DOCSLIB.ORG

William Wells: Frontier Scout and Indian Agent

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

William Wells: Frontier Scout and Indian Agent Paul A. Hutton” William Wells occupies an important place in the history of Indian-white relations in the Old Northwest. First as a Miami warrior and then as an army scout he participated in many of the northwestern frontier’s great battles; later as an Indian agent he held a critical position in the implementation of the United States’ early Indian policy. He was what was known along the frontier as a “white Indian,” a unique type often found along the ever-changing border that marked the bound- ary of the Indian country. As such, he was the product of two very different cultures, and throughout his forty-two years of life he swayed back and forth between them-never sure to which he truly belonged. Such indecision doomed him, for he could never be fully accepted by either society. When at last he perished in battle, it would be in defense of whites, but he would be dressed and painted as an Indian. Such was the strange paradox of his life. Born near Jacob’s Creek, Pennsylvania, in 1770, Wells was only nine when his family migrated down the Ohio River on flatboats in company with the families of William Pope and William Oldham to settle on the Beargrass, near what is now Louisville, Kentucky. His older brothers, Samuel and Hayden, had explored the region in 1775 and reported its richness to their father, Captain Samuel Wells, Sr., late of the Revolution- my army. No sooner had the old soldier settled his family in a fortified enclosure called Wells Station (three and one half miles north of present Shelbyville, Kentucky) than he was killed in the ambush of Colonel John Floyd’s militiamen near Louisville in 1781. His mother having died earlier, the or- * Paul A. Hutton is assistant editor of The Western Historical Quarterly, Utah State University, Logan. 184 Indiana Magazine of History phaned William Wells was taken into the home of his father’s comrade-in-arms, Colonel P0pe.l While hunting near Pope’s homestead in March, 1784, William and three other boys were surprised by a party of Miami Indians and carried north to the White River Indian villages. Although the other boys managed to make their es- cape, William was sent farther north to the Wea villages along the Eel River where he was adopted into the household of a village chief, Gaviahatte (the Porcupine). The fourteen-year-old captive evidently found the life of a Miami warrior much to his liking because he quickly adapted to tribal ways. Named Apekonit (wild carrot, on account of his red hair) by the In- dians, he accompanied them on raids against the white set- tlements. He proved particularly adept at luring river travelers to their doom along the Ohio. By acting as if he were lost, he would get them to move to shore where his comrades would slay them.2 This auburn-haired, freckle-faced warrior came to the atten- tion of Little Turtle, war chief of the Miami confederacy, and Samuel Wells, Sr., was a Virginian who had fought in both the French and Indian and Revolutionary wars, as well as Lord Dunmore’s 1774 campaign against the Shawnee, before moving to Kentucky. He had five sons and a daughter, of whom William was the youngest. “William Wells Genealogy,” William Wells Collection (Chicago Historical Society); Wells Family File (Fil- son Club, Louisville); especially valuable is Lyman C. Draper’s interview with Darius Heald in Lyman C. Draper Collection 23858-62 (The State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Madison); and Lewis Collins, History of Kentucky (2 vols., Louisville, 1924), 11, 239, 550. The only reliable accounts of Wells’ capture are in the Heald interview, Draper Collection 23862-65; and Mann Butler, “An Outline of the Origin and Settlement of Louisville, in Kentucky,” The Louisville Directory, for the Year 1832 (Louisville, 1832), 104. Almost all popular accounts of Wells’ life claim that he was adopted by Little Turtle, but there is no evidence to support this contention. In 1792 Wells told John Heckewelder that his adopted father was Gaviahatte. See “Narrative of John Heckewelder’s Journey to the Wabash in 1792,” Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, XI1 (no. 1, 1888), 45; and Edward Rondthaler, Life of John Heckewelder (Philadelphia, 1847), 112. There are no dependable accounts of Wells’ early life. Sketches of him appear in the following works, but they must be used with caution: Calvin M. Young, Little Turtle: The Great Chief of the Miami Indian Nation (Greenville, Ohio, 19171, 179; Otho Winger, Last of the Miamis-Little Turtle (North Manchester, Ind., 19681, 17; Bessie Keeran Roberts, “William Wells: A Legend in the Councils of Two Nations,” Old Fort News, XVIII (September-December, 1954), 7; Wallace A. Brice, History of Fort Wayne (Fort Wayne, 18681, 147. Somewhat more reliable, although brief, sketches are in Walter Havighurst, The Heart- land: Ohio, Indiana, Illinois (New York, 1956), 78-85; Jacob Piatt Dunn, True Indian Stories (Indianapolis, 19091, 117; Bert J. Griswold, The Pictorial History of Fort Wayne, Indiana (2 vols., Chicago, 19171, I, 136; and Bert J. Griswold, ed., Fort Wayne: Gateway of the West, 1802-1813 (Indianapolis, 1927), 30-32. For Wells’ activities along the Ohio River see John Johnston to William Eustis, November 6, 1810, Letters Received by the Secretary of War, registered series, Record Group 107 (National Archives, Washington). William Wells 185 CAPTAINWILLIAM WELLS Courtesy Indiana State Library, Indianapolis. 