xt76hd7npg0m https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt76hd7npg0m/data/mets.xml Hanna, Charles A. (Charles Augustus), 1863-1950. 1911  books b929748h195v22009 English G. P. Putnam s sons : New York and London Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Indians of North America --Pennsylvania. Indians of North America --Ohio River Valley. Pennsylvania --History --Colonial period, ca. 1600-1775. Ohio River Valley --History --To 1795. The wilderness trail; or, The ventures and adventures of the Pennsylvania traders on the Allegheny path, with some new annals of the old West, and the records of some strong men and some bad ones, by Charles A. Hanna ... with eighty maps and illustrations. text The wilderness trail; or, The ventures and adventures of the Pennsylvania traders on the Allegheny path, with some new annals of the old West, and the records of some strong men and some bad ones, by Charles A. Hanna ... with eighty maps and illustrations. 1911 2009 true xt76hd7npg0m section xt76hd7npg0m 
   Of this woik one thousand copies have been printed from type, and the type destroyed,

November, 1910. 
   The Wilderness Trail


The Ventures and Adventures of the Pennsylvania Traders on the Allegheny Path

With Some New Annals of the Old West, and the Records of Some Strong Men and Some Bad Ones


Charles A. Hanna

Author of " The Scotch-Irish "

With Eighty Maps and Illustrations

In Two Volumes Volume One

G. P. Putnam's Sons New York and London Gbe Iftiitcherbocher flJress 1911 
   Copyright, 1911



Cbe Ikmcfiabocfeec press, *  cw ipoch 




I.   The Debatable Land...... i

II.   The Iroquoians of the Susquehanna    ... 26

III.   The Petticoat Indians of Petticoat Land     .      . 88

\f   IV.   The Shawnees....... 119

V.   The Early Traders of Conestoga, Donegal, and

Paxtang........ 161

VI.   The Young Red Man Goes West   .      .      . .182

VII.   The Shamokin Traders and the Shamokin Path    . 192

y VIII.   Andrew Montour, "The Half Indian" .      .      . 223

IX.   The Frankstown Path ...... 247

X.   The Raystown Path     .      .      .      .      . .274

xi.   The Traders at Allegheny on the Main Path; with

Some Annals of Kittanning and Chartier's Town 290

xii.   The Ohio Mingoes of the White River and the

Wendats   ........ 315

xiii.   kuskuskies on the beaver   ..... 34o

v  xiv.   logstown on the ohio  ...... 352




The Trail through Shadow of Death Gap       . Frontispiece

Ona Indians in Action      ...... i

A Susquehanna Iroquois of the Stone Age      .      . 26

Stone Age Americans of the Present Day       .      . 28

Attack on an Iroquois Fort..... 30

The Site of the "Fort Demolished" of 1688    .      . 36

Looking West from the Site of the Fort Demolished 38

The Mouth of Octorara Creek       .... 40

Archaeological Relics of the Susquehannocks .      . 42, 44

The Susquehannock Fort of 1670     .... 46

The Site of the Susquehannock Fort of 1670   .      . 48

Looking East from the Susquehannock Fort of 1670. 50

Herrman's 1670 Map of Maryland    .... 54

Thomas Cresap's Fort of 1730  ..... 56

Map of the Iroquois Castles in 168 i        .      .      . 58

Susquehannock Picture Writings on Rocks in Susquehanna River.......60,62,64

The Site of the Conestoga Indian Town of 1700      . 78

De l'Isle's 1718 Map of Louisiana    .... 122

   viii                  Maps and Illustrations	


The Site of Fort St. Louis .....	124, 126

Minisink Flats and Minisink Island	140

Shawnee Island and the Site of Pechoquealin Town .	142

Pahaqualong, or Delaware Water Gap, from the Site	

of Pechoquealin Town .....	144

The Mouth of Pequea Creek.....	i50

Indian Point, on Conestoga Creek ....	152

Mayo's Map of the Potomac Shawnee Towns, 1737 .	156

Peter Bezallion's Grave ......	170

The Site of the Shawnee Town of Wyoming	186

The Site of the Shawnee Town of Chillisquaque	190

Taylor's Map of Shamokin and Vicinity, about 1727	192

Conrad Weiser........	196

Tioga Point........	206

Howell's 1792 Map of Pennsylvania	j 220

Shadow of Death Gap......	248

Black Log Gap .......	250

The Site of Aughwick Town .....	252

Jack's Narrows .......	254

Water Street  .      .      .      .      ...      . .2	56,   258, 260

Kittanning Gap ........	26l

The Site of Kiskiminetas Town ....	264

McKee's Rock .......	270, 272

Alliquippa's Gap, from the East ....	280

The Site of Saguin's Trading House on the Cuyahoga	334

The Site of Old Kuskuskies.....	340

   Maps and Illustrations


Looking down Beaver Valley from the Mouth of Mahoning........

