton's story was another really interesting one. Kenneth Roberts wrote a fun novel about him and the battle of Tripoli - Lydia Bailey.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0892725141

Decatur and Prebble and some other naval heros of the Barbary Wars won the Gold Medal of Honor, which was the precursor of the Congressional Medal of Honor. Pretty exciting stuff. Marni

Click Here for a Biographical sketch of Pvt William Bratton who participated in the Salt making operation on the Pacific. This sketch rates him high for his work at Fort Mandan as a blacksmith and the next year for his role at the salt works. Also he was one of three men who was nominated and received votes in the election held to replace the fallen Sergeant Floyd.

Regarding his back pain it sounds to me like a typical lower back disk ailment. Believe me I know from experience they can hurt something awful for months and suddenly get well. Clark treated Bratton with a sweat lodge that would be a good treatment even today. He responded well and soon had little or no pain. He lived until 1841 until he was 62 years old, making any serious source for his 1806 back pain unlikely.

Regarding lines of longitude and latitude, the former are not parallel to each other since they come together at the poles. Lines of Latitude do run parallel to each other as they swing in an east – west ring around the earth. The 49th parallel would be the line that was 49 degrees north of the equator.

Another TJ disappointment in the results from the Expedition was another geographic reality that there was no long running Missouri tributary river from the far North that would support a US claim to a more northern border. Actually I note that there are Several Missouri tributaries that have their origin north of the present boarder. I suspect this was argued out(give and take) at the conference table.

Harold It's interesting to know the same treatment that worked for Bratton then could work today. I really would like to read, in the future, a biography about Benjamin Rush. I need to check the library stacks.

Marni thanks for the link. I have seen Kenneth Roberts' books in the library. I have never tried one. He is on my list for the next trip in a couple of weeks.

Kleo thanks. After the post I wrote, my parallels are still mixed up. I thought it was the other way around. Thank goodness for your post. Harold I think the words, parallel, latitude and longitude make me a bit spooked, queasy and/or nervous! Your post is helpful too. I feel much better about the three geographical words. My sister kept a globe. My husband is going to buy one. I have ordered "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Geography." I looked at it on Amazon. It looks very interesting. This has been a journey for me in more ways than one.

Scrawler I have never of quinine being called "Jesuit Bark." Isn't that interesting? I can't remember what Ambrose wrote. Did the Jesuits find the bark and make first medical use of it? Why is it called Jesuit Bark? I am just curious.

Seldom97 I bet that sweat hole was pretty uncomfortable. It was like a mini volcano. I remember my parents using Vicks vapor rub. Now that will give you a really good, hard sweat. I guess it sweats all those poisons out of your system. I don't know if Vicks vapor rub is still on the market. My parents believed, Vicks, castor oil and Father John would cure whatever ailed you. At least the sweathold cured Bratton. Any treatment was better than living with a herniated disk. Ooooooh the pain! I can only imagine his discomfort. He needed to go the rest of the way home without pain.

Harold thank you for the biographical sketch of William Bratton.

That is interesting information about Stephen Decatur. I bet the home is beautiful. I have been to the White House. I think it was during the Johnson administration. I had no idea about Stephen Decatur's home being across the street. I would like to read about him too. I looked up some links yesterday. Somehow I became sidetracked in the world of Henry Hudson. He's interesting too.

I really admire men like Lewis and Clark and the team. Explorers Go places where no man has traveled. Exploring, takes a brave heart, a brave soul. Sacagawea was very brave. The only woman on the journey. She also had her baby with her. York had courage too. These people really didn't know what dangers would come their way. They did what President Jefferson asked them to do. They had to put their own lines on hold.

I remember reading the hunger felt by Lewis to go home. He wanted to share and talk about what he had seen with President Jefferson and others around a dinner table. Did he also want to get on with his own life? I think Lewis really suffered a hard case of homesickness.

It's tough going back. The snow in the mountain is very deep. One guide left the group. I don't know whether it was more difficult leaving for the expedition or returning from the expedition. At least, Shannon and Drouillaird were able to find three guides. I can't imagine going through those mountains without guides. I am happy too because the journals are safe. The journals were placed in a deposit. What is the deposit? Is it some kind of safety box Lewis and Clark had taken along????

I also can't remember much talk in the beginning about clothing. I remember much talk about boats, foodstuffs, etc. What about clothing? Did the men expect to meet up with such searing cold? Did they just use animal furs to throw over themselves? I have read that the mocassins were very light.

Jesuit's bark is called so because it was first known to Europeans through Jesuit missions in Peru. It is also known by cinchona. The trees in this genus are the source of a variety of alkaloids, the most important of which is quinine, especially used against malaria. The medicinally important part of the tree is the bark. As a medicinal herb, cinchona bark is also known as Peruvian Bark.

February 22, 1806:

"On the 21st, the day Ordway returned from the salt camp, another patient is identified: Alexander Willard. Lewis treats his unspecified illness with "Scots Pills," a physic of unknown origin or ingredients. "The general complaint," writes Lewis of his patients on the 22nd, "seams to be bad colds and fevers, something I believe of the influenza." Never have so many soldiers been ill at one time during the Expedition."

"Two Clatsop women and two boys visit the fort on the 22nd to deliver two hats made of cedar bark and beargrass they had made for Lewis and Clark. They bring other hats as well and these are all purchased and distributed among the men. The ladies inform the Corps that the small fish the Clatsop are anticipating have begun to run up the rivers. This is welcome intelligence, for the hunters are forced to go ever farther from the fort to find elk."

"Cobboway, the friendly Clatsop chief, and an entourage come to the fort on the 24th with some sturgeon and the small fish, which are a type of smelt known as the eulachon or candlefish. Roasted in "Indian stile" the fish are delicious, particularly to men who have eaten little but boiled elk for weeks. Lewis writes: "they are so fat they require no additional sauce and I think them superior to any fish I ever tasted." The Corps buy everything the Clatsop have brought and invite the Indians to spend the night in the fort when another wind and rain storm descends in the evening."

"Lewis and Clark determine to send a party to the Columbia River to purchase more fish, but the storm continues through the next day."

Lewis wrote a very interesting description of the Indians in his journal that I don't remember seeing in the Ambrose book. I thought you might be interested, too, so here goes....

"The Killamucks, Clatsops, Chinnooks, Cathlahmahs and Wackiacums resemble each other as well in their persons and dress as in their habits and manners. their complexion is not remarkable, being the usual copper brown of most of the tribes of North America. they are low in stature reather diminutive, and illy shapen; possessing thick broad flat feet, thick ankles, crooked leggs wide mouths thick lips, nose moderately large, fleshey, wide at the extremity with large nostrils, black eyes and black coarse hair. their eyes are sometimes of a dark yellowish brown the puple black. the most remarkable trait in their physiognomy is the peculiar flatness and width of forehead which they artificially obtain by compressing the head between two boards while in a state of infancy and from which it never afterwards perfectly recovers. this is a custom among all the nations we have met with West of the Rocky mountains.

I have observed the heads of many infants, after this singular bandage had been dismissed, or about the age of 10 or eleven months, that were not more than two inches thick about the upper edge of the forehead and reather thiner still higher. from the top of the head to the extremity of the nose is one streight line. this is done in order to give a greater width to the forehead, which they much admire. this process seems to be continued longer with their female than their mail children, and niether appear to suffer any pain from the operation. it is from this peculiar form of the head that the nations East of the Rocky mountains, call all the nations on this side, except the Aliohtans or snake Indians, by the generic name of Flatheads.

the large or apparently swolen legs particularly observable in the women are obtained in a great measure by tying a cord tight around the ankle. their method of squating or resting themselves on their hams which they seem from habit to prefer to siting, no doubt contributes much to this deformity of the legs by preventing free circulation of the blood.

the dress of the man consists of a smal robe, which reaches about as low as the middle of the thye and is attached with a string across the breast and is at pleasure turned from side to side as they may have occasion to disencumber the right or left arm from the robe entirely, or when they have occasion for both hands. the fixture of the robe is in front with it's corners loosly hanging over their arms. a mat is sometimes temperarily thrown over the sholders to protect them from rain. they have no other article of cloathing whatever neither winter nor summer. and every part except the sholders and back is exposed to view. they are very fond of the dress of the whites, which they wear in a similar manner when they can obtain them, except the shoe which I have never seen woarn by any of them."

[I'll continue in next post.]

"The dress of the women consists of a robe, tissue, and sometimes when the weather is uncommonly cold, a vest. their robe is much smaller than that of the men, never reaching lower than the waist nor extending in front sufficiently for to cover the body. it is like that of the men confined across the breast with a string and hangs loosly over the sholders and back. the most esteemed and valuable of these robes are made of strips of the skins of the Sea Otter net together with the bark of the white cedar or silk-grass. these strips are first twisted and laid parallel with each other a little distance assunder, and then net or wove together in such a manner that the fur appears equally on both sides, and unites between the strands. it makes a warm and soft covering. other robes are formed in a similar manner of the skin of the Rackoon, beaver etc. at other times the skin is dressed in the hair and woarn without any further preperation. the vest is always formed in the manner first discribed of their robes and covers the body from the armpits to the waist, and is confined behind, and destitute of straps over the sholder to keep it up. when this vest is woarn the breast of the woman is concealed. but without it which is almost always the case, they are exposed, and from the habit of remaining loose and unsuspended grow to great length, particularly in aged women in many of whom I have seen the bubby reach as low as the waist.

The garment which occupys the waist, and from thence as low as nearly to the knee before and the ham, behind, cannot properly be denominated a petticoat, in the common acceptation of that term; it is a tissue of white cedar bark, bruised or broken into small shreds, which are interwoven in the middle by means of several cords of the same materials, which serve as well for a girdle as to hold in place the shreds of bark which form the tissue, and which shreds confined in the middle hang with their ends pendulous from the waist, the whole being of sufficient thickness when the female stands erect to conceal those parts usually covered from formiliar view, but when she stoops or places herself in many other attitudes, this battery of Venus is not altogether impervious to the inquisitive and penetrating eye of the amorite.

The favorite ornament of both sexes are the common coarse blue and white beads which the men wear tightly wound around their wrists and ankles many times untill they obtain the width of three or more inches. they also wear them in large rolls loosly arond the neck, or pendulous from the cartelage of the nose or rims of the ears which are purforated for the purpose. the women wear them in a similar manner except in the nose which they never purforate.

they are also fond of a species of wampum which is furnished them by a trader whom they call Swipton. it seems to be the native form of the shell without any preperation. the men sometimes wear collars of bears claws, and the women and children the tusks of the Elk variously arranged on their necks arms &. both males and females wear braslets on their wrists of copper brass or Iron in various forms."

Hats: You asked about the Corps clothing. The dampness in the northwest rotted their clothing. Also, all of their activity and the water of the rivers was hard on their clothing and moccasins. I know Clark made some of his clothing from skins. I imagine they all learned to do this. Also, they had brought extra clothing along. We read at one point, when they were heading back and running out of goods to trade, Lewis traded his last coat and was hoping the government would pay him back for it.

I wouldn't be surprised if they traded for clothing made by the Indian women.

The Corps was really running out of stuff on the way back. I suppose that is one of the reasons they left too early before the snows had melted, against the advice of the Indians. They ran out of things to trade, ran out of some foods and clothing, and probably wanted to get back to their caches where they could re-supply.

Hats: I forgot to tell you - I'm going to check the library for the book Pirate Coast by Richard Zacks that you mentioned earlier. It sounds really good! Thanks!

Scrawler is right when she notes that the men at Fort Clatsop began to come down with colds and fevers. I suppose they were upper respiratory system infections but somehow they avoided pneumonia that would have likely proved fatal at least in many cases. As the time spent at Fort Clatsop lengthened, the hunters had to travel further away to harvest the elk that sustained them. No doubt this is why they departed Fort Clatsop early on March 23rd. On leaving Clark remarked, “we have lived as well as we had any right to expect, and we can say that we were never one day without 3 meals of some kind either pore Elk meat or roots.” I note that almost universally when ever Fort Clatsop Elk is mentioned in the journals it is modified by the adjective pore or some variation of the spelling.

I have the distinct impression that paddling up the Columbia was much more difficult for the expedition than paddling up the Missouri had been. This would follow from the fact that the change of elevation (some 7,000 to 9,0000 feet) was roughly the same in both directions. In passing up the Missouri the change per mile on the average was quite low since it was spread out over more than 1,500 miles. The Columbia passage was a much shorter horizontal distance, not much more than 500 miles. The average elevation change per mile was significantly greater on the Columbia.

On April 11th while engaged in portaging the canoes around a rapid there was an unpleasant confrontation with a group of Indians.; First an Indian stole a dog just after it had been purchased from the Indians. The threatened use of force brought quick recovery of the dog, but then the Indians stole Lewis’s dog, Seaman. Lewis sent a party to retrieve it and rather than risk a fight the Indians released Seaman.

By May 9th the expedition were back in Idaho with the Nez Pierce who returned the Expedition’s horses left with them over the winter. Unfortunately the snow was still blocking the pass over the mountains; they had a 6 week sojourn with the Nez Pierce before they could finally resume their journey east.

Harold: I'm glad you mentioned that about the Nez Perce having the Corps' horses. That was another reason they left early. They wanted to be sure to get to the Nez Perce and get their horses before the Nez Perce left the area to hunt elsewhere. The Corps needed those horses to transport their stuff back to the Missouri.

They needed some horses to get their stuff up the shores of the Columbia and through the mountains, too. They had to trade to get these horses and had little trade goods left. I think one or more of their canoes were wrecked from the rough waters and they were having trouble transporting their possessions.

It sounds like elk meat has less fat than other kinds of animals they hunted. At first I just though the elk they killed were thin, but now I'm thinking it's just the way elk are built - leaner than, say, buffalo??. L&C wanted their men to have more fat. That was one reason they were excited about the dead whale - it's blubber. I guess they needed fat because that they worked so hard physically and must have burned so many calories. You'd think they'd need carbohydrates and protein rather than fat, but I guess fat burns as energy.