186 Indiana Magazine of History they soon became close friends. In time Wells married Little Turtle’s daughter, Sweet Breeze (Manwangopath), and over the years they had three daughters and two sons. Wells could not have been more fortunate than to gain the protection of this chief. Born in 1751, Little Turtle had first battled the white man in 1780 when he wiped out a detachment commanded by Augustine de La Balme, a French soldier-of-fortune with his heart set on capturing Detroit from the British. From that time on Little Turtle led the Miamis in their conflicts with the whites to the east and south.3 As a member of the Miami tribe, Wells was free to come and go as he pleased, but he made no effort to return to Kentucky. He did, however, make contact with the American post at Vincennes, probably in the capacity of an interpreter, and was instrumental in securing the freedom of at least one white child held prisoner by the Indian~.~The commandant at Vincennes, Major John Francis Hamtramck, was acquainted with Carty Wells, William’s older brother, and informed him of William’s whereabouts. Carty made a dangerous but futile visit to the Eel River village but could not convince William that they were indeed brother^.^ Samuel Wells, who had already reached manhood when William was captured, also journeyed to Eel River to visit his Indian brother. This time the youth recognized his relative and agreed to return to Kentucky with him to visit the family homestead. Samuel had reached a position of wealth and im- portance in Kentucky society, and he attempted to impress William with the comforts and amenities of the white way of life. The youth was apparently not influenced, and, much to his family’s surprise, after a few days visit he returned to his life with the Indians.6 3The Chicago Historical Society has a color miniature of Wells in its collections, and Thomas Hunt, who knew Wells at Fort Wayne, left a physical description. Draper Collection 21857. Little Turtle’s early career is covered in Bert Anson, The Miami Indians (Norman, 1970), 91, 104-105. *Wells arranged the ransoming of Oliver Spencer. See Milo Milton Quaife, ed., The Indian Captivity of0.M. Spencer (New York, 19681, 58, 114. Wells is also mentioned in another famous captivity narrative-that of Frances Slocum. See Otho Winger, The Lost Sister Among the Miamis (Elgin, Ill., 19361, 91-92. Carty Wells, who lived at Coxe’s Fort near Bardstown, Kentucky, often carried dispatches for Major John Hamtramck. See Gayle Thornbrough, ed., Outpost on the Wabash, 1787-1791 (Indianapolis, 1957), 22, 40, 145, 160. For Hamtramcks part in reuniting Wells with his family see John Hamtramck to Secretary of War, November 1, 1801, enclosed in William Wells to William Eustis, June 25, 1809, Letters Received by the Secretary of War, registered series, Record Group 107. The Wells family passed down this story, and Darius Heald, the grandson of Samuel Wells, Jr., told it to Draper in 1868 and again to Joseph Kirkland in 1892. See Draper Collection 23362-65; and Joseph Kirkland, The Chicago Mas- sacre of 1812 (Chicago, 1893), 174-75. William Wells 187 Wells did not contact his Kentucky relatives again for several years, as the intermittent raids that had characterized Indian-white relations along the Ohio River for a decade erupted into full-scale war. To the government of the United States the question of who owned the land north of the Ohio River had been settled with the American victory over the British. The northwestern Indians had sided with the British in the Revolution and had thus been conquered. American officials were not swayed by Joseph Brant, the cultured Mohawk chief who led part of the Indian confederacy, when he declared that “nine-tenths of the Indians” had never heard of the Revolution, much less been participants in it. To chastise the recalcitrants the government sent General Josiah Harmar at the head of 1,133 Kentucky militiamen and 320 regulars to destroy the Miami villages at Kekionga (present Fort Wayne, Indiana), but Harmar’s much-vaunted Kentucky frontiersmen collapsed in panic when they came into contact with Miami warriors.
Recommended publications
  • In Search of the Indiana Lenape