The Site of Logstown......

Bonnecamps's 1749 Map of the Ohio River

The Ohio Company's Map of the Forks of Ohio, about 1750-52.......

The Ohio River from the Site of Logstown

Map of the Wilderness Trails .



356 360

372 380 384 

Acknowledgments are due to the following persons for their courtesy, suggestions, and assistance in furnishing material, information, and photographs for use in these volumes, and to the authors and publishers named for permission to use copyrighted matter from their publications:

To Mr. Charles William Burrows, and the Burrows Brothers Company, for transcripts from De Lery's Journals (manuscript) and the Jesuit Relations.

To Messrs. Charles Scribner's Sons, for transcripts from Richard Smith's Journal, in Halsey's Four Great Rivers.

To Col. J. Stoddard Johnston, for transcripts and notes from his First Explorers of Kentucky, relating to the travels of Walker and Gist in Kentucky.

To Dr. Reuben G. Thwaites, for transcript of Dr. Draper's manuscript account of John Finley.

To Dr. John W. Jordan, Jr., for transcripts of manuscript Journals and itineraries of Thomas Hutchins and Captain Harry Gordon.

To Messrs. Robert H. Kelby, A. T. Doughty, P. Lee Phillips, Frederick S. Dellen-baugh, William M. Beauchamp, and Wilberforce Eames, for numerous courtesies.

To Messrs. David H. Landis, Oscar J. Harvey, James Mooney, Frank R. Diffen-derfer, and Archer B. Hulbert, for suggestions, criticisms, corrections, photographs, and data.

And to Mrs. Louise Welles Murray, Miss Frances G. Weiser Shiffner, Mrs. Henrietta H. Bodwell, Miss Sarah Cresson, Mrs. Mary Calhoon Taylor, Mr. Charles W. Furlong, Mr. Clark B. Jamison, Mr. Charles Starek, Mr. George F. Hunter, Mr. H. Frank Eshel-man, Mr. J. C. Hommer, Mr. J. Ferd. Walther, Mr. Henry Houck, Mr. Thomas Lynch Montgomery, Mr. E. O. Randall, and the officers of the Maryland Historical, Society, for photographs, maps, books, information, material, and assistance furnished. 
   Ancient Civilization was spread among the Barbarians by the Trader and the Soldier.

Modern Civilization has been made known to the Far Nations by the Trader, the Soldier, and the Missionary.

Future Civilization will be carried to the Ends of the Earth by the Trader alone. 

HE American Indian has become familiar to the reading portion of

I mankind chiefly as a foremost exemplar of those two surviving arts of the savage in which he scarcely has been surpassed   war and oratory. The reputed speech of the half-breed Mingo warrior, Logan, even though its eloquence may have been largely that of John Gibson, his sister-in-law's "squaw-man," who wrote it down, will be declaimed by the American school-boy in ages to come, perhaps long after the stately and impassioned periods of a Webster or a Gladstone have been forgotten. In America to-day, the stories of Champlain and the Iroquois, of King Philip's War, of Braddock's Rout, of the Wyoming Massacre, of St. Clair's Defeat, and of Pontiac, Brant, Tecumseh, and Sitting Bull, are at least as well known as are the legends of Marathon and Syracuse, of Hastings and Orleans, of Blenheim and Waterloo. But as the arts of war and oratory are primarily arts of mischief and deceit, it is to be expected that the revelations which mediums of that nature afford of the life, sociology, and character both of the Red Man and the White Man should be distorted, one-sided, and incomplete   and the picture to a corresponding degree false.