Scrawler thank you for answering the question about the Jesuit Bark, quinine. It's very interesting to know about the Jesuits in Peru. Somehow I always relate Jesuits to California. Probably, I am thinking about another religious order.

Marni you read much faster than I do. I hope you will remember to tell what you think of the book. I want to get it too. I bet it is really good.

I am behind reading the posts. Please excuse. I have forgotten parts of the book. I could not remember much that was told about clothing.

Today with our present attitude toward fat, the 19th century craving for it sounds strange to us. But indeed it was and still is is fat that gives meat its flavor. Even today the choice steaks are marbleized with streaks of fat. The absence of visible fat would indicate a dry, flavorless steak.

Elk are certainly immense animals. I remember my brother waking me up at 2:00 AM one Morning at his house at Red River NM to see 5 of them grazing on his lawn after the motion switch had turned on the outside lights. There were 4 females and one huge male that I watched through a window from about 30 feet away. Elk are very large but very muscular animals; Marni may be right about there being naturally low in fat.

"This week's contributions to scientific knowledge through the pens of Lewis and Clark include observations on western mammals, including deer, elk, wolves, fox,fisher, antelope, sheep, sea otter, seal, eulachon, raccoon, and squirrels." ~ John Ordway's Journal

I think of all the things that the expedition brought back with them, the scientific and natural knowledge and observations were perhaps the most important. When you consider that they were perhaps among the first white men to make these observations, these oberservations become all the more important.

On the jaunt up the Columbia there was an incident in which Captain Lewis really lost his cool. Ambrose describes this incidence in Chapter 27 (page 347 in the hard cover edition). It involved the theft by the local Chinookan Indians of an iron item. Lewis threatened to shoot any Indian caught stealing and to burn the Indian houses to punish theft.

The next day a saddle and robe was stolen and Lewis’ blood pressure rose to the boiling point. He swore they would either get the property back or the Indian houses would be burned to the ground. Fortunately the recovery party led by Lewis quickly found the saddle and robe and the Indian houses were not burned.

Ambrose uses this incident to defend Lewis against charges that he was an anti Indian racist. Ambrose defines an Indian racist as one “with a blind prejudice toward native Americans, based on false but fully believed stereotypes.” Lewis according to Ambrose was no Indian racist because he “was keenly aware of differences between the tribes.” He judged each tribe individually based on its record with an open mind. The result was that in his judgment some tribes, he admired, to some he was indifferent, some he pitied, and a few he despised.

I think Captain Lewis’s open mindedness was predicated on the fact that his open-minded judgment of individual tribes was predicated on his “Melting Pot” model of America’s future. The “Good Indians” were those willing to meld into the accepted American Culture. Lewis shows no sign of being capable of understanding a “Multi Cultural” model in which tribal culture and the standard American culture would live side by side. I doubt today that a reincarnated Captain Lewis would pass the psychological evaluation required to become an astronaut or participate in some of the other U.S. Government, or for that matter Corporate, sensitive command positions.

Yes, the Ethonography and nature studies will always make us remember Lewis and Clark. I can only imagine Thomas Jefferson's thoughts about what he heard, read and saw concerning the expedition. Lewis collected fifty new plants.

"Lewis also collected, described, and preserved close to fifty new plants, including camas, yellow bells, Lewis's syringa, purple trillium, ragged robin, and mariposa lily."

Ragged Robin

I agree about Lewis and the melting pot. Ambrose says Lewis could not see African Americans fitting into American society at all. I have the feeling Lewis had no time for such ideas involving unity with other cultures. Perhaps, he was just too involved with his scientific studies.

On the way home Lewis would lose all of his plant specimens in the water. Paul Russell Cutright writes,

"Such losses were more than minor catastrophes, resulting as they did in the defeat of prime scientific objectives..."

What a very sad day!

I looked eulachon up in my dictionary. It says it is a another name for a candlefish.

"Candlefish |?kandl?fi sh | noun ( pl. same or -fishes) a small, edible marine fish with oily flesh, occurring on the west coast of North America. Also called eulachon . • Thaleichthys pacificus, family Osmeridae.ORIGIN so named because the Chinook Indians formerly burned the oily bodies of these fish as candles."

Believe they ate them as well.

... smelt.

It's a family of little, greasy, anadromous (living in salt water, returning to fresh water spawning grounds of birth) fish, the Osmeridae are.

A fun fact about Thaleichthys pacificus (Richardson, 1836). It was first described in the scientific literature and given its scientific name by a famous Scottish naturalist, Sir John Richardson. Richardson went on some of the British expeditions to search for the Northwest Passage through the Arctic (post Lewis and Clark). When you look at the name of an animal in scientific literature today, it is usually printed the first time with its initial authority and the date. The authority is not the person who collected the specimen, but rather the person who first described and assigned it to its correct position, and named it--a taxonomist, in other words. When one reads mid-19th century dates and the name Richardson, one thinks of the Scottish ichthyologist (fish dude).

I know that in botanical literature there are a lot of Lewis's. Namely the species Clarkia has a lot of scientists named Lewis studying and identifying Clarkia's (psst! don't tell Ginny I flubbed that Latin plural). The Clarkia and the Lewisia, both stunning beauties in the world of wildflowers, were, indeed, named for our explorers. I always wanted to find one they described, though. The standard surname, Lewis, without initials, is for Meriwhether Lewis in botanical authorities, but I can't find any flowers he named and described.

Kleo

Hats: Don't you just love those "Discovering Lewis and Clark" pages with the info and pictures! Fabulous!

Harold: The one and only time I ever saw elk was when Bob and I were in Arizona near the south rim of the Grand Canyon. We had just been seated next to a window in a restaurant. Suddenly, nearly everyone in the place raced out the door and across the street, which was next to a forest. We looked in amazement out the window and my husband realized there were 3 elk across the street. We ran over and joined the crowd where everyone was taking pictures. The elk were just standing there. Then they meandered off. It was cool.

We're still waiting to see a moose in the wild. I heard on the news last year that there were 12 moose in CT! One was killed (hit by a car).

The Nez Percé, who L&C spent an unintended six weeks with waiting for the snow on the Mountain pass to sufficiently melt, are an Interesting tribe. They normally lived on the western side of the divide but as Marnie mentioned in #714 in the summer they crossed over to the east side to hunt buffalo. During the six weeks while the Expedition was with them, they too were waiting an opportunity to hunt buffalo.

It is interesting to me that the mountain tribes (Shoshone and Nez Percé) were so rich with horses. Even the Columbia River tribes, whose culture really did not seem to require them, seem to have many horses.

The horse in this area had come via the Spanish settlements at Santa Fe and New Mexico. This was probable the principal source of horses acquired by the western and plains Indians beginning in the 17th century. We know that by the 1680’s some horses were already in the hands of the Caddo In East Texas, and there is no reason to doubt that the horse was reaching these Northwestern tribes by, or even before, that date. The Expedition used their time with the Nez Percé to neuter their male horses. They found that the procedure used by the Indians was less debilitating than their own.

The long wait with the Nez Percé gave Lewis the opportunity to study this tribe in detail. He seems much impressed with their potential judging them a cheerful people. The men loved to gamble and they were very skillful horse riders. `In Ambrose’s words,” On horseback the `the Nez Percé put the American soldiers to shame. Lewis was amazed at how accurate they were with the arrows, even when firing at a rolling target from the back of a galloping horse.”

Apparently the Nez Percé was a tribe which under rCapt Lewis’s standard could be classified as “good Indians,” a tribe he could hope would find its place in America’s future.

The tribe of the Nez Perce has a web site (click on frequently asked questions)

here

Note they prefer the designation Indian, not Native American, as we have seen for other tribes.

Another interesting Expedition activity while they waited for an opportunity to cross the Mountains, was their treatment of the paralyzed Nez Percé chief. One wonders what caused his paralysis. Apparently it was not an accidental trauma because it would seem the chief would have told them if that had been the case. Could it have been the disease we know as Infantile Paralysis? I do not recall hearing of this disease from pre 20th century writings. Also there are other diseases that could have caused his paralysis.

The Captains flushed with their success in treating Bratton’s back pain in a long sweat lodge session tried this therapy with the paralyzed chief. Apparently after repeated sweat treatments the men saw signs of improvement.

I supposed that as a realist, I must doubt the possibilities of significant improvement in this case. The truth is I cannot recall a single written account of any treatment failure in any of the journals. I suppose the Sergeant Floyd case was an unrecognized exception, but otherwise there was always at least a perceived improvement, that I fear was the situation in this case.

The most famous of the Nez Perce in American history books (non-Indian history books, obviously) is Chief Joseph of the Wallowa Nez Perce whose "I will fight no more forever" speech was interpreted and printed in Harper's Weekly in 1877ish:

"Tell General Howard I know his heart.
What he told me before, I have it in my heart.
I am tired of fighting.
Our chiefs are killed; Looking Glass is dead, Too-hul-hul-sote is dead.
The old men are all dead.
It is the young men who say yes or no.
He who led on the young men is dead.
It is cold, and we have no blankets; the little children are freezing to death.
My people, some of them, have run away to the hills, and have no blankets, no food.
No one knows where they are—perhaps freezing to death.
I want to have time to look for my children, and see how many of them I can find.
Maybe I shall find them among the dead.
Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is sick and sad.
From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever."

We had to memorize this speech for school, although I had to copy this from Wikipedia as it has been a long time.

Harold, Polio was known in ancient Egypt. I don't know how ancient is the appearance of the virus among humans, though.

Kleo

Harold the paralyzed Nez Perce Chief made a mark in my memory too. At the time I wondered whether the chief had just become tired of living the life of a nomad: searching for food, fighting different tribes, etc. Some of these very issues are mentioned in the speech by Chief Joseph posted by Kleo. Even though the chief improved I had the feeling he might not live very long. Some of this is my imagination overworking.

Kleo the speech by Chief Joseph is very moving. Thank you.

Mippy thank you for the link.

The Nez Perce weren't nomads, they had homelands. They were also, at least pre-contact, a peace-loving peoples. Chief Joseph's speech is not about a lifestyle but about a war, a particularly nasty war designed to kill all of his people.

The descendants of the Wallowa band of the Nez Perce, Chief Joseph's people, live on the Colville Indian Reservation in Washington, or used to, not on the main tribal reservation in Idaho. The Colville Indian Reservation is not a Nez Perce Reservation, though. The women my sister and I babysat for were from the Wallowa Nez Perce tribe. They were, like most of my family's friends, brilliant intellectuals, and deeply against war.

Kleo

Kleo thank you for those corrections. My imagination went over the top. Sorry.

Hats,

I think it was actually my fault. I did not place the speech in its historic context. And, like most of the people on the Internet with whom I discuss history, I just assumed that everyone had the same background in history that I did. I know this is not true from my frustrations that people born and raised on the East Coast simply don't realize that California was a Spanish possession for a long time before it became part of America. I studied Chief Joseph as did all of my siblings and peers because I grew up in Washington state.

Kleo

I grew up in Philadelphia. Besides, many facts are lost to me. My memory is really bad, comes and goes. I am glad you made those explanations. History has to be kept pure and factual. It is not a literature class.

thanks everybody for all your knowledge and links to interesting info. I'm lurking even tho not posting much and enjoying it immensely ....jean

"The delicious eulachon are so delicate that they must be smoked right away. The Clatsop cook their sturgeon with steam. A fire is laid on a layer of stones, heating them to cooking temperature. Sturgeon fillets are placed on the stones, a layer of brush place upon the fist, another layer of fish is added, etc., until a cap layer of mats is placed. Lewis declares this method better than boiling or roasting." ~ Patrick Grass - March 2, 1806

It makes my mouth water just to describe cooking the fish. When I first came up to the Pacific Northwest ten years ago salmon and other varieties abound everywhere, but now because of the shortage of fish many of the restaurants have found it to expensive to serve their customers.

Last time I was in Seattle, less than 10 years ago, there was no shortage of fish on every menu and in every market I visited. What is the shortage of salmon? It has been disastrously endangered due to the dams on the rivers for ages, but I don't know about this new crisis. Please elaborate.

One thing I miss in California, besides the late summer nights, is salmon jerky.

Kleo

Jean: It's good to hear from you. I hope you are feeling well.

Kleo: I'm glad you mentioned salmon jerky. Lewis mention that the Corps "jerked" various meats on their journey. Does anyone know just what that means? How would meat be "jerked"? Is it dried?

Bob and I toured the New Bedford Whaling National Historic Park today and went through the whaling museum. We watched parts of an old silent movie "Down To the Sea in Ships" which showed a whale being killed and de-blubbered, etc. Of course, I thought of Undaunted Courage and the whale that washed up on the coast and how the Indians cut off the blubber to eat. The New Bedford whalers wanted the blubber for its oil, not for food, but for lighting and other, more industrial, uses. We learned that it was the discovery of petroleum oil and its replacement of whale oil that brought the end to the whaling industry in New Bedford, "the whaling capitol of the world" (and eventually saved the whales.)

Yes Marni Jerkey is dried meat. Some of the early writing indicate it would be sufficiently dried in a manner of a few hours. I supposed humidit would have a lot to do with the time required. This was the only way pre-20th century had for preserving meat.

A common sight in any 19 century or earlier Indian village would be elevated racks for drying meat. They would have to be sufficiently elevated to te securely out of the reach of the dogs.

Even to day there are a number of countries much involved in whaling and the promotion of the whaling industry. Incluced are Japan, Iceland and Norway. Why is it so important to them today? I suspect they relish it as a food item????

In 1826 on the Delos on his way to England, Audubon discussed Whaling with the ship's captain. The Captain would have really liked whale meat in preferenc to the fish that was their fresh food stable while they were in the Gulf of Mexico.

