N %. 4' cyVLlB-zAMKRICA An Historical Review VOLUME 28. NUMBER 1 JANUARY 1946 ijA V ^ WL ''<^\ cTWID-cylMERICA An Historical Review JANUARY 1946 VOLUME 28 NEW SERIES, VOLUME 17 NUMBER I CONTENTS THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI SECONDARY SOURCES J^^^' Dela/iglez 3 THE JOURNAL OF PIERRE VITRY, S.J /^^« Delanglez 23 DOCUMENT: JOURI>j^ OF FATHER VITRY OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS. iARMY CHAPLAIN DURING THE WAR AGAINST THE CHIII^ASAW*. ]ea>j Delanglez 30 .' BOOK REVIEWS . .- 60 MANAGING EDITOR JEROME V. JACOBSEN, Chicago EDITORIAL STAFF WILLIAM STETSON MERRILL RAPHAEL HAMILTON J. MANUEL ESPINOSA PAUL KINIERY W. EUGENE SHIELS JEAN DELANGLEZ Published quarterly by Loyola University (The Institute of Jesuit History) at 50 cents a copy. Annual subscription, $2.00; in foreign countries, $2.50. Publication and editorial offices at Loyola University, 6525 Sheridan Road, Chicago, Illinois. All communications should be addressed to the Manag^ing Editor. Entered as second class matter, August 7, 1929, at the post oflnce at Chicago, Illinois, under the Act of March 3, 1879. Additional entry as second class matter at the post office at Effingham, Illinois. Printed in the United States. cTVIID-c^MERICA An Historical Review JANUARY 1946 VOLUME 28 NEW SERIES, VOLUME 17 NUMBER 1 The Discovery of the Mississippi Secondary Sources By secondary sources we mean the contemporary documents which are based on those mentioned in our previous article.^ The first of these documents contains one sentence not found in any of the extant accounts of the discovery of the Mississippi, thus pointing to the fact that the compiler had access to a presumably lost narrative of the voyage of 1673, or that he inserted in his account some in- formation which is found today on one of the maps illustrating the voyage of discovery. Except for this information, the document is worthless. The other secondary sources are two questionnaires, a memorial, a critique of this memorial, and a series of answers to this critique. These sources tell us what was known in Paris in the year 1677 about the voyage, /'. e., what documentation was available in France at that date. Moreover, a passage in one of these documents contains a legend which was on the lost map which JoUiet had drawn from memory after his return to Quebec in 1674. We shall examine each of these sources in turn. ( 1 ) Relation de la Nouvelle France, 1673 The above is the title of the first secondary source with which we are concerned; it is an abridged narrative of the expedition, and has been attributed to Jolliet. Father Steck, for instance, writes as follows: "Some time early in November, Jolliet brought this revised map to Frontenac, together with a written account of the expedi- 1 "The Discovery of the Mississippi. Primary Sources," Mid-America, 27 (1945) :219-231. 4 ^ JEAN DELANGLEZ tion. In drawing up this account he again used Dabion's report of August 1."^ The map referred to is the Franquelin map mentioned in our former article, which is mistakenly attributed to Jolliet. It is im- portant to prove here that the account was not written by Jolliet, because it has been used as a basis for opinions which are seen to be untenable when the document is analyzed and its provenance ascertained. When last heard of, the document was in the Bibliotheque Na- tionale (BN), Manuscrits frangais, nouvelles acquisitions, vol. 7485, pt. II, ff. Il6-lll\} Formerly the call-number of this volume was Fends Renaudot, vol. 30. This volume is made up of copies and extracts treating of geography and voyages; with the exception of one Tonti letter, all the documents are unsigned. In the same Fonds Renaudot, vol. 36, now Manuscrits frangais, nouvelles acquisitions, 7491, ff. 351-355, there is a copy of a complete relation of the voyage of 1673. The basis of this copy is a document now in the Archives du Service Hydrographique (ASH), 5:no. 16, which we described and compared with the earlier Dablon text of August 1, 1674, from which it is derived.^ Eusebe Renaudot, the former owner of the papers in the Fonds Renaudot, was a fervent Jansenist,^ who belonged to a small but active coterie whose principal objective seems to have been to tamper with any document in which a Jesuit is creditably mentioned. These gentlemen, now greatly admired by certain modern "impartial" his- torians, were not above forgery when it served their purpose. A document dealing with the Jesuits, whose provenance can be traced to Renaudot and his clique, should immediately be suspect.^ 2 F. B. Steck, The Jolliet-Marquette Expedition, 1673 (Quincy, 111., 1928), 183. The "again" in the last sentence of the quotation refers to Fath- er Steck's belief that the Saint-Sulpice manuscript was written by Jolliet. This opinion is discussed in "The 1674 Account of the Discovery of the Mis- sissippi," Mid-America, 26 (1944) :309-312. 