    In Search of the Indiana Lenape

    IN SEARCH OF THE INDIANA LENAPE: A PREDICTIVE SUMMARY OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT OF THE LENAPE LIVING ALONG THE WHITE RIVER IN INDIANA FROM 1790 - 1821 A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS BY JESSICA L. YANN DR. RONALD HICKS, CHAIR BALL STATE UNIVERSITY MUNCIE, INDIANA DECEMBER 2009 Table of Contents Figures and Tables ........................................................................................................................ iii Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1 Research Goals ............................................................................................................................ 1 Background .................................................................................................................................. 2 Chapter 2: Theory and Methods ................................................................................................. 6 Explaining Contact and Its Material Remains ............................................................................. 6 Predicting the Intensity of Change and its Effects on Identity................................................... 14 Change and the Lenape .............................................................................................................. 16 Methods ....................................................................................................................................
  • 9 the British Alliance of 1812–14

    9 the British Alliance of 1812–14

    9 The British Alliance of 1812–14 Chapter Outline This chapter examines the War of 1812 and, in particular, the role that Tecumseh had in this event. By the early 1800s, the intentions of the Americans were clear. The Americans were expanding, and it would be to the west where they would seek land. The War of 1812 can be viewed as a continu- ance of the American War of Independence, as this inconclusive war had left unresolved several im- portant matters, such as those relating to Indigenous Peoples and their lands. In a similar fashion to Obwandiyag, Tecumseh, a part-Shawnee and part-Cree leader, rose to the forefront as an advocate for a pan-Indigenous movement. Like Obwandiyag, Tecumseh was linked to a prophet. Tenskwa- tawa was known as the Shawnee Prophet and happened to be Tecumseh’s brother. Tenskwatawa argued that no particular tribe had the right to give up land as its own. Tecumseh had a particular disdain for Americans as both his father and brother were killed in US frontier wars. He chose to side with the British not because he favoured them but rather because he saw them as the lesser of two evils. Tecumseh challenged the cessions of lands that the Americans were obtaining, particularly those claimed in Indiana Territory. Throughout 1812 to 1813, Tecumseh led Indigenous forces to victory af- ter victory over the Americans. Tecumseh eventually met his demise at Moraviantown where, unsup- ported by British troops that had been promised, he was killed in October 1813. The death of Tecum- seh had immediate impacts since no leader could fill his role as a catalyst for a pan-Indigenous move- ment.
  • Peter Stephen Du Ponceau Collection 1781-1844 Mss.B.D92p

    Peter Stephen Du Ponceau Collection 1781-1844 Mss.B.D92p

    Peter Stephen Du Ponceau Collection 1781-1844 Mss.B.D92p American Philosophical Society 2004 105 South Fifth Street Philadelphia, PA, 19106 215-440-3400 [email protected] Peter Stephen DuPonceau Collection 1781-1844 Mss.B.D92p Table of Contents Summary Information ................................................................................................................................. 3 Background note ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Scope & content ..........................................................................................................................................6 Administrative Information .........................................................................................................................7 Related Materials ........................................................................................................................................ 7 Indexing Terms ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Other Descriptive Information ..................................................................................................................10 Collection Inventory ..................................................................................................................................12 Peter Stephen Du Ponceau Collection.................................................................................................
  • POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution

    POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution

    POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution JOHN F WINKLER ILLUSTRATED BY PETER DENNIS © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CAMPAIGN 273 POINT PLEASANT 1774 Prelude to the American Revolution JOHN F WINKLER ILLUSTRATED BY PETER DENNIS Series editor Marcus Cowper © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 5 The strategic situation The Appalachian frontier The Ohio Indians Lord Dunmore’s Virginia CHRONOLOGY 17 OPPOSING COMMANDERS 20 Virginia commanders Indian commanders OPPOSING ARMIES 25 Virginian forces Indian forces Orders of battle OPPOSING PLANS 34 Virginian plans Indian plans THE CAMPAIGN AND BATTLE 38 From Baker’s trading post to Wakatomica From Wakatomica to Point Pleasant The battle of Point Pleasant From Point Pleasant to Fort Gower THE AFTERMATH 89 THE BATTLEFIELD TODAY 93 FURTHER READING 94 INDEX 95 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com 4 British North America in1774 British North NEWFOUNDLAND Lake Superior Quebec QUEBEC ISLAND OF NOVA ST JOHN SCOTIA Montreal Fort Michilimackinac Lake St Lawrence River MASSACHUSETTS Huron Lake Lake Ontario NEW Michigan Fort Niagara HAMPSHIRE Fort Detroit Lake Erie NEW YORK Boston MASSACHUSETTS RHODE ISLAND PENNSYLVANIA New York CONNECTICUT Philadelphia Pittsburgh NEW JERSEY MARYLAND Point Pleasant DELAWARE N St Louis Ohio River VANDALIA KENTUCKY Williamsburg LOUISIANA VIRGINIA ATLANTIC OCEAN NORTH CAROLINA Forts Cities and towns SOUTH Mississippi River CAROLINA Battlefields GEORGIA Political boundary Proposed or disputed area boundary
  • War and Legitimacy: the Securement of Sovereignty in the Northwest Indian War