On June15th the party left their camp with the Nez Percè to cross the mountains. Two days later finding 15ft snow and no grass necessary to sustain their horses they cached their heavy equipment and returned to the lower elevation camp with the Nez Percè

On June 24th the party tried again, this time with three Nez Percè guides. This time they found patches of grass for their horses . On June 29th the party rested at a hot springs and Partick Gass tells us that most of the party had a hot bath. By July 1st they were back to the Missouri where two days later the party split with Capt Lewis proceeding back down river and Clark diverting to the Yellowstone. It was intended that at the Maria’s River Lewis would take a small party up the Maria’s River, Clark was to pick up the Yellowstone and reunite with the main party at its mouth with the Missouri.

What does Nez Percè mean In French? Could it be pierced nose?

Yes, "Nez Perce" means "pierced nose" in French. However, it is the Chinook Indians who pierce their noses, not the Nez Perce.

Kleo

http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/cultural/northamerica/nez_perce.html

Another way people preserved meat pre-20th century was by salting it. I was wondering if L&C set up the salt works on the coast throughout the winter was so they had salt to salt elk meat to bring with them on the return trip. They made a lot of salt. But I never saw anything about them using the salt for preserving meat. I guess they just used it as a flavoring.

Marni

Kleo, because of global warming salmon are spawning to soon and are not strong enough to get where they have to go. In addition bears and other predators are coming down from the mountains because there is a shortage of food and are stocking up on the young salmon. We have a seal in the Portland area that has made his home in the fish preserve. The engineers have tried everything to get this seal to leave, but so far the engineers are bating zero. Also, because of additional government regulations in this area, many of the fisherman are going elsewhere to fish. All of this drives the price of fish up.

"The species cataloged this week are the mountain beaver, badger, rat, hare, sharp tailed grouse, prairie chicken, sage grouse, spruce grouse, ruffed grouse, mourning dove, varied thrush, black-billed magpie, pileated woodpecker, common flicker, red-breasted sapsucker, Stellar's jay, gray jay, western meadowlark, winter wren, and California condor." ~ Patrick Gass March 3, 1806

Imagine what Lewis might have felt when he came across all these various species. If this had been the only thing that the expedition had brought back, the expedition would have been a success. And considering they couldn't exactly run to the nearest UPS store and ship it back east, I think they did remarkably well in not only getting back an array of species, but the scientific notes to go along with them.

Marni, I don't get the impression from the book that they carried meat over a day or so, with a fresh kill. Salting meat to cure it is a long term process, I thought, unlike making jerky, which just requires a lot of prep work. Yes, it seems like a ton of salt, but what was it used for, simply for flavor? Dang they had some salty diets.

Scrawler, yes I guess there continue to be more issues as time goes on, especially as very little recovery for the populations has been effected due to the dams. I'm not sure about the global warming connection, though, as salmon have spawned the rivers of the northwest for longer and more variable climate than has been exhibited over the past 200 years. In Seattle they usually have a problem with a sea lion at the runs at the locks, not a seal. They move them 1000s of miles away, but they just come back, and usually with friends. They needed to make the first one captive, but they didn't. I don't know the current status of the sea lion(s) at the locks in Seattle, though.

I am having a problem with my sbcyahoo browser. Test

The crazy browser is back again. There are many journal entries saying they stopped to jerks meat. At Fort Mandan they had a deep freeze storage so keeping it was no problem. At Fort Clatsop it wasn’t a deep freeze but it was a cool room. On the trail and at Fort Clatsop they would eat improperly cured meat a lot older than we would call safe. How often do the journals speak of using spoiled elk meat?

Somewhere I remember reading in a journal that after killing deer or a buffalo the journal said something like "at noon we stopped to jerk the meat.) The next sentence read something like "At four PM we continue up river." I don’t think their jerky was anywhere near as dry as the jerky we buy at the interstate truck stops today.

I've thought it would be interesting to read the Journals to count the number of different animals, deer, antelope, elk, buffalo etc , to get an accurate estimate of the total animals of each class that the expedition killed. The total pounds would be quite high. I suspect the amount of waste was rather high. I wonder if the total count of animals killed from the journal was the method Ambrose used to make his estimate that the daily meat consumption the first year on the Missouri was 9 pounds per day per man?

We will contine the week 5 assignment through Thursday. Until then we can continue in low gear feeling free to interrupt for our own Labor Day observances. Meanwhile those of us that are available can continue with the weeek 5 discussion.

Tomorrow we might plan to comment on the wisdom of the Captain's decision to break their platoon size unit into 5 separate groups each with its own special mission. One of these consisted of only 3 men lead by a Sergeant yet it was by itself far removed from support from the other groups.

Interesting tidbit. I grew up in California and there they have Yellow billed Magpie. They exist only in the Sacramento-San Joaguin Valley west of the Sierra mountains.

In the rest of the country they are black billed.

The posts about salmon reminded me of the photo I took when we visited the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks, often called the Ballard Locks, near Seattle. The locks link salt walter Puget Sound with the fresh waters of Salmon Bay, Lake Union, Portage Bay and Lake Washington. A fish ladder was built there to allow salmon to pass around the locks from salt water to fresh water. Through glass panels in an underwater viewing area, visitors can view the salmon navigating their way up the fish ladder, adjusting to different levels of salt each step of the way. Occasionally, a sea lion hangs around looking for a meal.

Here's my photo of a salmon going up the fish ladder at the locks:

Salmon Ladder

Marni

During the massive migration via the Oregon-California trail, woman were able to "answer nature's call" in the middle of no-where by other women surounding that woman with their long skirts.

But what the heck did Sacajawea, the only woman, do?

And what's worse, there was no toilet "tissue," nor often even leaves from trees avaialable.

And I remember, back in the 1940s, how many, many diapers wife and I had to rinse out in the toilet before throwing in the washing machine.

I know it was a different time, but how did she manage? Nursing "Pomp," probably resulted in no menstration, luckily because Lewis forgot to order Tapons. And was this problem ever mentioned in any journal?

Of course the men had the same problem; no toilet tissue, no sears catalog and no tree leaves for many days.

Did I miss how meat is "jerked?" What do they do when they "dry" it that it doesn't just spoil? My Dad used to make "dried beef" but that took a lot of seasoning and a lot of time and i didn't pay much attention, so i'm not even sure what that was about.

Thank you for asking Marni, I'm doing very well. Have been busy w/ a lot of other things, so haven't re-read much of the book - i read it about 2 or3 yrs ago. So, i haven't commented much, but your discussion has been wonderful........jean

The issues raised by Seldom and Jean in Messages #752 & 753 were consistently ignored by the early writers. Universally they just didn’t go to these issues. I suspect that Sacagawea was simply unaware that these were in any way issues as indeed they were not issues to her. She just did what she had to do. Likewise it don’t seem to have been an issue for the men either. There was never a disciplinary issue raised because of her presence.

The early writers provide just a bit more detail on the handling of babies who universally spent at least their first 18 months or longer mostly on their cradleboard carried on their mother’s back or hung from a convenient tree limb as mom went about her work. Little time was spent entertaining babies. They were expected to entertain themselves with perhaps a bright tied down, dream catcher in their reach to get their attention. There were no cloth diapers. Instead there was some disposable material that might have been buffalo hair, buffalo chips (dry dung), moss or dry grass. I have heard all of thee items mentioned by the professional staff at the ITC, but I don’t remember reading of any of them in primary source writings. Several early writers including George Catlin tell of their keeping babies on the cradle board as long as three years, much longer than we would think desirable today.

This was certainly how Pomp spent his first 20 months while he made the trip from Fort Mandan to the Pacific and back carried in a series of successively larger cradleboards on his mother's back..

Back across the Mountains the Captains made a decision to divide the party into four separate groups each with its own particular mission. The first was to be led by Captain Lewis. It consisted of nine men and seventeen horses who would follow the Nez Percé’s overland route to the great falls where they would drop off three men to assist in the portage. The remaining six would then explore up the Maria’s River north to the 50th parallel, hopefully to meet the Blackfeet and to see if there were Missouri tributaries coming from the far north.

The rest of the party was to proceed to the head of the Jefferson River where they had left the Canoes and from there, down the Jefferson to the three forks. At that point Clark would separate with a party of 10 men with York and Sacagawea with horses overland to the Yellowstone River where they would build canoes to pass down the Yellowstone to its Mouth at the Missouri where they would eventually meet the others.

The third independent group would be led by Sergeant Ordway who after the Clark party left him at the three forks would take the remaining men in the canoes down the Missouri, portage the falls with the help of the three men left there by Lewis, continuing on to the re-assembly point at the mouth of the Yellowstone.

The fourth group led by Sergeant Prior with only 2 Privates would accompany Clark on his overland jaunt to the Yellowstone. There Prior and his men would separate with the horses bound for the Mandan Village where the Horses were to be used as gifts to and trade with the Mandans. Also Prior was to deliver a letter to the Northwest Company agent Hugh Henry probably demanding his exit from U.S territorial.

Ambrose calls this “a highly ambitious plan, exceedingly complex, full of promise about what could be learned, (and) dependent on tight timing.” He also called it “exceedingly dangerous” and voiced his judgment that the Captains were taking chances they should have avoided.” I can easily agree with the Ambrose conclusion that in undertaking it the officers certainly demonstrated their high confidence in their Sergeants and enlisted men.

As It turned out I suppose the general good luck that had follow the expedition since its launch continued though two to the groups encountered major encounters with Indians that might have turned into disaster.

Jerky is made by drying at about 150 degrees F, so they probably put the meat on racks over a fire, the temperature regulated by height of the meat over the fire. Most people use lots of flavorings on the meat, as mentioned by someone else watching her dad dry meat. The flavorings are not necessary. It takes anywhere from 3-6 hours, according to internet sites. We used a dehydrator which took longer, maybe overnight.

Real jerky is not the stringy cardboard sold at truck stops. Now you all have me craving jerkey. They make and sell it at real meat markets most places across the country. If you have a real butcher, an American butcher, not Halal or Kosher, near you, ask them about it.

Yes, I love the yellow billed Magpie of California. It's a beautiful bird, just right, imo.

The Ballard Locks are not "near Seattle" but rather in Seattle, in the neighborhood called Ballard, somewhat of a Norweigan fishing village. This is where I grew up as a child, in Ballard in Seattle. Going to the locks was wonderful fun.

As to toilet tissue and diapers, the travelers certainly stowed a stash of handy leaves as any modern person in the same predicament would do, they are other means of cleaning oneself, also. I believe there is a book called How to S#*^ in the woods that explains this. In addition to what Harold mentioned, the bottom of the cradle part of the cradleboard could be stuffed with cattail down or any number of materials. Sacagawea probably had as much as she needed, gathering more when available, and using cleanable materials otherwise. Women used this and other means as menstrual pads, again, being prepared as necessary.

Remember that the Indians lived in these lands from year to year much better than the Expedition did. Ambrose even points this out at the end of one chapter on ethnography where he notes the party had to return because they had hunted all the elk, while the Indians continued to live enjoying the luxury of artistry and skilled crafts even, whereas the Expedition spent their winter in drudgery.

Kleo

I'm a bit confused about some of Ambrose's conclusions about the trading posts. He says,

"No sailing vessel could possibly come to the Pacific Northwest from London or Boston in one year, which led Lewis to speculate that there had to be a a trading post down the coast to the southwest, or perhaps on some island in the Pacific. He was wrong about the trading post, right about the island. Although he never knew of its existence, the trading base was Hawaii."

As interested in everything in the world, and in exploration and geography and international affairs as Lewis was he certainly knew of the existence of the Hawaiian Islands, as Cook's writings about them were published in the late 18th century.

What about the trading post? Well, one could assume that the British might use the islands as a trading post, because they were heavily involved in the trade to the East (China, Japan, Korea). But I don't know the times of this trading. I would guess that by the early 19th century the British had trade interests in the Far East. So, Lewis, with more knowledge of the times than I do by a long shot, knew whether or not the British were using the Sandwich Islands as a trading post for silks and spices from the East for furs to the East.

There were other long-established trading posts along the coast of Western North America at the time. The Russians were involved in the fur trade in Alaska by this time, and the Spanish capital in Monterey was a major port of call for sailing vessels along this coast for resupplying themselves. Did the British call there with furs? Probably not, as the furs were not as valuable to the Spanish as to the Asians and Europeans proper.

Ambrose sometimes adds irritating bits like this, half-thought out, partially explained, indirectly connected to the narration. Why? It's very frustrating for me as a reader. I suspect he uses secondary sources for a lot of his research and simply doesn't investigate the accuracy or dig for the roots.

Nonetheless it is clear that a ship home was a definite option for the expedition. They learned from the Indians exactly when the vessels came (and made sure they cleared out before then), how long they stayed, what was traded.

There are a handful of coastal Indian groups of the United States who were formidable seamen. The Indians of the Pacific Northwest, some parts of the North Coast of California and the Channel Islands all made sea-worthy canoes that they used in the ocean, going to and from coastal islands, or for long journeys along the coast. They have ingenious paddles, and were major components of all trade along the coast and far inland, and developed arts and crafts that the Europeans saw value in. Again, they had rich civilizations because the lands they lived in, although impoverished for the white man and his ways, were abundantly full of resources.

Kleo

"Bratton is much worse today...I rubbed [his back] well with Some volatile linniment which was prepared with Sperits of wine, camphire, [C]astile Soap, and a little landinum."

"Lewis is very concerned about Private Bratton's back. He gives Bratton one of the few remaining flannel shirts and concocts the liniment described above. "Sperits of wine" is brandy, camphor an aromatic topical analgesic, and the soap is added perhaps to give the compound a lotion texture. Laudanum is a tincture of opium which at large does would make Bratton forget all about his bad back, and pretty much everything else. Its therapeutic value in a liniment is open to question. But the rub does give Bratton temporary relief from pain." ~ March 7, 1806

I've suffered with back pain for years and nothing short of surgery seems to help. I use a combination of exercise and meditation. I tend to stay away from pills etc since I'm allergic to everything under the sun as well as the sun. But next time I'm withering in pain, I might consider Lewis's compound.