Yet, with few exceptions, the writers of history, until a comparatively recent period, have written chiefly of wars and words, of soldiers and politicians, and have neglected the matters of more real moment to the seriously interested student of man   matters pertaining to his origin and development, to his daily life and pursuits, his migrations and colonies, his taboos, ceremonies, social culture, and religions. To such a student there is more value in one line of Caesar relating to some peculiar custom of the ancient Britons than in two pages of the rhetorical harangue which Tacitus imagines Galgacus to have delivered to his warriors before a battle; and more merit in one page of a contemporary record of material facts than in a whole chapter of hypothetical philosophizing on the patriotic motives of politicians, or the logical continuity of cause and effect in the statesmanship of kings and the favor of princes; or in the mathematical analysis and explanation of the movements of two opposing mobs made up of men intent either on killing or running.



History comprehends as many branches as there are phases in the activities of human life. It is trite to say that a complete history of a nation or a race would present the life of that nation or race in all its aspects   physical, geographical, social, economical, philological, commercial, recreational, intellectual, literary, artistic, sexual, religious, and spiritual; as well as political and military. The two latter aspects, while more spectacular, certainly are not so important as the others. Yet most of the writers of history have confined themselves to politics and battles alone. This is due, perhaps, to the innate fondness of immature humanity for noise and pageantry. There are still a few grown-up men living in the civilized world, who, out of sheer vanity, delight to dress themselves in bright colors, and, following a brass band, to parade before their fellow-men. At one time in the life of every man, nation, or race, the same thing has been universally true. Now-a-days, however, most men outgrow this weakness before they become men. But most of our histories have been written after ancient models which were designed to be read by the other kind of men. They were made to please and instruct men and nations who had reached the same period of intellectual development as the modern boy of ten, or the man of thirty, who still takes pleasure in wearing feathers.

It is for this reason, possibly, that most of the histories which have been written, have, sooner or later, taken the next place on our library shelves to the books of last year's sermons or the highly ornamented volumes containing a miscellaneous assortment of the " World's Famous Orations." Happily, the writing of this kind of historical fiction has ceased to be the work of serious minded men; and its field is now chiefly occupied by very young women novelists.

However, for those students and readers who insist on having the romantic in history, there is no field of reading which yields such abundant returns both in interest and knowledge as are afforded by the authentic records of the North American Indian in Colonial times. Parkman has demonstrated this with the greatest success in his highly interesting chronicles of the French Traders and French Missionaries. He first appreciated what has since become a recognized fact, that the most romantic and picturesque characters in American history have been the Latins, of both continents. Indeed, the careers of some of these have never been surpassed in romantic interest by those of any characters in European history. By his faithful and spirited narratives, the writer last named has made the whole world familiar with the stories of La Salle and Tonty, of the Jesuits and the Hurons, of Frontenac and La Verendrye.

Equally interesting, and in many respects more romantic, are the yet untold stories of the lives and vicissitudes of some of the French 


"squaw-men," and the French half-breeds, whose parents were partly Indian and partly white   such as the Joncaires, father and sons, the Chartiers, father and son, the Montours, father, daughter, and grandson, the Shekallamys, father and son, the Langlades, and others, the history of all of whom belongs chiefly to that of our own country.

The ancient historians who wrote of battles still have their lessons for us to learn, though, if not in one way, then in another. The harangues and fights, for instance, which form the substance of the literary remains of Thucydides, are not without their value even at this late day. They at least serve to show that the chief interest of the early Greeks for whom he wrote, like that of all races in their primitive days, was the savage's love for battles and talk. While we of to-day have largely outgrown, even if our historians have not, the blood-thirsty attributes of the savage, we still have his fondness for many pow-wows. Nevertheless, the evil of too much talk is not wholly an unmixed evil, for it serves men as a vent for excess of spleen, which, if held too long confined might cause even more disastrous results than the unrestrained output of words.

As war, or the effort to gain power by force, is no longer the chief business of men, neither can the record of plotting for political power, or power by craft, be regarded seriously as the most important branch of history. The falsity of Freeman's conception, that history is past politics and politics present history, is fully illustrated by the fate of his own historical work, the political part of which has been superseded to a great extent by the work of newer historians of politics. It is on a line with Carlyle's dictum that true history is to be found only in the record of the lives of the world's heroes. Yet many of our histories are written on the assumption that both of these propositions are true.

Heroes and politicians still survive, to dazzle and bedevil our present day mankind; just as the moral uplifters of the ten-cent dreadful will always nourish   men who start in to make the world good, for a consideration, and then, like most other men, consider their work done when they have made it good to themselves. But there are few thinking people to-day who would credit any of these three classes as being typical or representative of our own or our country's life, activities, and ideals. Fortunately, there can be no long endurance of those men or principles that would make of government an end rather than a means.

