University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Great Plains Quarterly Great Plains Studies, Center for Winter 1984 "A Chart In His Way" Indian Cartography And The Lewis And Clark Expedition James P. Ronda Youngstown State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly Part of the Other International and Area Studies Commons Ronda, James P., ""A Chart In His Way" Indian Cartography And The Lewis And Clark Expedition" (1984). Great Plains Quarterly. 1816. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsquarterly/1816 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Great Plains Studies, Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Plains Quarterly by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. "A CHART IN HIS WAY" INDIAN CARTOGRAPHY AND THE LEWIS AND CLARK EXPEDITION JAMES P. RONDA The sixteenth of January 1805 was not the Mandan was a young war chief intent on mount­ kind of day Lewis and Clark would have chosen ing a horse-stealing raid against the Shoshonis. for calm deliberation and the thoughtful ex­ Most of what passed between the eager warrior change of cartographic information. On that and the edgy explorers centered on an attempt cold Dakota day, Fort Mandan was the scene to dissuade him from the proposed raid. Almost of angry words and hostile gestures as Mandans as an afterthought, William Clark noted that and Hidatsas traded jeers and insults. While "this War Chief gave us a Chart in his Way of Lewis and Clark watched heiplessly, Hidatsa the Missourie.,,1 warriors from the village of Menetarra charged That map and the telling phrase "in his Way" Mandans with spreading malicious rumors de­ typify the substantial cartographic contribution signed to breed fear and keep Hidatsas away made by native people to the Lewis and Clark from the expedition. As the tough talk flew expedition. Throughout its nearly two and one­ higher, the expedition's hopes for diplomacy half years in the field, the expedition actively sank. But in the midst of the bitterness and sought out Indian maps and map-makers. That harangue a remarkable event took place-some­ search brought Lewis and Clark more than thing both important for the immediate needs thirty of what Malcolm Lewis has so aptly of the expedition and symbolic of one of the termed "cartographic devices."Z But more most valuable relations between native people important than the quest for Indian maps was and the explorers. Among the Hidatsas at Fort the effort by the Corps of Discovery, and especially William Clark, to understand both James P. Ronda is professor of early American the structure and substance of those docu­ history at Youngstown State University, Youngs­ ments. Lewis and Clark did not pursue Indian town, Ohio. He is the author of several books map-makers just to obtain travel information and numerous articles on the history of Indians from native sources. They knew Indian maps on the early American frontier. His most recent represented a vital part of a broader encounter, book is Lewis and Clark Among the Indians, to an attempt to communicate important ideas be published by University of Nebraska Press. and experiences across the cultural divide. This [GPQ4 (Winter 1984): 43-53]. essay seeks to evaluate expedition Indian maps 43 44 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, WINTER 1984 within the framework of that encounter. The incorporated wholly within Lewis and Clark questions posed here are aimed at illuminating maps. the maps, their makers, and the ways Lewis and First, there were maps created by Indians Clark struggled to use those cartographic de­ either verbally or graphically and then drawn VIces. or traced by Lewis and Clark as distinctively When the Hidatsa warrior offered Lewis and Indian maps. This describes a murky historical Clark a chart of the upper Missouri, he did it and cartographic process that can be clarified "in his Way." That way may have been a relief with two examples. map constructed with heaps of dirt and marks Early in January 1805, the Mandan chief on the ground or a river channel drawn with Sheheke, or Big White, made one of his fre­ charcoal on a piece of hide. But whatever quent visits to expedition quarters. After dinner, means were employed, we are reminded that Big White offered what Clark described as "a native cartographic information came to and Scetch of the Country as far as the High Moun­ was preserved by Lewis and Clark in a variety tains, and on the south side of the River Rejone of ways: described in words, drawn on hides [Yellowstone]" (fig. 1). Big White may well or on the ground, or constructed topographical­ have drawn an outline of the Yellowstone and ly in sand-and preserved or redrawn by Lewis its tributaries and then the map was copied by and Clark as distinctly Indian productions, or Clark. But "sketch" does not necessarily mean / ,/ FIG. 1. Big White's map of the Yellowstone River and tributaries, 1805. See list of Indian maps, no. 2. (Western Americana Collection, the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University) "ACHARTINHISWAY" 4S a graphic representation. Big White might have ephemeral maps from native sources. They given Clark simply a verbal description of the ranged from simple charcoal-on-hide outlines Yellowstone country. In fact, Clark records of river channels to the very elaborate relief just such a description, noting the Indian's map of the Willamette country constructed words about the tributaries of the Yellowstone, by an elderly Multnomah Indian. Such maps the general character of the terrain, and the presented a unique challenge to expedition presence of "great numbers of beavers." And patience as well as intellect; they brought the of course, it is equally possible that Big White expedition face to face with traditional carto­ produced both a graphic map and a verbal graphic practices and conventions. Three exam­ description of the river.3 But whatever the ples of ephemeral maps tell us important things process, the map that emerged was plainly an about the ways native people made maps and Indian production and recognized as such by about how the expedition used them. the explorers. The most short-lived of the ephemeral maps A second example of an Indian map produced produced for Lewis and Clark were those drawn either verbally or graphically and then drawn or on the ground. Such maps were not hastily traced by Lewis and Clark was received at the made scratches in the dirt. Rather, they were end of April 1806, when the expedition was in often elaborate relief creations portraying present-day eastern Washington with the mountain ranges and river systems. William Walula, or Walla Walla, Indians. The Walula Clark learned about the complexity of those chief Yelleppit had been especially friendly to maps firsthand on 20 August 1805. Camped the explorers on their westward trek, and now with a northern Shoshoni band along the Lemhi on the return journey he offered food, horses, River in what is now Idaho, Clark prevailed on and vital route information, part of which came the band headman, Cameahwait, to instruct in a map prepared by Yelleppit for the captains. him "with rispect to the geography of his coun­ Bearing Lewis's notation, "Sketch given us by try." Cameahwait's lesson was enhanced by a Yellept the principal Chief of the Wallah wallah superb map, constructed on the ground, depict­ Nation," the map portrays the region around ing the courses of the Lehmi and Salmon rivers. the Columbia-Snake confluence.4 The maps With heaps of sand the Shoshoni skillfully laid that Big White and Yelleppit produced, in out the "vast mountains of rock eternally either verbal or graphic form, were preserved covered with snow.,,6 What Cameahwait's by the explorers as distinctively Indian prod­ tutorial in geography revealed was not especial­ ucts. Along with the maps of the Willamette ly good news for the expedition. Yet the map River obtained from Multnomah Indians and itself was a masterful and largely successful the charts drawn by Nez Perce headman Hohots attempt to communicate complex geographical Ilppilp, these maps represent the first category realities across cultural barriers. But no matter of native cartography made available to Lewis how accurate the map, its physical structure and Clark. destined it to a short life. When William Clark and Nicholas Biddle Clark also knew that there were ephemeral talked about native maps and map-making maps having some chance for a longer life. Maps techniques in 1810, Clark suggested a second of that kind were drawn on hides or whitened category. Indian maps, he explained, were skins. The expedition had perhaps its first look "sometimes in sand, hills designated by raising at such a map in late September 1805. While sand, rivers by hollow." Characterizing these camped temporarily at Weippe Prairie outside maps by their ephemeral nature, Clark observed present-day Weippe, Idaho, Clark convinced the that "Indian maps made on skins or mats may Nez Perce chief Twisted Hair to draft a map be given to you, by individuals, but are not of the Clearwater River down to the Snake­ kept permanently among them."S On at least Columbia confluence and as far west as celilo nine occasions Lewis and Clark obtained such Falls. Working with what Clark described as 46 GREAT PLAINS QUARTERLY, WINTER 1984 "great Cherfulness," Twisted Hair marked a his 1805 map of western North America, Clark white elk skin with the appropriate river noted that he was employing "the information courses. The Indian's map evidently impressed of Traders, Indians, and my own observation & Clark and persuaded him to seek additional Ideas." That range of sources was verified by native cartography for the region.