The more I read about the time frame of the 1800s; the more I am surprised at the use of medicine like opium to relieve pain.

"Opium was used to help control mild pain through much of the century. It was abused as a recreational drug from as early as 1840. In 1868, it was estimated at least 100,000 people from all stations of life were addicted to the drug, which was openly sold in drugstores in pill form or as laudanum." ~ "The Writers Guide to Everyday Life in the 1800s"

Scrawler, Why are you surprised at the use of opium to relieve pain?

Kleo

I enjoyed reading the sections in Washington State and Oregon because of the mention of all of the Indian tribes that are familiar to me. When I grew up in Washington the history of the Indian tribes was taught extensively from elementary school on up, much more extensively than in any other state I've lived in (California, Oklahoma, Texas, Colorado, Louisiana, North Carolina). When I read general American history books the tribes mentioned, from the East, are not the tribes I am most familiar with (outside of having lived in Oklahoma, of course).

I also liked these sections because of my familiarity with the geography. I thought, hmmm, Tillamook Head for the beached whale? That's quite a hike--and it is. I knew most all of the rivers, the harbors, the cities, and the tribes mentioned. I spent my teen years hiking and scrambling and camping around Eastern Washington along the Columbia River country. It's fun revisiting this in a book, and I'm pretty sure this is the first book I've revisited in.

Kleo

The only thing I've read so far in the L&C journals regarding Indian women's menstruation is in Clark's journal. He noticed that in some northwest tribes, the women were not allowed to touch things like food for others during their menstruation. When on the move, they had to stay a certain distance behind. They built special buildings (Clark refers to them as "hospitals") where the women stayed during their periods. They must have enjoyed that. Although they were segregated, it must have given them an opportunity to visit with each other and be away from their general toils.

Clark never uses the word "menstruation" in his journal. He leaves a blank instead of assigning a word. I found that amusing. But, it may have embarrassed Clark somewhat to write about it.

during their periods. Marni's right - a chance to chat, commiserate, rest, be out of the world for 4-9 days, could sound like heaven to some women today. Of course, we now know that women who live together tend to synchronize their cycles, so you could have the whole village/tribe of women going missing for one week/month. How would that effect things????? Something to contemplate? aaahhhhh........jean

I have never read a pre 20th century primary source account of the Indian method for drying meat that used fire or smoke. They simply cut it in long thin strips and hung it on racks sufficiently elevated to keep it away from the dogs. In a reasonable dry air I suspect a single day would do the job. Also their was the L&C reference I previously cited when some 5 hours seems to have sufficed. I did a google search on “Indian Jerky” and true there are all kinds of modern recipes including the use of fire smoke, salt and all kinds of seasonings. If these were used they escaped the notice of the early writers.

For many years the Smithsonian had a wonderful large diorama of a plains Indian tepee that was first exhibited in 1876 in at the Philadelphia U.S. Centennial celebration. Near the tepee meat was drying on elevated racks similar to the scene in this picture, Click Here. The last time I was

Harold thank you for showing that picture. It almost looks like ragged clothing belonging to a child.

Kleo your knowledge about the Indian tribes was very helpful.

Regarding the Trading Ships at the mouth of the Columbia. I think it would have been possible for a sailing ship to reach the Pacific Northwest in a bit less than a year. Some 15 years earlier HMS Bounty reached Tahiti in 10 months (Dec 23, 1787 – Oct 26, 1788) despite the fact that it wasted time trying to force its way into the pacific around the horn. When it failed it reversed course to reach Capetown where it spent almost 6 weeks refitting before resuming its course around the cape of good Hope and still made it in significantly less than a year.

The one ship that I had web information on and mentioned previously spent a full year trading at the Columbia. Finally with its trade goods spent and its hold full of furs, it headed west to China where it sold the furs for gold before returning home to Boston.

I can't imagine just leaving meat out, even on a windy day on a drying rack w/out it ending up being rotten and pretty untasty in the end.....besides, on a windy day, there could be dirt, ashes, etc. attached to it.....i guess my 20/21st century sensitivies are showing ..........jean

March 8, 1806:

"John Collins delights everyone on the 8th with the three elk he kills in the open country near Point Adams and his sighting of "two large herds." Clark and Lewis send Drouillard and Joe Field in that direction. Lewis declares McNeal and Goodrich free of "Louis veneri" and directs them to cease application of the mercury."

March 9, 1806: Filed and Drouillard return to the fort on the 9th to report they could not find the elk Collins had seen. Bratton's back pain returns on the he 9th, but responds again to Lewis's special liniment."

March 10, 1806: Three parties of hunters are sent out on the 10th, two along the Netul River and another to Young's River east of the fort, an area in which they the Corps have not hunted yet."

March 11, 1806: "Pryor returns with a canoe full of fish on the 11th that he has obtained from the Cathlamet tribe on the Columbia River. Wind and canoe difficulties had delayed his return, but the sturgeon, eulachon, and wappato root he purchased are very welcome. "We live once more in clover," writes Lewis. A hunting party returns without the canoe they had taken out. Rising tide had carried it away."

These entries certainly give us an idea of how difficult it was to obtain food especially in the winter months. It makes you feel glad about that Safeway around the corner. The only thing I ever caught was some fish and I think they were just too old to get away. My husband used to fish out in the American River and the Pacific Ocean. Once or twice a month he would go out and we would have enough fish to last us for months back in the 1960s, but than we had a draught for three or four years and fish was hard to come by because the rivers were so low.

If I remember correctly, Ambrose wrote about the starving Indians. Those were very hard times. The team went without food or had trouble getting food too.

It probably won't spoil if the air is dry enough. However, through a large part of their trek, the air is not dry enough. I wish Ambrose described their methods. However, if you leave a piece of meat on the counter in your home, a thin-slice piece, you will see that it readily dries up just sitting out.

Jean, there are probably plenty of small unseen particles in the average home that are the equivalent of what is blowing in the wind out on the prairie getting on our foods and especially our meats, not the mention the ghastly practices associated with large scale meat processing that most Americans are subjected to. I know you probably don't want to know this, still, it might not be as bad as what the Indians ate from air-dried meat, or it might be worse.

Kleo

http://www.dillon-real-estate.com/lewis_and_clark.htm

my husband is a microbiologist and infrequently comments about what is growing in our garbage disposal and around the sink and i read "The Jungle." Of course, the consequences of "The Jungle" was that all that has been cleaned up somewhat, but i've enough acquaintances in the food and restaurant industries to know their world is not pristine........arrgghh, hate to think about it. But i'm sure L&C probably had less concern aboutthose things then how to get some food to eat, especially in the winter times. I'm not sure where it was in the book, but my most vivid mind pictures from the reading was getting the horses thru the high snow and even more so getting the horses food........jean

Oh, Jean, you already know far more than you want to know being married to a microbiologist. I drive my family crazy because I boil my sponges and dish-cleaning tools every day, then dump the boiling water down the garbage disposal, also use citrus on the latter. Folks think I'm obsessive-compulsive or a germaphobe. I think I'm realistic.

I don't have any issue with camping, though, and cold-water dish-washing, eating in the field, taking care of business in the woods.

Kleo

Not only would the final product be contaminated with blowing dust and ash, worse it would have had flies, and other Insects crawling on it while drying on the racks. The early 19th century Indian was not finicky when it came to his food. I have said before if by some time machine we could join the expedition with our 21st century GI systems I suspect we would quickly come down with a bad case of the grippers. Remember even Captain Lewis had a 2-day attack in 1805 when he left the Maria’s river cache camp to explore up the Missouri to the falls.

We are now near the end of our week 5 discussion but still have a lot of material to discuss before the expedition is back at St Louis. What are your comments on the four independent parties each on its own separate mission? Which 2 of them got into serious trouble? Was it wise or reckless to divide the party in this manner?

Some other Week 5 points to discuss is the friendly fire incident that severally wounded Capt Lewis. Finally what significance do you assign to the several parties passing the expedition on their way up river to trap beaver and trade with Indians? And did you notice one member of the Expedition obtained the Captain’s permission to leave the expedition to join one of these up river groups?

Speaking of insects, I think the worst that the Corps faced by far was the mosquito (a.k.a. "mosqueter"). They were literally plagued with them again in spring and summer 1806. They horses were frantic and the dog howled from mosquitos biting. My husband spent a summer when a teenager as a cowhand on a ranch in Wyoming. He said the mosquitos were just like they were described by L&C - so thick they got in your throat when you opened your mouth. Bob said when he ran his hand down his horse's neck it came away just covered with blood from mosquitos feeding on the horse. It just makes me cringe.

I thought dividing the Corps into the various smaller teams had its pros and cons. Pro: The different teams could explore different areas and report on them, which just one team would be unable to do since they wanted to try to get back to civilization that year and time was apassing. Con: Each group was small and more defenseless. They were heading into Blackfoot territory and knew other Indians were afraid of the fierce Blackfoot tribes.

Lewis' group ran into big trouble. They kept hoping not to bump into the Blackfeet and saw signs of their deserted camps periodically. Finally, they met up with 8 of them to Lewis' chagrin. Droulliard was alone, I believe, searching for signs of the Indians, when Lewis and men with him spotted the Indians watching Droulliard. Lewis and men approached the Indians and communicated with them, gave them gifits, etc. and tried to keep things going smoothly. They got Droulliard back to them safely.

That night Lewis and his men and the Indians slept together in a camp. Lewis had only one man keep watch. He and the rest fell asleep which seems pretty dumb. The one man on post, J. Fields, carelessly laid his gun down behind him and an Indian nabbed it along with his brother's gun. Two other Indians seized Lewis' and Droulliard's guns. The Fields brothers chased after the Indian with their guns, wrestled their guns back, and R. Fields stabbed the Indian to death.

Droulliard got his gun back after a scuffle. Lewis raised a pistol at the Indian with his gun and the Indian dropped his rifle. Then the Indians stole a bunch of the team's horses and drove them off. The team was able to halt a bunch of the Indians' horses. Lewis shot one of the Indians who wouldn't give his horse back, and the Indian shot back at Lewis who wrote later, "He overshot me, being bearheaded I felt the wind of his bullet very distinctly."

The team rounded up some of their own horses and some of the Indians' horses. The Indians got away with two guns. The team headed off quickly, pushing their horses as hard as they could to get to the Maria's river, fearing that the Indians would come back after them with reinforcements.

Whew! Just like a movie!

I was surprised at how often the Corps' horses disappeared or escaped. It seemed like it happened constantly. You'd think the Corps could have been more careful with the horses considering how hard they worked to trade for them in the first place. They sometimes hobbled their horses, sometimes tied them up, sometimes just let them graze and roam. Sometimes the horses broke their ropes to escape. Other times, I'm not even sure how they escaped. Sometimes they were stolen by Indians.

I agree with the Ambrose conclusion that breaking up the party was risky. True there was also benefit to the gained, but was the risk of the loss of much, or all of what had already been achieved worth it?

Furthermore the Captains when they crossed the Mountains already had intelligence that their peace message given the year before was not being followed. The Hidatsa were raiding the Shoshone, and Black war parties were active. The old culturalpatterns were too deeply entrenched; it would take more than a few gifts and un-understandable talk to effect a change in their century old customs.

But Captain Lewis and his party were lucky. It seems amazing that after loosing their guns the Fields were able to get them back and in a hand-to-hand knife fight kill one of the Indians. Lewis shot another Indian as he felt the air from the Indian’s bullet whiz by his head.

But history is always ready to forgive an impulsive military commander who is lucky enough to avoid total disaster. In Lewis ‘s case, it took a 24-hour horseback retreat to escape. True he had made contact with the Blackfeet, but with an outcome far removed from what he expected.

The one thing that this incident illustrates is how self reliant, just how capable the individual men had become.

I forgot to mention that earlier that year Pomp had gotten very very sick. His neck was swollen up and he had a fever. Did he have mumps?

The teams kept missing each other as they headed down the rivers they were exploring. Clark's group got ahead of the rest as he made it to a main rendezvous point first. He went on ahead, leaving messages for Lewis behind. Lewis' group would find signs of Clark's team, but it took them quite awhile to catch up. Same with the rest. Colter and ....Collins, I think it was, were by themselves. They waited for Lewis for several days and then went on. Lewis had already gone that way. Finally, the groups met up.

More horses had been stolen by Indians - an important loss because they were the Corps' money now. They had needed horses to tempt some Sioux to head east with the Corps to Washington. Now they weren't going to be able to do that.

Lewis was never able to prove that the Louisiana Territory went up above the 49th parallel. This had been one of the important missions of the Corps.

I found something in Lewis' journal that I didn't see in the Ambrose book. Lewis found his sunken iron boat in the river on his return trip. He noted it hadn't rusted. But he didn't say anything else about it. So I guess he just left it there where it was.

Oh, I found something else I was looking for. In Clark's journal, he finally said something to indicate his fondness for Pomp. I knew that later on Clark wanted to adopt Pomp, but hadn't really seen anything about his feelings for him. On the trip down the Yellowstone, Pomp traveled in Clark's dugout canoe. Clark referred to him in his journal as "my boy Pomp." Clark also carved his name on a rock formation which Clark named "Pompey's Pillar." Pomp was approx 18 months old at this time.

Too bad we don't have any drawings of Pomp, Sacajawea's little boy.

Clark still refers to Sacajawea as "the squaw." I haven't found anything to indicate that Clark had any sort of friendly affection for her at all.

There are times when Ambrose misses his own connections. He speaks often of how news of Lewis and Clark was passed among the Indians, yet misses the connection that on their return journey the Chinook probably heard about the theft of the Clatsop canoe. I think Lewis and Clark were treated on their return journey, with plenty of thieving, according to the ways they established by steeling something that could be a matter of life or death to a man and his family.