    War and Legitimacy: the Securement of Sovereignty in the Northwest Indian War

    i ABSTRACT WAR AND LEGITIMACY: THE SECUREMENT OF SOVEREIGNTY IN THE NORTHWEST INDIAN WAR During the post-revolution period, the newfound constitutional government of the United States faced a crisis of sovereignty and legitimacy. The Old Northwest region, encompassing what is now Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, was disputed between several groups. The U.S. government under George Washington claimed the region and sought to populate the land with white settlers, British officials in North America wished to reestablish British hegemony in the Ohio River valley and Native-Americans wished to protect their ancestral homeland from foreign invasion. In the 1790s, war broke out between a British backed alliance of Native tribes and the United States of America. Historians have named this conflict the Northwest Indian War. Examining government records, personal correspondences between Washington administration officials and military commanders, as well as recollections of soldiers, officials and civilians this thesis explores the geopolitical causes and ramifications of the Northwest Indian War. These sources demonstrate how the war was a reflection of a crisis which threatened the legitimacy to American sovereignty in the West. Furthermore, they also demonstrate how the use of a professional federal standing army was used by Washington’s government to secure American legitimacy. Michael Anthony Lipe August 2019 ii WAR AND LEGITIMACY: THE SECUREMENT OF SOVEREIGNTY IN THE NORTHWEST INDIAN WAR by Michael Anthony Lipe A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History in the College of Social Sciences California State University, Fresno August 2019 APPROVED For the Department of History: We, the undersigned, certify that the thesis of the following student meets the required standards of scholarship, format, and style of the university and the student's graduate degree program for the awarding of the master's degree.
  • Anthony Wayne M Em 0 R· I a L

    Anthony Wayne M Em 0 R· I a L

    \ I ·I ANTHONY WAYNE M EM 0 R· I A L 'I ' \ THE ANTHONY WAYNE MEMORIAL PARKWAY PROJECT . in OHIO -1 ,,,, J Compiled al tlze Request of the ANTHONY WAYNE MEMO RIAL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE by lhr O..H. IO STATE ARCHAEOLOGICAL and H ISTORICAL SOCIETY 0 00 60 4016655 2 I• Columbus, Ohio 1944 ' '.'-'TnN ~nd MONTGOMERY COt Jt-rt"-' =J1UC llBR.APV Acknowledgments . .. THE FOLLOWING ORGANIZATIONS ass isted lll the compilation of this booklet : The A nthony Wayne Memo ri al J oint L egislative Cammi ttee The Anthony \Vayne Memori al Associati on The! Toledo-Lucas County Planning Commiss ions The Ohio D epa1 rtment of Conservation and Natural Resources The Ohio Department of Highways \ [ 4 J \ Table of Contents I Anthony Wayne Portrait 1794_ ·---···-· ·--· _____ . ----------- ·----------------- -------------------. _____ Cover Anthony Wayne Portrait in the American Revolution ____________________________ F rrm I ispiece Ii I I The Joint Legislative Committee_______ --------····----------------------------------------------------- 7 i· '#" j The Artthony Wayne Memorial Association ___________________________________ .-------------------- 9 I· The Ohio Anthony Wayne Memorial Committee _____________________________________ ---------- 11 I I I Meetings of the Joint Legislative Committee·------·--------- -·---------------------------------- 13 I I "Mad Anthony" Wayne a'dd the Indian \Vars, 1790-179.'---------------------------------- 15 lI The Military Routes of Wa.yne, St. Clair, and Harmar, 1790-179-t- ___________ . _______ 27 I The Anthony Wayne Memorial
  • Re-Evaluating “The Fort- Wayne Manuscript” William Wells and the Manners and Customs of the Miami Nation

    Re-Evaluating “The Fort- Wayne Manuscript” William Wells and the Manners and Customs of the Miami Nation