The few soldiers and statesmen who have been truly great in American history, were so before, and not because they temporarily acted the parts of soldier and statesman. To mention the most familiar examples, Washington was a great general because he was first a great business-man and knew that secret of wealth   to run when other people stand still, and to stand still when other people run.   In our present 


day he would be, and in the past he has been called a land-jobber. So Lincoln was a great President, because he was first, a great lawyer, and possessed to a very high degree the homely wisdom called common-sense, or the faculty of seeing things as they are to common men. Franklin, likewise, was great as a public leader because he was first a great inventor, practical philosopher, and hard-headed man of business; and by precept and example taught his countrymen that man's first duty was to be thrifty.

Dead heroes, like dead kings, are seldom missed. No political soldier or oratorical statesman who ever lived can compare in industry, usefulness, integrity, or substantial patriotism with the higher class banker or business genius of to-day, a man whose type can be found in every large and almost every small community in this and other lands.

Another view of history is, that it should be so written as to show the working out of some one or more of the theories and precepts of the philosophers. This would be admirable if philosophy fulfilled its promise in such cases, and really led us to the goal of power by knowledge. But does it?

A favorite formula of the school-master is to the effect that history is philosophy teaching by example. The same thing might as well be said of the earthquake. While one is an understatement and the other an overstatement, both are alike misleading; for both history and earthquake have repeatedly tumbled the house of the philosopher down upon his head, as they will continue to do for an indefinite time in the future. And while it is not to be denied that history is the womb from which philosophy was born, and the mother from which it should draw its sustenance, the teachings of philosophy are always diametrically opposed to some of the examples of history, and often to one another. There is neither consistency nor continuity in the examples, and their only constant teaching is that men do not act in accordance with such teachings of philosophy, but in accordance with the always different conditions which confront them. To attempt to follow all the teachings drawn from the examples of history, on any one proposition, is exactly as impossible as to attempt to travel at the same time on four roads leading north, south, east, and west. Yet this conception of history has been elaborated and augmented to the point where some people, like the brilliant and pedantic Buckle   whose philosophy has largely turned to fustian   have undertaken seriously to fabricate history into an exact science. They attempt to analyze, dissect, classify, generalize, and draw morals from the record of the impulses, activities, and casualties of man   a record which furnishes the most vital examples for showing the fallacies and incompleteness of philosophy. In this they are at one with those who in recent years would make a counterfeit science of 


religion. Scarcely less fallacious, indeed, was the method of the ancient philosophical historians, whose narration of almost every event was prefaced with a description of the particular sign or portent which presaged it. No king could die until a comet had appeared in the sky; no battle was lost, by their side, until after a cow had given birth to a two-headed calf. The omen, of course, was always discovered after the event had happened. Their science was more exact but not much more ridiculous than that of those who would make a science of religion or of history.   But men now call the science of portents superstition.

Written history at its best is nothing more than a tentative and cumulative record of those things which concern the environment and activities of men; in short, the record of human experience. But the secret influences which control the actions and determine the destiny of men, are entirely too subtle, complex, intangible, mixed, and remote to be even grasped by the human mind. We must be able to fathom the infinite before attempting to formulate them into principles of philosophy which will abide. The theory that history should be so written as to show the logical development, unfolding, and continuity of some divine plan of God, some law of Nature, or some principle of metaphysical philosophy, is simply a survival in another form of the ancient theological dogma which held that every good or evil happening in a man's life was either a reward for some virtue or a punishment for some sin, and that both were ordained and carried out solely for the enhancement of the glory of God.

Experience, of course, is our best teacher; but it must be our own experience, or no lesson is taught.

Philosophies, like religions, are largely made up from the imagination ; and both tend to make romance of history and history of romance. Philosophy's truths, so fondly worshipped by their admirers, are necessarily half of them speculations, pure and simple, and as such they may or may not have the value which gives them permanence. The events of history do not take place from causes circumscribed by the limits of philosophy. On the contrary, the truths of philosophy are themselves more or less matured outgrowths from those events.

History cannot be developed into a science or made to serve as a handmaiden to philosophy, for the simple reason that the mental characteristics and susceptibilities of every human being are different from those of every other human being, and therefore, to the limited perception of man, like causes, in human affairs, do not produce like effects.