Clark adopted Sacajewea's and Charbonneau's two children, presumably after her death, Pomp and a much younger girl. He had some 8 children of his own.

I think there is a photograph or statue of the boy as an adult, not as a baby, though.

Kleo

On their way down the Missouri River, L&C met up with Forrest Hancock and Joseph Dickson, who were heading upriver following the trail L&C had blazed. Hancock and Dickson asked Corps member John Colter to join them and go with them back upriver. Colter agreed and got permission from L&C to leave the Corps.

Hancock, Dickson, and Colter made it to the Yellowstone country, but the three-way partnership lasted only six weeks until Hancock and Colter left Dickson alone. In the spring of 1807, they too split up, and Colter headed alone for St. Louis.

At the mouth of the Platte River Colter met a trading party, Manuel Lisa's first expedition to the upper Missouri, including Colter's old comrades George Drouillard, Jean-Baptiste Lepage, John Potts, Peter Weiser, and Richard Windsor. Once again, Colter turned his back on returning to the home he had left in 1803, now becoming a free trapper for Lisa. Soon joined by Colter's former partner, Forrest Hancock, these men built Fort Raymond on the Yellowstone River at the mouth of the Bighorn.

John Colter had many adventures and became one of the most famous mountain men because his story was told by Dr. William H. Thomas in the Missouri Gazette in 1809.

In 1808 Colter and John Potts were captured by Blackfeet and Potts was tortured and killed. Colter was stripped of his clothing and allowed to run in a life-and-death Indian game when he had a chance to outrace the Indians for his life.

"Within a few miles his nose was bleeding and his strength failing, and only one Blackfeet was behind, gaining on Colter with an upraised lance. Surprising his attacker, Colter suddenly stopped. The Indian threw his lance, breaking it, but simultaneously tripped and fell. Colter killed him with the spear point. As he took the man's blanket, he saw the rest of his pursuers still coming.

Catching his second wind, Colter beat the Blackfeet to the Madison River, five or six miles from where he had started. He dived into the icy snowmelt water and hid under a raft of driftwood, where he held his nose above water while the Blackfeet searched for him, even walking on the wood overhead, as Colter related the story. Long after they moved away--and not until darkness fell--did Colter, in his own account, emerge and continue traveling east.

Getting to the Three Forks from Fort Raymond had taken a week and a half, with time for hunting and cooking, which Colter now could not do. He ate seeds and berries, dug up roots with the spear head, drank from the Yellowstone River, and moved only by night. He made his way back to Fort Raymond in eleven days. Mountain man Thomas James described the apparition that staggered into the fort: "His beard was long, his face and whole body were thin and emaciated by hunger, and his limbs and feet swollen and sore."The men had to ask his identity....The company at the fort did not recognize him...until he had made himself known."

When he was about 35 years old, Colter married a woman named Sarah, called Sally, who bore him a son they named Hiram. They settled at La Charette, where a neighbor was Daniel Boone. In March of 1812, when Boone's son Nathan helped create the Mounted Rangers, a mobile frontier police force, Colter signed on. But he died of an unspecified illness on May 7. Some say he died of jaundice.

For more information about John Colter:

http://www.lewis-clark.org/content/content-article.asp?ArticleID=2616

http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/old_west/20759

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/HNS/Mtmen/johncol.html

March 26, 1806: "The dearth of trade goods will continue to be a serious issue as the Corps of Discovery makes it way home. Indians offer dogs, fish, and wappato root for sale at prices the explorers can not afford to pay. Tobacco is always desirable tender, but the Corps have but a few "carrots" left. The Corps chewers have taken to the bark of wild crab apple as substitute. The smokers are using a native mixture bearberry leaves and the dried inner bark of dogwood (Moulton)."

March 27, 1806: "On the 27th the Corps enjoys one of the more pleasant visits of the Expedition with a tribe of Skillutes who feed their guests candlefish, sturgeon, wappato and other roots. When the Corps made camp for the evening, more natives arrived with fish, dried berries, and roots which they offered for remarkably modest prices."

I found it interesting that just like in our own time one can find trade goods priced extravagantly high in one place and in another they are priced more modest. I suppose it shows us that even primitive people knew about supply and demand. In fact I wouldn't be surprised that they knew it better than we do.

I found the spot in Clark's journal where the Charbonneaus are leaving the Corps. There is no more need for them as interpreters and L&C have discharged and paid Charbonneau. (Sacajawea didn't get paid anything even though Clark calls her "interprete[s]s.") Charbonneau would have been retained if any of the Minetarre chiefs had gone with the Corps to the U.S., but none did.

Clark wrote, "I offered to take his little son a butifull promising child who is 19 months old to which they both himself & wife wer willing provided the child had been weened. they observed that in one year the boy would be sufficiently old to leave his mother & he would then take him to me if I would be so friendly as to raise the child for him in such a manner as I thought proper, to which I agreed etc."

Regarding the Iron Boat frame, I’ve often wondered if some how It could still survive today. What a wonderful Smithsonian display It could make. At this late date, it seems unlikely to be found.

I certainly see no physical attraction between Clark and Sacagawea. I think that so far as Sacagawea was concer she was simply Mrs Charbonneau . Incidentally Charbonneau shows no sigh that he aver suspected her of being unfaithful to him. Yet, I do think there was respect and even friendship between Sacagawea and Clark. As Marni’s post #787 indicates Charbonneau and Clark seem to have parted friends.

I understand that the only surviving evidence of L&C on their trail today is Clark’s name at the Pompey’s Pillar site.

Regarding John Colter who received permission to leave the expedition to return upstream to trap, he became a real mountain man. In 1809 Colter made a famous run from the Blackfeet an engagement in which his associate, John Potts was killed. Later he was the first white man to enter the Yellowstone park area known as Colter’s hell which today bears his name.

Sergeant Prior’s small party was the other independent group that ran into real Indian trouble. They only had three men for their mission that was driving a number of horses overland to the Mandan village. Indians stole the entire herd leaving them horseless. Again their ability to improvise saved their lives. The made an Indian Bull boat (a willow frame covered with buffalo hide and floated down the Missouri.

Tomorrow I am going to have to leave early for Guadalupe county in connection with the sale of my 20 acres there. I will be back in the late afternoon or evening. Let’ us continue discussion of the Week Five material. Remaining discussion points are the friendly fire Incident that left Captain Lewis wounded and the significanc of the increased up river traffic by independent trapping parties including the one that induced John Colter to join them in their up river trapping venture.

Probably on Friday we can move on to the final Week 6 discussion. I would like to finish the discussion on schedule by the 15 so I can begin full time to dispose my assorted archives, treasures, junk and general debris still at the Guadalupe County place

I rented the Lewis and Clark 4 hour documentary from Netflix and started watching it tonight. Stephen Ambrose among others talks from time to time, and I enjoyed seeing him - haven't ever seen him before. The documentary is lovely and so far fairly follows Ambrose's book.

"The officers send several parties out on the 1st: Pryor in a small canoe to examine Quicksand River and hunters in all directions to kill meat to make jerky. Whitehouse, who was with Pryor, reports that a quarter of a mile up the river it becomes "a continual rapid...full of islands and Sands barrs." The hunters bring in four elk and two deer. Indians coming downriver state that food is scarce up stream: little game and no salmon yet. How far can the Corps proceed on? They are determined to return to the Nez Perce, reclaim their horses, and cross the mountains before the Missouri freezes."

"While on the Marias River in Montana Lewis' small group had a fight with a party of Blackfeet Indians, and was forced to kill two of them who tried to steal their guns and horses. This was the only violent incident of the entire journey. While out hunting one day, Lewis was accidentally shot by Cruzatte, a nearsighted member of his own party. The painful wound in Lewis' back side kept him from being able to sit down or continue his journal writing. Soon after this near-disaster, the Corps of discovery reunited in North Dakota. They returned to the Mandan villages where they left Charbonneau, Sacagawea and the baby behind. Clark promised to take care of the baby, who he nicknamed "Pomp". Three years later, Charbonneau and Sacagawea brought Pomp down to St. Louis, where William Clark saw to his schooling."

I think one of the reasons the expedition was a success was due to the fact that other than the two incidents described above there were very little disasters. Just think what a disaster it would have been had any of the Indian tribes attacked the expedition especially towards the end when Lewis and Clark split up into small groups.

Wasn't that awful about Lewis getting shot!?! As Harold said earlier, "friendly fire." Lewis and Cruzatte were hunting elk and Cruzatte was near-sighted and accidentally shot Lewis! I'm surprised there weren't more accidents like that with all those guys sneaking around amongst the trees shooting at their prey. Near-sighted!

Lewis was shot through the backs of both upper thighs. The bullet missed his bone which was lucky, but he was in terrible shape for nearly a whole month. He came down with a fever and he was in awful pain. He couldn't walk; he could barely write. What a way to end years of planning and exploration - all that they had been through and the near-death experiences - to be shot practically in your butt by your own man and to have to lie prone on your stomach helpless for weeks.

Apparently, when Lewis was shot he thought it was an Indian and that both he and Cruzatte were being attacked. He called for Cruzatte, who didn't answer him. When there was absolutely no sign of any Indians, Lewis started to realize it was Cruzatte, who must have thought Lewis was an elk. Lewis even checked the bullet when it came out and saw it was the kind Cruzatte would have had in his gun. Cruzatte didn't think he had done it.

It's now called the Sandy river and is 20 miles east of Portland, Oregon. Exit 18 on I-84 brings you to it.

http://www.iinet.com/~englishriver/LewisClarkColumbiaRiver/Regions/Places/sandy_river.html

"... at 3 miles I arrived at the enterance of a river which appeared to Scatter over a Sand bar, the bottom of which I could See quite across and did not appear to be 4 Inches deep in any part; I attempted to wade this Stream and to my astonishment found the bottom a quick Sand, and impassible -- I called to the Canoes to put to Short.

I got into the Canoe and landed below the mouth. & Capt Lewis and my Self walked up this river about 1 1/2 miles to examine this river which we found to be a verry Considerable Stream Dischargeing its waters through 2 Chanels which forms an Island of about 3 miles in length on the river and 1 1/2 miles wide, composed of Corse Sand which is thrown out of this quick Sand river Compressing the waters of the Columbia and throwing the whole Current of its waters against its Northern banks, within a Chanel of 1/2 a mile wide, Several Small Islands 1 mile up this river,

This Stream has much the appearance of the River Platt: roleing its quick Sands into the bottoms with great velocity after which it is divided into 2 Chanels by a large Sand bar before mentioned, the narrowest part of this River is 120 yards ..." [Clark, November 3, 1805]

Was caused this sand bar ??? ... According to Gardner of the U.S. Geological Survey [Garner, et.al., 2000] an eruption of Mount Hood occurred a few years before the passage of Lewis and Clark. "In 1805, Meriwether Lewis and William Clark named a river on the south side of the Columbia River gorge the "Quicksand River." Their description of a wide, shallow river with a bed "formed entirely of quicksand," bears little resemblance to the narrow, moderately deep river we call today the Sandy River.

What happened? The answer lay 50 miles away at Mount Hood. An eruption in the 1790's caused a tremendous amount of volcanic rock and sand to enter the Sandy River drainage. That sediment was still being flushed downstream when Lewis and Clark saw and named the river.

Since 1806, the river has removed the excess sediment from its channel. The Toutle River in southwest Washington was similarly affected by the 1980 eruptions of Mount St. Helens."

While Lewis and Clark generally called the river "Quicksand" River, the phrase "Sandy River" did appear. "... passed the Lower mouth of Sandy river at 3 miles ... river wide The Countrey below quick Sand river on the Lard Side is low Piney Countrey. ..." [Clark, November 3, 1805, first draft]

"... This morning our Officers sent Serjeant Pryor & 2 of our party in a Canoe in order to go 5 or Six Miles up <Quick Sand or> Quicksand or Sandy River ... " [Whitehouse, April 1, 1806]

"... Myself and 4 men went below the mouth of Sandy river, and killed an elk, some deer and a black bear. ..." [Gass, April 2, 1806]

"... The natives that were still with us, informed our Officers, that there was a large River, which emptied itself into the Columbia River, on the South side, below Sandy River ..." [Whitehouse, April 2, 1806]

Beautiful pictures, seldom!

Scrawler was right in mentioning the fact that the firefight with the Blackfeet in the Summer of 1806 was the only incident of a shoot out with Indians. Of course the 1804 council with the Sioux had come close to a shootout but in the last minute the exchange of fire was avoided. With the Blackfeet the Lewis party since two of the party temporarily lost their guns to their Indian opponent. Rubin Field fought hand to hand with his kinfe killing his Indian opponent. The lewis party lost no time in making a forced 24 hour retreat from Blackfeet country.

Regarding the avoidance of friendly fire incidents, today Cruzatte would never have been chosen as a member of the expedition. He would have failed the vision check. Only 20-20 men would have been picked for the expedition. In this case it was a simple accident. There was not even an inquiry or investigation. It was an accident, luckly no one was killed or badly injured.

Regarding the three man probe up the Quicksand River, the Whitehouse Journal says it was led by Sergeant Prior. I am confused by an editors footnote that says “Gass led this party, which included Winsor and Colins. They remained in this area until April 4th then returned to the main party camp.” From this river the party observed a high mountain peak that the Captains named Jefferson Mountain.

Thank you for the pictures Seldom; that is certainl]y beautiful country.

Coming down the Missouri in the late summer of 1806 the expedition seemed to meet considerable up-river traffic. From them they received word that many Americans had concluded they were lost. One account had them taken prisoner by the Spanish who had them as slave labor working the mines. Another leader said what while the people had given up on them the President has yet hope for them. Ambrose remarked that this “should have gladdened the hearts of the leaders of the expedition. From the up river parties the expedition obtained biscuits, chocolate, sugar and whiskey.