    Re-evaluating “The Fort- Wayne Manuscript” William Wells and the Manners and Customs of the Miami Nation WILLIAM HEATH n April 1882, Hiram W. Beckwith of Danville, Illinois, received an Iunusual package: a handwritten manuscript of twenty-eight pages of foolscap sent to him by S. A. Gibson, superintendent of the Kalamazoo Paper Company. 1 The sheets, which appeared to have been torn from a larger manuscript, were part of a bundle of old paper that had been shipped for pulping from Fort Wayne, Indiana, to the company mills in Michigan. 2 Gibson must have realized that the material was of historical interest when he sent it on to Beckwith, who was known for his research into the frontier history of the Northwest Territory. Indeed, the packet __________________________ William Heath is Professor Emeritus of English at Mount Saint Mary’s University; he presently teaches in the graduate humanities program at Hood College in Frederick, Maryland. He is the author of a book of poems, The Walking Man , and two novels, The Children Bob Moses Led and Blacksnake’s Path: The True Adventures of William Wells . The author is grateful for a fellow - ship at the Newberry Library in Chicago, which led to many of the findings presented in the essay. 1Hiram W. Beckwith (1830-1903) was Abraham Lincoln’s law partner from 1856 to 1861 and a close personal friend. He edited several volumes in the Fergus’ Historical Series and served from 1897 to 1902 as president of the Historical Society of Illinois. 2The bundle of papers was “The Fort-Wayne Manuscript,” box 197, Indian Documents, 1811- 1812, Chicago History Museum.
  • Indiana Magazine of History

    Indiana Magazine of History

    148 Indiana Magazine of History Diplomacy on the Indiana-Ohio Frontier, 1783-1791. By Joyce G . W ilXams and 3 ill E . F arrelly . (B\oomington: Ingiana University Bicentennial Committee, 1976. Pp. ix, 118. Map, notes, illustrations, appendix, bibliography. Limited number of paperbound copies available upon request, $3.00.) The territorial provisions of the Treaty of Paris which ended the War for American Independence in 1783 immedi- ately sparked a protracted struggle among the United States, Great Britain, and various Indian tribes for control over the region known as the Old Northwest. More than an ex- tended essay about this triangular diplomacy during the decade following the Revolutionary War, Diplomacy on the Indiana-Ohio Frontier is also the first chapter of the tragic American saga which ended at Wounded Knee, South Dakota, in 1890. With consummate skill Joyce G. Williams and Jill E. Farrelly outline the stakes of postwar forest diplomacy. The United States wanted to neutralize and remove the Indians to facilitate settlement of the trans-Appalachian territory. Great Britain wanted to maintain good relations with its wartime allies in order to profit from the fur trade as well as to bolster British hegemony in the Great Lakes region. The Indians, caught in the middle, wanted to retain both tribal independence and ancestral homelands. The outcome was never really in doubt. Neither the British nor the In- dians, separately or in concert, could match the political power and military might of the Americans. When efforts of the United States to acquire aboriginal lands peacefully through purchase met militant resistance from the Wabash- Ohio tribes, the action moved from the negotiating table to the battlefield.
  • The Mckee Treaty of 1790: British-Aboriginal Diplomacy in the Great Lakes

    The Mckee Treaty of 1790: British-Aboriginal Diplomacy in the Great Lakes

    The McKee Treaty of 1790: British-Aboriginal Diplomacy in the Great Lakes A thesis submitted to the College of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies In partial fulfilment of the requirements for MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of History UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN Saskatoon by Daniel Palmer Copyright © Daniel Palmer, September 2017 All Rights Reserved Permission to Use In presenting this thesis/dissertation in partial fulfilment of the requirements for a Postgraduate degree from the University of Saskatchewan, I agree that the Libraries of this University may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying of this thesis/dissertation in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor or professors who supervised my thesis/dissertation work or, in their absence, by the Head of the Department or the Dean of the College in which my thesis work was done. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis/dissertation or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the University of Saskatchewan in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my thesis/dissertation. Requests for permission to copy or to make other uses of materials in this thesis/dissertation in whole or part should be addressed to: Head of the Department of History HUMFA Administrative Support Services Room 522, Arts Building University of Saskatchewan 9 Campus Drive Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A5 i Abstract On the 19th of May, 1790, the representatives of four First Nations of Detroit and the British Crown signed, each in their own custom, a document ceding 5,440 square kilometers of Aboriginal land to the Crown that spring for £1200 Quebec Currency in goods.
  • The 1818 Saint Marys Treaties A