3 The document is printed in P. Margry, Decouvertes et ^Jtablissements des Franqais dans I'Ouest et dans le Sud de VAmirique Septentrionale (6 vols., Paris, 1876-1888), 1:254-262; reprinted from this compilation by E. Gagnon, Louis Jolliet, decouvreur du Mississippi et du pays des Illinois, premier seigneur d'Anticosti (2d ed., Montreal, 1913), 316-320; translated in Steck, The Jolliet-Marquette Expedition, 184-186; the comments are in the footnotes. 4 "The 1674 Account of the Discovery of the Mississippi," loc. cit, 312-315. 5 J. Delanglez, Some La Salle Journeys (Chicago, 1938), 12ff, 75fF. 6 A similar abridgment dealing with a voyage of La Salle is in the same Renaudot volume (BN, fr., Mss. n.a., 7485:134-138v) ; printed (with translation) from a copy in AC,C 13C, 3:23-26, by T. C. Pease and R. C. Werner, eds., The French Foundations 1680-1693 (Collections of the Illinois THE DISCOVERY OF THE MISSISSIPPI 5 The author of the Renaudot document used Jolliet's dedicatory letter to Frontenac and a copy of the ASH version of Dablon's letter of August 1, 1674.'^ Though his identity remains unknown, this compiler was certainly not Jolliet as will be clear from the following considerations. What first strikes the reader of this narrative is the peculiar interchange of the first and third person singular, the unexpected transitions from "il" to "je" and from "je" to "il." This is queer enough, on the supposition that Jolliet wrote the document. Still queerer, on this same supposition, are the three opening words: "Le nomme Joliet ..." These words are mistranslated when they are rendered by "The said Joliet," as though the French text had "ledit Joliet." This latter expression is used when the name has already been mentioned; obviously, it cannot be used at the beginning of a document. The words Le nomme, on the other hand, indicate that the person referred to is either a man of no importance, or else that he is unknown to the writer or speaker. Hence the correct transla- tion of "Le nomme Joliet" is "A man named Joliet," or "One Joliet." The use of this expression is evidence that the document was writ- ten in Paris; for in documents originating in Canada after 1674, the explorer is always referred to as "le sieur Jolliet," or even as "Monsieur Jolliet." Finally, as we have seen,^ Jolliet never wrote his name with one /. The presence of these incongruities in the first three words should, it would seem, have led to a closer examination of this docu- ment, however inconvenient such an examination might have been. Unless Jolliet were an imbecile, he would not have begun with such words "in drawing up this account." He would not have re- State Historical Library, vol. 23, French Series, vol. 1, Springfield, 111., 1934), 1-16. Both the La Salle and Jolliet abridgments were first published in English (they are not in the original French edition) as appendices to Hennepin's A New Discovery of a Vast Country in America (2 parts, Lon- don, 1698), part 2:185-195. In the reprint of the second issue of this Eng- lish edition (2 vols., Chicago, 1903), 2:622, note 1, R. G. Thwaites, the editor, wrote as follows: "This [the Jolliet document] is a poor and in- accurate abridgment of the account given in a contemporary MS. [the ASH manuscript] which is published by Margry in his Decouvertes et etablisse- ments des Franqais, i, pp. 262-270; it is reproduced (with translation) in Thwaites, Jes. Relations, Iviii, pp. 92-102." Those acquainted with Father Hennepin's career will not find it strange that he should have copies of these documents. "^ It should be noted that a copy of the ASH docvunent is among the Renaudot papers. s "Louis Jolliet, Early Years: 1645-1674," Mid-America, 25 (1945) :3. 6 JEAN DELANGLEZ ferred to himself as "one Joliet," and he certainly would not have mispelled his name. The opening paragraph of the document is a resume of the two initial paragraphs in ASH, plus a few details taken from the dedica- tory letter to Frontenac. The third paragraph, which is also a synopsis of material in the ASH document and the Frontenac letter, contains the first substitution of "je" for "il." With regard to the sentence "je m'estois embarque avec six homes," Father Steck re- marks: "It seems strange that he does not mention Marquette's name," This would indeed be strange, if Jolliet were the author of the Renaudot document, but the omission of Marquette's name is not strange at all, when we remember where and by whom the document was written. The modified copy of Dablon's letter which the compiler of this document used reads as follows: "Estant arrive aux Outaouacs il [Jolliet] se joignit au pere Marquette ..