I first got the Idea that this up river traffic was already greater than the it had been two years earlier. This probably was not the case. Two years earlier the expedition heading up stream in the spring was unlikely to meet other us stream parties also heading up stream at a similar pace. Then the parties they met were coming down stream. From the Ambrose story we have no reason to judge that the upstream traffic had increased in 1806. A few yeas later after the report of the Expedition had been circulated the traffic did increase and within a quarter century steamboats were making regular fast trips to supply trading posts at several points on the river.

Tomorrow I am going to have another all day work session at the place in Guadalupe county. Next week, however, on most days I should be available for both morning and evening appearances.

I suggest that we conclude our week 5 comments tomorrow so on Saturday, Sept 9 we can begin the discussion of our Week 6 material. (Chapters 31 – 38). During this coming week some things to highlight will be the post expedition careers of the captains and other Expedition participants, including particularly Sacagawea, Pomp, and York. Also some of us I’m sure will have comment on the Post expedition careers of the Sergeants and enlisted men. And just what did the Expedition accomplish? In what areas did it fail? And finally what effect did it have on the future History of the United States

"Clark and Lewis determine on the 2nd a new strategy. They will remain at the present camp [present Vancouver, WA. until they have killed and dried enough elk and deer meat to get them back to the Nez Perce country, where they will collect their horses and cross the Rocky Mountains. As they travel up the Columbia, they will trade or exchange their canoes for horses until they have a sufficient number of animals to quit the river altogether and return that much faster overland to the Nez Perce. Hunting parties are dispatched to all likely areas.

When a native informs the Corps that a large river enters the Columbia from the south just below their present camp Clark assembles a party to explore it. It is, of course the present Willamette River, know to the natives as the Multnomah. The Corps had missed the river twice because the confluence with the Columbia is concealed by several islands. Clark's party paddles up the Multnomah some ten miles before going into camp for the night. It is a very impressive river, although it source is only a fraction of the distance to the south Clark believes it to be."

"We proceeded on, on to the Mouth of this great River, which the Indians had given our Officers on account of. - Mouth of this River came in behind an Island lying on the So. side of Columbia River...Joseph Whitehouse. April 2, 1806. [His last entry.]

The Willamette River is very impressive indeed. The first time I saw the Multnomah Falls it took my breath away. I used to live close to Multnomah Road but never new before where it got its name. I find all this information fascinating.

Just so people not familiar with the area don't get confused, the Multnomah Falls are not on the Willamette River.

The falls are about 30 miles east of the Willamette river, and yes, they are breathtaking.

It is the 2nd highest year around falls in the nation.

I don't know whether L & C observed this fall.

Of course L&C being as they were a small party were bound to miss significant land marks as they did the Willamette river concealed by an island on their downstream trip in late 1805. By chance they found it in the spring of 1806.

The captains certainly realized the single party would miss some things. That may have been a factor leading to their decision to split the party in 1806. In any case it was many years and many other observers before the full topography of the West was near fully known..

But come on now the Expedition left the Columbia months ago. It is now September 1806 and the expedition is about to conclude its journey with a triumphant return to its starting point.

It WAS a triumphant return. Nearly everyone had thought they had been lost or killed and dead. (Apparently Jefferson continued to believe they were alive.) As they headed into civilization people all along the way cheered, shot off guns and cannons, celebrated, invited them to dinner, etc. They were heroes. Word of their arrival began to travel faster than they did by letters and newspapers.

The Whitehouse Journal that I consider the best or the Enlisted men’s reports ended with its last post April 2nd 1806 months before the conclusion at St Louis. Sergeant Gass’ comes closer to the end, but he too without explanation made his last post Sept 19th a full five days before the final touch down in St Louis.

Sergeant Ordway continues his account through to the 23 and the final arrival at the Mississippi and St Louis. During the last week the expedition was in a hurry making some 85 miles a day, scarcely stopping to hunt or to look for food. They killed only one deer in that period stopping only to gather papaws that Ordway described as a fruit that “the party in general are very found of.” What kind of fruit is this papaw? Have any you ate them?

On Sept 20th they arrived at the site of St Johns or Charette village. There was a mild celebration involving the exchange of celebratory gunfire. The Captains obtained 2 gallons of whiskey from an up-river trader but the cost was $8.00 an amount Ordway considered excessive.

Three days later on Sept 23 they finally ran out of Missouri River; they entered the Mississippi and landed opposite the center of the town again with the exchange of celebratory gunfire. In Ordway’s words:

we unloaded the canoes and carried the baggage all up to a store house in Town. drew out the canoes then the party all considerable much rejoiced that we have the Expedition Completed and now we look for boarding in Town and wait for our Settlement and then we entend to return to our native homes to See our parents once more as we have been So long from them---finis.

They traveled much faster than they expected down the Missouri. They must have been so excited! And then the greetings, foods, and WHISKEY! They hadn't been drinking in a long time. I bet they were all totally blitzed. Must have been a rowdy bunch.

But the citizens in the towns along the way invited the men to stay in their homes. It must have been a huge honor for them to have a member of this famous expedition stay overnight in their home. They could talk about it forever. kind of like "George Washington slept here."

I love your excitement here! I feel very happy that Lewis and Clark and team made it back safely and successfully in so many ways. I like the Stephen Ambrose puts it.

"On the more personal side, he had seen wonderful things. He had traveled through a hunter's paradise beyond anything any American had ever before known. He had crossed mountains that were greater than had ever before been seen by any American... He had seen falls and cataracts and raging rivers, thunderstorms all but beyond belief, trees of a size never before conceived of, Indian tribes uncorrupted by contact with white men, canyons and cliffs and other scenes of visionary enchantment. A brave new world."

"Following the Expedition, Bratton returned to Kentucky. He re-enlisted during the War of 1812 against Great Britain apparently serving in both a militia unit and in a U.S. volunteer infantry regiment. On January 22, 1812, he was among the Kentuckians who fell prisoner to a combined British/Canadian/Indian force at the Battle of Frenchtown on the Raisen River near present Monroe, Michigan. Several dozen of his comrades in arms, many of them wounded were massacred by the Indians following their surrender. Bratton survived the massacre and was later released in a prisoner exchange. He is recorded as a participant at the Battle of the Thames on October 5, 1813, an American Victory considered by the Kentukians who fought there as revenge for the "Raisin River Massacre."

In November, 1819, William Bratton wed Mary Maxwell. After living at Greenville, Ohio, for three years, the couple settled near Waynetown, Indiana. Bratton was the justice of the peace in his township and held the post for five years. In twenty-two years of marriage the couple were parents to two daughters and eight sons. William Bratton, victim of perhaps the most famous backache in American history, died in 1841 at the age of sixty-three.

Dr. Bruce Paton, author of Lewis and Clark: Doctors in the Wilderness, suggested that Bratton may have been suffering from a herniated spinal disc which "relocated spontaneously" under the influence of the heat treatments that were given to him by Lewis.

One of the things that fascinated me about this expedition were the medical procedures used by Lewis and Clark. In fact because their supplies of "gifts" were so limited on the return trip it turned into the Lewis and Clark Traveling Medicine Show as a substitute for the final disappearance of all trade goods.

I too was much interested in Bratton's back pain principally because of my own similar back pain experience. Perhaps his disk problem had not reached the herniated stage. Mine never did yet is showed up on the MRI pictures and believe me I felt the pain for 5 months in 1992 and 7 months in 1996. I of course used heat not too dissimilar to Bratton's sweat lodge treatment. Both in 1992 and again in 1996, it just suddenly got better. Over a short period a week or two the pain just lessened until it was no longer felt as a problem. I can’t really associate its disappearance to the heat treatments though they may have played a role. What ever it was it just suddenly got better. I suspect that that was Bratton cure also.

Jefferson seems to have made a decision to appoint Lewis Governor off Louisiana Territory as soon as he received Lewis’s letter reporting the return to St Louis. Ambrose considered this a big mistake. Better according to Ambrose, TJ should have promoted Lewis to a higher Army rank and assigned him to Washington with a secretary and staff of experts to prepare the Journals of the expedition for publication.

I am inclined to agree with Ambrose. In an Army Office in Washington Lewis would have been sheltered from the commercial and political interests that troubled him when he returned to St Louis as Governor. In Washington Lewis could had done what he had exhibited great skill at Fort Mandan; he could have, with Clark, and a staff of experts prepared a definitive report of the discoveries of the Expedition.

Lewis after his return expressed some interesting ideas concerning the structure of the Fur trade from the U.S, West. His idea encompassed an annual trade fair to be held each July at the Nez Percé village on the West side of the divide. From there the accumulate American Product would be carried down the Columbia to the Pacific where American ships would carry the accumulated product to Canton China where it would be sold for gold. This it was thought would be much quicker and cheaper than the British system that require all firs from British North America to be sent to London from where they would be shipped to China on British ships using the Capetown route around Africa.

On the surface the Lewis plan might offers merit but I wonder about the practicality of using the Columbia as a highway since several portages would be required.

I am not one who judges the Expedition’s failure to report the absence of an easy river route across the continent as a failure. On the contrary we must count the expedition’s account of a long, (350 miles) high altitude perpetually snow bound trail over the continental Divide as a success. This was the reality they found; no longer could America hope for an easy water route leaving it no choice but to use the difficult route in the short term as best as it might and wait the day when iron rails could provide an easier mass- transit road across the Continent.

This was the path America followed building in the short term on the fur trade while settlers eager for land and opportunity pushed westward. It would take another 63 years before the railroad would finally transverse the Continent.

I think the greatest failure of the expedition was its failure to really communicate with the many Indian it consoled with as it made its way across the continent. Indeed this was a difficulty, perhaps impossible task. While the tribes were eager to trade with the Americans, they had no desire to change their ancient life styles. They simply did not understand the peace message preached by the captains. Though apparent promised acceptance came easy, there is no evidence that actual compliance was ever contemplated. The Captains should have realized this when in the summer of 1806 they returned to the east side of the divide to learn that the Hidatsa were raiding the Shoshone, the Blackfeet war parties were active, The Sioux were after the Mandans; in short the old raiding patterns were unaffected by the peace promises of 1804-05. It would take the better part of the 19th century, and a long bitter military engagement with genocidal implications to quell the ancient patterns of tribal war.

I thought one of the strangest things in the last section was how Lewis never finished getting the journals, maps, etc. published as an official report of the expedition. He spent a lot of time on this task in preparation of publication, per Jefferson's request. Many people were waiting for the report anxiously. Many around the world would have been interested in reading it. But preparations got to a certain point and no further. Lewis did not arrange for an editor, which apparently was a big problem. And then he had to take on his new position as governor of Louisiana Territory. He didn't give up the work to another work to finish. Jefferson didn't carry it out to its conclusion and he was president until Madison took over in 1809. Then Madison wasn't particularly interested.

Harold, I disagree with you completely here. These tribal warfare patterns that you call ancient were set by guns being given to some tribes and not to others. There is also no ancient history of horseback raiding and warfare among the Plains tribes as horses came from the New World. Lewis lied to the Indians, as did Jefferson, as did every president after him. The way the United States treated the Nez Perce after the way they treated Lewis and Clark is a shame that can never be remedied.

If you want to talk about ancient patterns of tribal warfare, then talk about the ancient ones, what the Indians were like before the Americans and the British and the French and the Spanish came in and started playing games with them. It's like calling the Russian-occupied Afghan speaking Russian the ancient Afghan. Nope, they're the interference-created ones.

I remember growing up in Washington State and that I could never keep straight which tribe it was that hated Lewis and Clark. I'm pretty sure after reading this book that it was the Blackfeet who hate them to this very day. It should be the Nez Perce.

Americans were paid bounties for dead Indians in California. Genocidal implications? The United States killed a number of tribes outright. That is genocide, it doesn't just imply it.

The Americans were lying to the Indians, straight to their faces. Is it really so unreasonable that the Indians didn't fall down on their knees and worship their Great White Father for lying to their face while giving them tobacco, whiskey and firearms to kill themselves and each other?

Ethnographers never looked for or reported evidence of peaceful tribes--it didn't sell. No matter how many times people remark upon the peaceful nature of the Nez Perce Indians they are always lumped into the group "Indians" with their "ancient patterns of tribal warfare."

The American actions of the 19th and early 20th century proved beyond any doubt that the Indians were right not to trust the word of the Americans. Every time they did, they were killed. One of the women I babysat, who was born in the 1950s was removed from her tribe when she was in kindergarten and sent to school in Indian territory. It's not even confined to the early 20th century, it's still going on in the 20th century, when I read a letter to the editor challenging the claim of some tribe to Yosemite, it spoke of the tribe in the past tense, although they are not one of the extirpated tribes.

The Cherokees were largely assimilated into American culture by the time they were forced to march from their homes in Georgia (a small portion of their homelands) to Indian Territory to make way for gold seekers. It didn't save them. So why and how could it have saved the Sioux? Or the Blackfeet? It couldn't save them if they had to sell their souls and their heritage to become what they weren't.

The argument? That they did not leave a history written for the white man of today to verify their claim.

Indians get to write their own tribal histories. Or voice them. And they do. Let's not take the word of one biased and lying American to be the voice and history of the Plains and Columbia Indians.

Lewis and Clark were destined to failure of their stated mission to the Indians. They did accomplish their real goals: a census of the tribes so that they could be hunted down and murdered and their land stolen.

On the Shoshone--they're a tribe that lived in the North, but also far to the South. Some of them live today in Death Valley, an ancient homeland to part of their tribe.

Kleo

On the other hand, I doubt that relationships were always sweetness and roses before the white man arrived with guns and whiskey. Human nature being what it is, there was probably plenty of tribal rivalry and warfare going on for a long long time. There was competition among the tribes for food and land the way there is among people everywhere. Introduction of powerful weapons to certain tribes and not to others would have changed the power structure. As whites arrived, they discovered the relationships between the tribes and used the knowledge to their advantage.