Written history should be a phonograph to lived history, which is a vaster thing than philosophy, because it comprehends both wisdom and folly, and something more besides, which philosophy cannot compass. The possibilities of man's life are too huge, and its history too kaleido- 


scopic for either to be fossilized by the labels and classifications of the precisian, or limited by the definitions of the philsopher.

As is naturally to be expected, among those who would make philosophy the chief purpose of history, we find a certain number of writers and critics   educated to a point where it may be said their intellects are either overtrained or undertrained   who affect to disparage the importance of facts in the writing of history, and who patronizingly inform us that history should not be concerned with the common things of every-day life, but only with life's great moments and crises; and that the first place should be given to the consideration of the workings of those immutable laws and eternal verities, whatever these may be, which (they say) have governed the whole course of human affairs from the beginnings of history.

Facts, it must be allowed, are stubborn and ofttimes unwelcome things. They are not permitted in poetry under any circumstances whatever; and they are given such an ungracious welcome, and apologized for in a footnote, as it were, when they chance to make their appearance in other fields of polite literature, that they have come to be regarded as interlopers. They are subordinated by the metaphysician; there is no welcome for them in the drama; and the artist runs away rather than meet them face to face. Yet the poet, the novelist, the philosopher, the playwright, and the artist all are, or at least all profess to be, zealous devotees at the shrine of truth.

Now, verified or verifiable facts, material or perceptible, are the stuff from which truth is made. Without venturing into the deep waters of metaphysical definition it may be said that truth is the result of the mind's correct analysis and generalization of those kinds of related facts. Some may go so far as to say that a fact is, potentially, a concrete truth, and that truth is, or should be, fact in the abstract.

Abstractions, however, are usually more than the naked truth. They are facts   bare realities   dressed up by the emotions, the imagination, and the intellect, and as such not free from fallacy; for the most brilliant intellects often take entirely diverse views of the same subjects, interpreting their facts into opposite conclusions. This being the case, it may not be unreasonable for common-sense to assert, as some of our modern practical philosophers seem to do, that, apart from the material facts or demonstrable principles on which it may be based, no such thing has yet been discovered as absolute'or eternal truth; and that all abstract truths are relative, or conditional, or contingent, and in a process of growth and change. Christ's question to Pilate, "What is Truth?" has never been and never will be adequately answered. The so-called truths of the remote past, not wholly based on and synonymous with ascertained or anticipated facts, have all been modified or have died, 


just as we see that such truths of the recent past are to-day being increased or diminished, and as we feel assured that similar truths of the present will likewise be changed or abandoned in the future. What men call truths are really men's opinions about truth, and as such they are neither immutable nor eternal.

Hence, as facts accumulate, philosophies pass away, and the seeming truths of one generation become half-truths to the next. Facts are the only realities which abide, and a concrete truth in history, whether it be newly discovered or newly presented, is the only vital thing about history. It possesses a double interest, in that it serves to establish a new and truer point of view, as well as to destroy an old error.

The business of the common man's philosophy, therefore, is to seek the meaning of facts; not to fabricate them, as the writings of our philosophers might lead us to infer. But the business of the historian is simply to discover and record facts.

A recent observation of Mr. Taft on the subject of "Journalism" is so entirely applicable to the writing of history as well that it may be quoted with profit here: "The increase in the intelligence and discrimination of the people," he says, "has in one way largely modified the power of the press. The editorial writers have by no means such influence upon popular view as they had in days gone by. The newspapers are taken more for the news they contain than for the advice as to the lessons which should be drawn from it. The people make more allowance now for the bias of the paper than they ever did before."

So in the future will our histories be written and read more for the news they contain than for advice as to the lessons which should be drawn from it. And the accurate reporter of the events of history is bound to take a higher place as an authority than the moralizing professor, the brilliant rhetorician, or the idealistic philosopher. Who cares now what Macaulay thought of the Tories; or that Buckle ascribed Scotland's "lack" of progress to superstition and thunderstorms? And what permanent historical value has Carlyle's opinion, that " the history of what man has accomplished in this world is at bottom the history of the great men who have worked here"?

After all, the source and standards of ideals are the lives of men, and high ideals are only the examples set by the best for the others to follow. None of them are more important than the elemental virtue of simple moral and intellectual honesty. Yet this is an ideal that every common man can by example create, and leave behind him as a standard for others. If the historian would attain it, he must confine himself to the discovery and setting forth of pertinent facts.