    The 1818 Saint Marys Treaties A

    INDIANA HISTORICAL SOCIETY PRESS The 1818 Saint Marys Treaties A. ANDREW OLSON III The 1818 Saint Marys Treaties A. ANDREW OLSON III Indiana Historical Society Press | Indianapolis 2020 © 2020 Indiana Historical Society Press. All rights reserved. Indiana Historical Society 450 West Ohio Street Indianapolis, IN 46202-3269 www.indianahistory.org 317-232-1882 Copies of the four issues of THG: Connections in which the article series first appeared may be purchased from: IHS Basile History Market Telephone orders: 1-800-447-1830 Fax orders: 1-317-234-0562 Online orders @ http://shop.indianahistory.org Originally published as a four-part series in the following issues of The Hoosier Genealogist: Connections Volume 57, Fall/Winter 2017 Volume 58, Spring/Summer 2018 Volume 58, Fall/Winter 2018 Volume 59, Spring/Summer 2019 No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Contents Part 1: Tribal and Euro-American Historical 1 Backdrop through 1817 Part 2: Brothertown and Stockbridge Indians 11 and Treaty Preparations Part 3: Concluding the Treaties: The Brothertowns’ 23 and Stockbridges’ Sagas Part 4: In the Aftermath of the Treaties: Removal 37 and Settlement Part 1: Tribal and Euro-American Historical Backdrop through 1817 The years 2017 and 2018 marked disinterment of remains at the site in the Initially the Saint Marys treaties were the two-hundredth year since six pivotal first half of the twentieth century. Upon tangential to my original object, but treaties were concluded at Saint Marys, assuming ownership of this parcel, my when I also discovered a historical error Ohio.
  • The Emergence and Decline of the Delaware Indian Nation in Western Pennsylvania and the Ohio Country, 1730--1795

    The Emergence and Decline of the Delaware Indian Nation in Western Pennsylvania and the Ohio Country, 1730--1795

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by The Research Repository @ WVU (West Virginia University) Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports 2005 The emergence and decline of the Delaware Indian nation in western Pennsylvania and the Ohio country, 1730--1795 Richard S. Grimes West Virginia University Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd Recommended Citation Grimes, Richard S., "The emergence and decline of the Delaware Indian nation in western Pennsylvania and the Ohio country, 1730--1795" (2005). Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 4150. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/4150 This Dissertation is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by the The Research Repository @ WVU with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Dissertation in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you must obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Dissertation has been accepted for inclusion in WVU Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports collection by an authorized administrator of The Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Emergence and Decline of the Delaware Indian Nation in Western Pennsylvania and the Ohio Country, 1730-1795 Richard S. Grimes Dissertation submitted to the Eberly College of Arts and Sciences at West Virginia University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History Mary Lou Lustig, Ph.D., Chair Kenneth A.
  • Fort Dearborn—Conflict, Commemoration, Reconciliation

    Fort Dearborn—Conflict, Commemoration, Reconciliation

    Fort Dearborn—Conict, Commemoration, Reconciliation, and the Struggle over “Battle” vs. “Massacre” JOHN N. LOW Ohio State University, Newark The 200th anniversary of the Battle of Fort Dearborn in the city of Chicago was celebrated in August, 2012. There have, in fact, been four “battles” over the razing of the fort. The rst was the actual battle itself; the second was over how the settlers of Chicago collectively memorialized the event; and more recently there were struggles in 2009 and 2012 over how the encounter should be commemorated. The resulting conict over how the battle would be remembered reects the powerful and often contentious nature of memorialization. The details surrounding the circumstances and nature of the so-called “Fort Dearborn Massacre,” as it came to be known, appear to have been sub- stantially supported by the literature and histories being written in the late nineteenth century, including Mrs. John Kinzie’s Narrative of the Massacre at Chicago, August 15, 1812 and of preceding Events (1844), Wau-Bun, the Early Days in the Northwest (1873), Joseph Kirkland’s The Chicago Massacre of 1812 (1893), and Heroes and Heroines of the Fort Dearborn Massacre, A romantic and tragic history of Corporal John Simmons and his heroic wife, by N. Simmons (1896). The idea that the battle was a “mas- sacre” was effectively written in stone (okay, bronze) with a monument commissioned in 1893 by industrialist George Pullman. The (in)famous statue of Black Partridge saving a settler, which originally sat across from Pullman’s home, eventually ended up in a Chicago Park District warehouse.