One thing that caused desperate trouble for the various tribes was disease that was brought over and spread inadvertently early on by very few white men. Smallpox, for instance. It decimated tribes unevenly causing a huge disruption to power structures. I think I mentioned in an earlier post that the Pilgrims discovered that tremendous numbers of Indians had been wiped out before they arrived on the east coast by smallpox traveling down from French in Canada. It wiped out countless numbers of Indians and not equally among the tribes. The same thing happened farther west.

As whites pushed tribes westward, this increased competition among tribes for food and land.

"Human nature being what it is, there was probably plenty of tribal rivalry and warfare going on for a long long time." Marni

Yes, probably no more or less so than among Europeans, white Americans, Africans, Australians or any other human being, so to try to set the Indians apart from other humans or from the Americans by speaking of them as "warlike" is disingenuous.

The competition for land was lessened by the killing of huge tribes of Indians from contact with white diseases.

In addition land use was not as intense for the Indians as for the whites. Remember, it took Lewis and Clark a matter of a few months to hunt all the animals near their winter camp in Oregon. The Indians had been living there for thousands of years without hunting out all their resources--in fact, the land was so abundant in resources that they could afford to devote large amounts of time to handcrafting plank canoes with stone age tools. The canoes were not merely watercraft, also. They were highly decorated. These were people who not only lived on the land, but lived well on the land.

That the Indians needed more land? It was the Americans who needed more land, because of their farming practices that didn't then and don't today honor the relationship between the earth and those who live upon it. Soil takes hundreds to thousands of years to develop, but the Americans were depleting theirs and moving on to undepleted soil every few years.

The white ethnographers saw the competition they wanted to see to elaborate their own pet theories. That the Indians were warlike, remember, was to great advantage to the Americans of the times. It justified killing them, taking their land, stealing their children, destroying their culture. The investment in the Indians being warlike is, imo, too great to take the word for those who profited so immensely from this.

Ambrose has this habit of forgetting the Indians in his writing, too. He waxes poetic about Lewis and Clark, for example, being the first people to travel certain rivers that the Indians had been travelling for thousands of years. I'm not certain what it is about being the first that is so important it allows you to figuratively commit the genocide of a couple of thousand years of generations.

I wonder now about the fate of York. What was it like for him to go on this journey, then return to Kentucky a slave? What was it like to be the a slave on the journey? The picture on the cover shows him with a rifle, doesn't it? It was a bit later, that laws to keep slaves down started being more severely maintained due to the abolition of slavery in England. I understand York asked Clark for his freedom when they returned but Clark refused. It feels creepy in the 21st century to think of what was the norm in the early 19th, and what was acceptable to some, such as slavery. York appeared to have done a lot for the expedition. Clark admitted not paying Sacagawea was unfair, but he held no such compunction about not only not paying Clark, but continuing to charge him the fruits of all his labors in exchange for his life--it tastes foul.

Kleo

Kleo, we will have to agree to disagree on the points you question in #812. I think we have strong evidence of pre-Columbian intertribal warfare in many parts of the Americas. The most obvious example is the Aztec Empire in pre-Columbian Mexico. There prior to Columbus the Aztec had conquered and subjugated many tribes to form their Aztec Empire. It was these subject tribes who quickly allied with the Spanish under Cortez that enabled a few hundred Spanish to defeat an empire. True Cortez made promises he had no intention of keeping but in desperation they were willing to ally themselves with the Spanish devil in a desperate attempt to escape Aztec slavery. I am not saying they escaped their chains, but that was the hope that motivated the alliance. I think a similar situation in South America enabled the Spanish to also conquer the Inca Empirel

An example of pre-Columbian intertribal Warfare in North America is the pueblos Indians in New Mexico and the Southwest. They lived in almost inaccessible canyons or multi-story buildings without ground level doors or windows not because they wanted to, but to protect their very lives from other Indians enemies.

I could come up with other examples in what is now the United States. The evidence is overwhelming that the pre Columbian Americans were a hodgepodge of thousands of different tribes of many different cultures, speaking many different languages. They lived together each tribe with its allies and trading partners but also with its particular enemies. The coming of the Europeans did not create these animosities though in some instances by providing better weapons to one party they complicated relationships and perhaps made inter tribal warfare bloodier.

1. What symptoms did you observed in you reading (particularly after the return from the West) that might indicates the deep troubled mind that lead to Lewis’s suicide?

2. Discuss Clark’s post Expedition career particularly his role educating Sacagawea’s children and his disgraceful disregard of York’s aspirations for freedom.

3. What was the various reaction to the results of the Expedition- The popular reaction, the Federalist Reaction?

4. In your opinion what effect did the Expedition have on future U.S. history>

Harold, Evidence of warfare into any particular culture does not translate into all Indians of the American being warlike. If that is the case then ALL humans are warlike because there is plenty more evidence of pre-Columbian tribal warfare in the Old War. What I'm saying is don't apply attributes to American Indians that distinguished them from peoples of the Old War if that isn't accurate. The Old War, from the evidence, was far more warlike than the New World. So, let's just say that the Indians were like other humans.

It's a bit disingenuous to say "The evidence is overwhelming that the pre Columbian Americans were a hodgepodge of thousands of different tribes of many different cultures, speaking many different languages," but not grant any differences in their warlike attributes.

4. In your opinion what effect did the Expedition have on future U.S. history?

It mapped the west well enough for the warlike Americans to destroy the Indians.

On a different topic, Ambrose uses one of my favorite phrases, "counting coup," "a brave or reckless deed performed in battle by a single warrior, as touching or striking an enemy warrior without sustaining injury oneself," or relating to others these deeds performed.

Kleo

1. What symptoms did you observed in you reading (particularly after the return from the West) that might indicates the deep troubled mind that lead to Lewis’s suicide?

I wonder if Lewis' wound kicked off something. I didn't see any signs of depression from reading the journals. I understand some sort of depression ran in the family. Jefferson mentioned it. I wonder if it was manic depression. Anyway, Lewis suffered a terrible wound when he was shot by his own man right near the end of the expedition when they were returning home. He had a fever and had to lie on his stomach; he could barely write. It was nearly a whole month before he could walk at all. The wound must have continued to bother him for a good long time. It must have been a humiliating end to an amazing journey.

Then there was the publication of the journals. This was a big job. But think of the other things that Lewis accomplished without trouble. Something about getting the journals published troubled him. Why couldn't he finish the job? One difficulty was when other members of the Corps wanted to publish their own stories. But that shouldn't have stopped him. I wonder what happened.

Lewis had trouble finding a girlfriend. He seemed handsome enough and he certainly was brave and smart. He had land and some money. He was famous. Sounds like a fabulous catch for any woman. But he was apparently shy and awkward around women. Plus, apparently he was an alcoholic. That sounds like the biggest problem that kept women away. His drunkenness.

Why was Lewis drinking so much? Maybe some of it was just the lifestyle he had led in the army and with his male friends. Sounds like southern men grew up drinking a lot, according to Ambrose. Maybe Lewis inherited his alcoholism. And maybe his problems led him to drink.

Then on his new job he had big problems, especially regarding expenses. He was used to charging items that the government was to pay for. He had handled things that way for the expedition. But suddenly the government began questioning his spending. Then he was told they weren't going to pay for things he had purchased. He had to use his own money to cover costs that had incurred. He basically had to sell everything he owned including his land and he was in big debt. No wonder he was depressed and suidical. That would be a gigantic stressor for anyone.

Finally Lewis headed east towards Washington to try to straighten things out. But he never made it.

"The incident for which Cruzatte is most known occurred on the return trip. Lewis and Cruzatte had stopped to hunt elk on a "thick willow bar" along the Missouri. Cruzatte wounded an elk. Both men went into the willows after it. Lewis, in his own words, "was in the act of firing on the elk...when a ball struck my left thye about an inch below my hip joint missing the bone it passed through the left thye and cut the thickness of the bullet across the hinder part of the right thye."

Because Cruzatte's vision was poor and Lewis was wearing leather clothing, the captain's first thought was that Cruzatte had mistaken him for the elk and accidentally shot him. Lewis called out, "Damn you! You have shot me." Cruzatte suddenly faced humankind's oldest ethical dilemma. When you make a bad mistake [and shooting your captain in the rear qualifies], do you confess and seek forgiveness, or do you keep your mouth shut and hope they don't find out? Cruzatte heard Lewis call his name at the top of his voice several times. He remained silent. Supposing Cruzatte to be out of hearing and that the shot had come from some other weapon, Lewis naturally assumed: Indians! Perhaps Blackfoot warriors seeking vengeance?

Lewis ran for the boat. He still called out to Cruzatte, but now it was a warning, not a curse. It occurred to him that Cruzatte may have already been captured or murdered. When he came within sight of the boat, he called to the men there to come and find the Indians. Unable to continue, Lewis returned to the boat and with his rifle, pistol, and airgun prepared "to sell my life as dearly as possible." Twenty minutes later the men returned with Cruzatte. No Indians. Cruzatte "declared if he had shot me it was not his intention." And no, he hadn't heard Lewis calling him. With Sgt. Grass's help, Lewis dressed his wounds. Although the wound bled severely, Lewis was relieved to discover the ball had touched neither bone nor artery.

This incident was raised several months later in an odd postscript to the Expedition. When Lewis learned that Gass would be publishing his journal before he and Clark could prepare theirs for printing, he rather churlishly warned the public of "unauthorized" and "spurious" works that may appear before his "genuine work" could be published. Lewis's remarks provoked the following response from Gass's editor, David McKeehan:

"I...conclude with congratulating you that Mr. Gass's Journal did not fall into the hands of some wag, who might have insinuated that your wound was not accidental, but that it was the consequence of design...that the young hero might not return with more scars (if not honorable, near the place of honour) to excite the curiosity and compassion of some favorite widow..."

Concerning the man who inflicted the scars, history has little more to add. When Clark compiled his list of Corps members in the late 1820s, Cruzatte was among those listed as dead."

This piece poses some interesting questions. First of all could you imagine what would have happened if Lewis, after being shot, had spotted some Indians. To say the least Cruzatte would have really had to have faced an ethical dilemma of a different kind.

Now we come to the commits made by Lewis in regards to Gass's Journal. We have seen that Sgt. Gass helped Lewis dress his wounds and so was very knowledgeable about the incident. So what made Lewis make such commits as he did? It would seem that Gass and Lewis, if not friends, were close during the expedition. He implied that Gass's Journal was not only "unauthorized" but also "spurious" strong words at the very least. Could Lewis have been jealous of Gass publishing before he did? Or was this the foreshadowing of things to come in regards to Lewis's mental health?

Than even curiouser were David McKeenhan's commits? Was there really a plot from the "wags"? Certainly, there were those in Congress that would have not regretted that the Expedition not succeeded, but I thing McKeenhan's remarks are a little on the heavy side. I wonder what was really meant by his remarks?

I think Meriwhether Lewis was a tremendously talented man. It seems as if the government used him once then spit him out. I think a talented, capable man, who had given as much as Lewis did, would feel awful after being spat out subsequent to draining himself physically, mentally and emotionally as he did on the trip. What a burden in all ways the trip was. What they accomplished is simply amazing. Yet, soon after his return it must have been clear to Lewis how little he would benefit from the trip, being penny-pinched by a government that owed him so much. I dislike Thomas Jefferson more the more I read about him, although certainly more of the fault probably lied with those playing politics against Jefferson. It seems Americans are doomed to playing two sides of the same coin to the brink of ruin.

I suspect, also, that a wound like Lewis got, would pain him all his life. That was one huge ball of metal to go through one's buttocks and take that long to heal. I wish Lewis had lived longer, as he seems like one of those men whom you want to read later adventures.

Kleo

--- as I said earlier, we are going to have to agree to disagree on the war like proclivities of the North American Tribes. I do not recall saying anything implying that all were equally involved in war activities. On the contrary they came in many different verities speaking many different languages, practicing many different cultures. Some were strong, some were weak, some were aggressive bullies some weak and passive victims. Also they were no more warlike than other primitive tribes elsewhere in the world including our Germanic ancestors and for that matter arguably our present day governments and even religious institutions.

And another possible answer to- question 4 (In your opinion what effect did the Expedition have on future U.S. history?) might be- it made possible a strong and prosperous united America that rose to the status of a world Power within a century to stand a firm bulwark against repeated tyrannies threatening world freedom and democracy in the 20th and 21st centuries.

--- I too judged Lewis’s failure to attract a serious lady friend as the most significant evidence of some problem that was evident to them but somehow escaped the notice of history. On the surface Lewis was about as eligible as an early 19th century man could be. He was a returning hero with property, proper family connections, a bit of wealth and adequate education. I doubt that even shyness on his part would result in the rejections accorded him. Those colonial ladies seemed to sense a problem and turned stone cold to his courting.

The documentary that I just watched on the Lewis and Clark expedition stated that Lewis was "almost certainly manic depressive". If we accept that, it explains a lot. I have had some exposure to people with this condition, and when they are in the depressed state their life is just hell. I'm guessing this is why the journals never made it to publication and possibly this is also why Lewis couldn't find a suitable wife.

I simply don't understand where you are coming from, Harold, especially when you keep nothing all the differences, then lumping all American Indians in one fell swoop as warlike--all American Indians are NOT warlike. And their history is very different in their voice from the voice of those who want to justify their genocide.

I urge you to talk to a variety of Indians about their history, instead of making them all one.

If not all Indians are warlike, please don't keep broadening your sweep of who you paint with this brush, and you do keep broadening it, Harold. I thought you were just talking about the Indians Lewis and Clark met, in spite of their evidence to the contrary, until you headed to Central America for proof. The Aztecs and the Chinook have very little in common, although they do share an interesting genetic story unrelated to the peoples.

Kleo

However, as your analogy that Aztecs were warlike proves that Chinook were, I will offer the same in Europe, Romans Civilization was warlike, so Irish peasants are, too. Or were the Romans and Aztecs "primitive?"