The present age, as the natural heir of the past, is one where men gain power chiefly by industry, or by the sweat of the brow and the brain 


   more or less value given for value received; which, being a cumulative and reciprocal process, may, as some believe, be the true means and end of power by knowledge. According to this view, men's desires drive them to work for their accomplishment, and their accomplishment brings knowledge, and leads to new desires, which require more work and result in further knowledge and produce further effort for more power. In this way knowledge may be said to grow with what it feeds upon; but the price paid for the food is always physical or mental labor. This seems alike true, whether the objects of desire be material, social, or spiritual   money, rank, authority, or wisdom; and even though inherited wealth and position are not always paid for by those who possess them.

There may be more wisdom than is conceived of by philosophy in the simple Bible allegory of the Garden of Eden, which suggests that the fruit of the tree of knowledge is the attainment of man's desire. But what a preposterous lie do we now perceive that part of it to be which teaches that work   man's one sure means to attain all things   is a punishment decreed by God's curse. Such a conception is incomprehensible to a civilized intelligence, which regards creative or productive work for a definite end as the highest privilege and blessing of life; though the study of the Indian, as of all other savage races, shows that to look on labor as a curse is the natural attitude of the mind of primitive man. Indeed, the average Indian community in Colonial America was a Socialist's Utopia. There were no laws beyond those of Nature, and tribal customs. As a general thing, land was held in common. Such government as existed was that of a pure democracy, of the town-meeting style. The men had no other occupation than fishing and hunting, and making war and speeches; and the women did all the work.

Now, while our material civilization has been built up by the pick, the axe, the plough, the spinning-wheel, the steam-engine, and the historically ignoble Trader, rather than by, and notwithstanding, the war-club, the battle-axe, the Idealist, and the Talker, it has only recently occurred to men that there might be a better way to learn their own race history than by repeating unmeaning and of ttimes unmerited eulogies of soldiers, or attempting to analyze, classify, and draw lessons from the short-sighted and short-lived policies of opportunist statecraft, or prophesying the rise and fall of the stock market in times of peace, by citing causes for the high price of wheat during the Punic Wars or the Norman Conquest.

Some have, therefore, in late years, undertaken to apply the pickaxe and shovel method to the learning and teaching of history, and have done so, and with great success, both figuratively and literally. The archaeologist in Europe has turned up the dirt of the Mediterranean countries, and discovered that the history of ancient civilization will 


have to be in large part rewritten, and that it must begin before Adam. The antiquarian has searched the charter chests of families and the private and state archives of his own and neighboring nations, and found that the story of his institutions and governments and people has never been truthfully told. As a result, we have the very interesting reports of what new excavations have unearthed in Greece and Italy, in Egypt, in Asia Minor, and in Mesopotamia; and the equally important discoveries made by students of ancient documents other than official papers, with the light they throw on the contemporaneous activities of man. We see, also, that in the writing of European history, what Walter Scott called the "big bow-wow style" has become well-nigh a thing of the past, and in its place we have the results of the careful, painstaking, minutely detailed, and illuminating researches of such men as Mommsen, Heitland, Lecky, Stubbs, and Gardiner, instead of the labored, brilliant, and intrinsically disappointing rhetoric of a Hume, a Macaulay, a Gibbon, a Froude, or a Carlyle.

The same thing is true in the treatment of the race history of the aboriginal American, whose period was much nearer our own than is the case of his prototype in Europe and Asia, and whose living descendants have not yet wholly emerged from barbarism. The archaeological and philological investigations which have been carried on by the Bureau of Ethnology at Washington, and by many private investigators in various of the States, have revealed a wealth of material evidence that the prehistoric inhabitants of this continent were the natural and logical ancestors of the Indians living here to-day; and so have upset the finely elaborated theories so eloquently set forth by scores of writers on the subject of the Mound Builders in the past   writers who drew on their imaginations for ninety per cent, of their facts.

Since Lewis Morgan established the modern science of anthropology through his works illustrating the development of human society, from the study of the tribal relations of the Iroquois, each year has added a new stroke to the knell of the old romantic group of writers about America   a group which included Cooper (who frankly acknowledged his output to be fiction), Prescott, Schoolcraft, and both the Bancrofts. The historical value of the work of Albert Gallatin, in his comparative study of the Indian languages, of that of Morgan, in his League of the Iroquois and Ancient Society, of that of Mooney, and Gatschet, and Hale, and Parkman   whose books are so vital because he followed so literally his sources   is incomparably greater than, for example, the highly poetical bathos used by George Ba