This is very frustrating to think we gained some ground discussing the Indians and how varied the cultures of the pre-Columbian Americas was, then to have the whole of North, and probably South and Central, America, painted with one brush: warlike! Primitive!

Aaarrghhhhh! It's time, me hearties, to sign up for the discussion of The Mutiny on Board H.M.S. Bounty! This book is Captain Bligh's own written account of what happened on the mutinous voyage and afterward when he and some of his crew were set adrift in shark-infested waters.

The discussion begins officially on November 1. There's plenty of grog, salt pork, and duff aboard ship waiting for you, so sign up here:

patwest, "---Mutiny on Board H.M.S. Bounty, The ~ William Bligh ~ Proposed for Nov. 1st" #, 11 Sep 2006 2:26 pm

Marni

I think now we should move on to the conclusion of our discussion. Regarding the discussion thread relative to the effect of L&C on the Indians, Kelo and I have presented alternate arguments neither of us understanding the argument of the other, Perhaps we can agree that Ambrose in his book might have gone deeper into the ndian’s role in the expedition and the effect it had on the Indian culture. Other books have done this, including the James P. Ronda book, “Lewis and Clark Among the Indians” that is linked in the bibliography.

In any case I have other necessary work closing out my country house, and since we are now at the completion point outlined in the schedule, let us plan to finish by the end of this week. I think each of you will want to add your own concluding summation. The board will remain open for this purpose through Friday,Sept 15th after which it will be available in our discussion archives.

From the standpoint of international politics, the expedition altered the struggle for the control of North America, particularly in the Pacific Northwest, by strengthening the U.S. claim to areas which today include the states of Oregon, Idaho and Washington.

The expedition generated American interest in the fur trade. This had a far reaching effect, since it led to further exploration and commercial exploitation of the West. I think we can safely say that Lewis and Clark's Expedition resulted in a century of rapid settlement which peopled the West with Euro-Americans.

Lewis and Clark added to geographical knowledge by determining the true course of the Upper Missouri and its major tributaries. They forever destroyed the dream of a Northwest Passage or water route across the continent, but proved the success of overland travel to the Pacific. In addition Clark produced a map which enabled valuable information for later explorers.

The expedition was also the first to compile information on the culture of the Indians of the Missouri, the Rocky Mountains, and of the Northwest coast.

"Perhaps we can agree that Ambrose in his book might have gone deeper into the ndian’s role in the expedition and the effect it had on the Indian culture."

I think Ambrose chose his subject carefully, Meriwhether Lewis, and focused his details on this. The problem is the subject is just too relevant to too many areas of American History for anything short of an encyclopedia to do it justice. I'll agree that the book raises more issues and Ambrose needed a lot more detail in some areas, in particular the relationship between the explorers and the Indians they encountered.

Harold, excellent choice of a book, and thanks for proposing a book that had already been discussed in here. I hate it when I think of a great book and it's completely dismissed because it was discussed by 4 people 7 years ago. It's still a compelling book.

Kleo

Harold, I am not finished reading the book yet. I hope to finish soon. I don't have many pages left.

This is what Stephen Ambrose writes about York and the issues of slavery.

"No commentary is necessary. Much of the evil of slavery is encapsuled in this little story....York had helped pole Clark's keelboat, paddled his canoe, hunted for his meat, made his fire, had shown he was prepared to sacrifice his life to save Clark's, crossed the continent and returned with his childhood companion, only to be beaten because he was insolent and sulky and denied not only his freedom but his wife and, we may suppose, children."

York's life speaks for itself. That one man can cheat another man out of the chance to make decisions is despicable. It saddens me to read about Clark trying to decide whether to sell York to a cruel master, etc.

"I wish him Sent to New Orleans and sold, or hired out to Some Severe Master untill he thinks better of Such conduct."

1. I am hurt by men using York for one purpose: to make themselves rich, famous and successful.

2. I hate the fact that one man can deny another man his freedom.

"I am determined not to Sell him, to gratify him."

York is called "insolent and sulky." His freedom is denied. For payment for his services, York was asking for, not money, but freedom.

3. I hate reading about York being "beaten." How many lashes of the whip did York receive? I say one lash was too many. While being beaten remembering that the man owning him had been his "childhood companion."

4. I hate reading about York's wife being in one state and he in another state. York wanted to go to Kentucky. While there, he would hire himself out and

"send the money his labor earned to Clark." Clark writes "which I have refused."

Still, to this day, people can not admit that American Slavery was an evil. Afro Americans are told it is the past, forget it. Then, I must forget my ancestors. Would you forget your ancestors? It is not about anger, a grudge, bitterness. It is about the lives of suffering people. For once, I hope we do not try to explain it away. I hope it is possible to acknowlege that York was a victim of a system along with many others in America, a system that never worked for one and all.

Writing York's name in bold is my personal way of letting others, in this discussion, know my pain and perhaps, his pain. It is my way of giving him some semblance of importance.

As Jefferson wrote, "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just."

Hats Clarks post expedition reluctance to immediately free York remains the great blemish on Clark’s Historical image. Fortunately he did finally free York in 1811. The details of York’s post freedom life are at best vague and uncertain. There is also the question of his wife’s status who was held by another.

Other than that Clark’s post expedition career and his life was successful. His career was very much formulated by his experience gained through his co-command of the expedition working with the Western tribes as Indian Commissioner. He actually knew many of the Tribal chiefs and they knew him since they had met face to face on the Expedition

Kleo Thank you for your comment on the need for us sometimes to repeat discussions of particular titles. Quite true of the 3 or 4 participants in our 1998 discussion. I am the only one who is still active. “Undaunted Courage” is a great discussion on a subject made timely by the 200th anniversary of the event. This has been a good, discussion in which we probed much deeper into the event than previously. I thank all of you who have participated.

It really was so shocking to read about Clark's treatment of York, especially after reading about York's activities and responsibilities on the expedition, how he had worked as an equal member of the Corps, been given voting rights, had saved Clark's life and probably others'. You'd think that all would have had a tremendous impact on Clark's treatment of York afterward, but it didn't. Hard to believe. But, I guess that's what slavery did. Clark just expected York to go back to pre-expedition conditions. The "peculiar institution." What an understatement. And all the years that passed before he was freed.

I thought it was a good discussion, too. I really really enjoyed reading this book. It was such an exciting fascinating story.

Thanks for leading the discussion, Harold!

Harold, along with Marni, I would like to say thank you too. As usual, you have been a wonderful host. Reading about exploration is very exciting. I can't wait to read "Mutiny on the Bounty." Thanks to all for the links, pictures and added information.

I only have a few pages. I feel very sorry for Lewis. Being bothered by creditors, carrying unpublished journals around, suffering Malaria, overdrinking to deal with his problems and having a genetic code of some mental instability must have made his life seem very, very difficult. It is sad that Lewis's mother lived to see such a day, a day when her son would take his life.

Thanks, Harold, and thanks to all the enthusiastic post writers!
This has been an excellent discussion, and my regrets for not having time to post more often.
I never find it easy to write summaries, such as those above, which are so well done.

I think the L&C exploration was a key to opening of the West; that is the keystone of the book.
However, the late years, especially when Federal government had such a poor response to Lewis' requests for funds, was a disgrace. Ambrose could have given us a bit more depth about later years, but perhaps that was beyond the scope of his plan for the book.

for the wonderful discussion and the many links leading us to more and more fascinating tidbits. Where else but at SN can we learn so much going in so many different directions.

Harold and Marni, you were your usual helpful and informative selves, looking forward to the next discussion w/ you all.......jean

Hats, thanks for the post. Of all the many evils of slavery, don't forget that it robbed otherwise good men of their character, and their possible standing as good men. Clark's treatment of York, calling a man insolent and beating him for the crime of wanting to be with his wife, will stain his reputation and his soul forever. People want to make slavery less today than the brutal, murderous reality it was for the slaves. Being beaten for wanting a right that another man, for the legally superior color of his skin, took for granted, is repugnant. And learned men of Clark's time knew this and saw slavery for exactly what it was.

Great discussion, everyone. Ah, an anniversary year. I didn't see the obvious. Did we discuss Einstein last year in SeniorNet? That would have been awesome

Kleo

To me the most important significant additions that Lewis and Clark made were those to the zoological and botanical knowledge of the continent. They provided the first scientific descriptions of many new species including the grizzly bear, prairie dog, pronghorn antelope, and mountain goat. They also made the first attempt at a systematic record of the weather of the West and a less successful attempt to determine the latitude and the longitude of certain geographical points.

In conclusion, Lewis and Clark traveled over 8,000 miles in less than 2 1/2 years and only lost one member of their party. It cost the taxpayer $40,000, a bargain when you think about today's cost of scientific exploration. Not only was the West investigated and an overland route to the Pacific was reached, but because of the Lewis and Clark Expedition America would be changed forever.

Thanks Harold for leading a great discussion and thanks also one and all for making it a rewarding discussion. Until we meet again!

I just imagine the sort of equipment today's adventurer would need, not to mention the money for gasoline. But I wonder how much equivalent equipment would cost today for a similar expedition? I just don't see modern man and woman doing it.

Kleo

The sad truth is that the institution of slavery really bound the white slaveholder as well as the black slave. Another sad fact is that the ill social affect of the abolished institution continued holding both the new legally freed blacks and white people too in continued bondage for another hundred years. Finally the great social changes of the 1960's and 70's seem to have made substantial progress toward the final liberation of all people black and white.

I note that while most of the enlisted men were discharged after the return, many reenlisted later particularly to fight in the War of 1812. Also several of them continued with careers in trapping and the western fur trade. Two or three lost their lives to Indian warriors and others record many close encounters. A few, particularly George Shannon became Laweyers. Though Shannon died young in court pleading his client's case, Sergeant Patrick Gass was the last survivor living until almost 100 to die in the 1870's after the Civil War in a greately changed America.

Click on the link below to see a list of the Corps of Discovery. When you click on any individual, you'll find out what happened to them after the expedition.

http://www.nps.gov/archive/jeff/LewisClark2/CorpsOfDiscovery/TheOthers/Others.htm

Awwwhhh.....I just read this about the last days of Seaman, Lewis' dog.

"P.S. It is believed that I survived the journey and made it back to St. Louis. My master, Meriwether Lewis, died of gunshot wounds while we were traveling on the Natchez Trace in 1809. A recently-discovered book written in 1814 says that I refused to leave my master's grave and would not eat after his death. I pined away until I also died."

I found this site which is rather interesting. It is from a project about 98 St. Louis court case files from 1809 to 1839. On the site it says, "These case files consist of 98 court actions in which Meriwether Lewis, William Clark or other members of the Corps of Discovery are defendants, plaintiffs, or play a prominent role. The majority of cases are disputes concerning promissory notes, debts, and the payment and assignment of notes and debts....

...The case files described in this finding aid were filed as civil, chancery (equity) or criminal proceedings in the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas or the St. Louis Circuit Court between 1809 and 1839. These case files remain part of the larger St. Louis Circuit Court Case File Records Series and are presented here as an artificial, subject-oriented records series to facilitate research in a distinctive area of national, regional, and local history....The records are now housed in the Circuit Court's Record Center.....

....The bulk of the series, 46 cases, consist of disputes concerning the business and financial activities of William Clark, territorial governor (1813-1820), commander of the territorial militia, Indian agent, unsuccessful candidate for public office and partner in the St. Louis Missouri Fur Company and the Bank of Missouri. Clark made his home in St. Louis from 1807, when he was appointed Superintendent of Indian Affairs by President Thomas Jefferson, to his death in 1838. Many of the actions are "assumpsit," "trespass on the case," or "debt on note," characteristic of this period of Missouri's history when many transactions were conducted through the use of promissory notes rather than currency. Clark is usually the plaintiff in these actions, attempting to collect debts due him. There are also some cases concerning the slaves of William Clark.

The nine Meriwether Lewis cases compose a much smaller share of the series. Lewis was appointed territorial governor by President Jefferson in March 1807, but for the next year tried to administer the territory from Washington, D.C. Lewis died in 1809 on his way from St. Louis to the nation's capitol to defend some of his financial activities as governor. In these cases Lewis, or his estate, appear as defendant. Unlike Clark, who was a creditor, Lewis was deeply indebted for land purchases and a mining venture. These cases shed light on Lewis' financial position just prior to his death and indicate that Lewis contracted additional debt just before he set out on his journey.

This series also contains 26 cases that relate to Corps of Discovery members John Boley, John Collins, John Colter, George Drouillard, Etienne Malbouf, John Newman, Paul Primeau, Nathaniel Pryor, Isaac White, and Alexander Willard, who remained in the St. Louis area following the return of the Lewis and Clark expedition in 1806. These cases date from 1808 to 1833 and illustrate the members' continuing social, commercial, legal, and financial relationships with their fellow citizens, as well as the frequency and diversity of financial interactions on the frontier. Only the case of John Colter vs. Edward Hempstead, Administrator of the Estate of Meriwether Lewis directly mentions the 'Corps of Discovery.'

These case files consist of approximately 98 court cases in which Meriwether Lewis, William Clark or other members of the Corps of Discovery are defendants, plaintiffs, or play a prominent role, such as Clark's partnerships in the St. Louis Missouri Fur Company and the Bank of Missouri. Also included are actions concerning claims against the estates of both Lewis and Clark. The majority of the cases are disputes concerning promissory notes, debts, and the payment and assignment of notes and debts.

Case files may include the following documents: promissory notes, assignment of notes and debts, petitions filed by attorneys, affidavits, summonses of witnesses required to support or refute the validity of the suit, writs, replications, depositions of witnesses, motions, wills, orders for sale, instructions to juries, jury verdicts and appeals."

http://stlcourtrecords.wustl.edu/about-lewis-and-clark-series.php?PHPSESSID=12d4d71f1298cfbaa4b91238861d9285