LA SALLE'S ROUTE
DOWN THE OHIO.
E. L. TAYLOR.
[In the July Quarterly, 1905, page 356,
Volume XIV, publications
Ohio State Archaeological and Historical
Society, appeared an article
by the late E. L. Taylor, Sr., on
"Water Highways and Carrying Places."
Some time after the publication of that
article Mr. Taylor had cor-
respondence with a critic concerning the
identity of the much disputed
route of La Salle down the Ohio in his
western journey of 1669, the
alleged date of his discovery of the
Ohio River. This has ever been
a most interesting question among
historians and Mr. Taylor's letter
to his critic, which letter is herewith
published, is a valuable contribution
to the controversy. This letter from Mr.
Taylor came to our notice
some time ago and it was at our request
that Mr. Taylor secured us a
copy and gave permission for its
publication, which was delayed until
the present time. -EDITOR.]
Insofar as the first expedition of La
Salle (1669) is con-
cerned, I do not think the Genesee is in
any way involved. In
the map of old Cadwallader Colden there
is no portage noted
between the waters of the Genesee and
those of the Allegheny.
He was the most familiar of any man of
his time (about 1720-
1740) with the
topography of the entire country of the Iroquois.
He was the Surveyor General of that
entire territory under the
English government, and was the best
informed man in the coun-
try in regard to the topography and
geography, not only of the
State of New York but of the regions as
far west as the Mis-
sissippi and as far north as the lake
country. He spent his
entire life in contact with the Indians.
He was a learned, in-
dustrious and able man and devoted his
entire time to official
duties, always in connection with Indian
affairs. In the map
which he left, he noted all the carrying
places of which he had
knowledge from the Hudson River as far
west as Lake Michigan.
He makes no note of any portage between
the waters of the
Genesee and the waters of the Allegheny.
He notes a portage
between the Hudson River and Lake
George; also between the
waters of the Mohawk River and Oneida
Lake, the overflow
(382)
La Salle's Route Down the Ohio. 383
waters of which lake go north into Lake
Ontario at the present
city of Oswego; also the carrying places
around Niagara Falls;
also between the waters of the Ottawa
River and Lake Nipissing;
also between Chautauqua Lake and the
waters of the Allegheny
River, which flows into the Ohio River;
also between the waters
of the Maumee and the Wabash; also the
carrying place be-
tween the head waters of the "St.
Joseph of Lake Erie" and the
head waters of the Kankakee; also
between the Kankakee at a
point much further west between the
Kankakee and the "St.
Joseph of Lake Michigan," which was
near the present city of
North Bend, Indiana. But no portage is
noted between the
waters of the Genesee and the waters of
the Allegheny, as before
stated. That the aborigines passed from
one of these waters to
the other by many different trails,
there is no doubt, but they
were trails rather than portages. The
topography of that coun-
try would indicate that it would be a
long distance from one of
these waters to the other at places
where they had volume of
water sufficient to float a canoe.
Colden was much in that
region, and if there had been a well
known portage suitable for
La Salle's purpose, he would have known
it and have noted it.
No man in his time had as thorough and
accurate knowledge of
Indian routes of travel or of the
geography and topography of
that region as himself.
In so far as the Genesee being connected
with La Salle's
expedition, it may be dismissed from
consideration, not only on
the grounds above stated, but for the
insurmountable difficulties,
to which I will hereafter refer.
I had occasion some years ago to
consider what route La
Salle did take at that time. Much of the
confusion, and I might
say, all of the confusion that has
arisen concerning the route
which he took has been caused by a
narrative published by a
Frenchman whose name is unknown,
entitled "Historie de
La Salle," which was evidently
prepared and published after
the death of La Salle. That portion of
the narrative which re-
lates to the route which La Salle took
after parting with the
Sulpitian priests upon the upper waters
of Grand River, which
took place at a point a short distance
west from where the city
of Hamilton, Canada, now stands, was
copied by Pierre Margry
384
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
in the first volume of his
"Discoveries" and has been given as
a foot note in Parkman's "La
Salle," pages 22 and 23, of the
edition which I now have, (Little, Brown
& Co, 1901). This
passage needs but slight examination to
show that it was writ-
ten in entire ignorance of the geography
of the country and long
after the "conversations," and
it is worse than worthless as a
historical statement. But, bad as it is,
it has been made still
worse by the use which has been made of
it by subsequent
writers. It has had the effect of
greatly confusing both readers
and writers, and has even lead Parkman
into confusion, and his
confusion has extended to the reading
world.
There is no obscurity and never has been
about the route
taken from La Chine to the west end of
Lake Ontario; that the
joint expedition of La Salle and the
priests and the Seneca In-
dians was up the St. Lawrence and along
the south shore of
Lake Ontario to a point between the
Genesee and the Niagara,
probably not far from the mouth of the
Genesee. A stop was
made opposite a Seneca village, which
was a lay's journey from
the shores of Lake Ontario. As this was
an important Seneca
village it is necessarily west of the
Genesee and east of the
Niagara, for these were the limits of
the Seneca country. The
expedition rested here while La Salle
and Father Gallinee went
inland to the village with a view of
procuring guides to the val-
ley of the Ohio. They were detained at
the village for nearly
a month with the usual Indian diplomacy
of delay, and at last
they not only failed of their purpose
but found themselves in
considerable danger of personal
violence. It would seem that
they were glad to escape from the Seneca
country. La Salle,
however, procured an Indian of the
Neutral nation, who
promised to guide him to his country,
which was west of the
Niagara River and Lake Ontario. They
proceeded west past
the mouth of the Niagara to the extreme
upper end of Lake On-
tario and to a village of the Neutral
tribe some few miles in-
land from where the city of Hamilton,
Canada, now stands.
Here they met Joliet and his companion
returning from the
northern lakes. The information which
Joliet imparted to them
caused the separation of the Sulpitians
from La Salle. The
history of the expedition thus far is
all settled history; also the
La Salle's Route Down the Ohio. 385
further expeditions of the priests until
they returned to the St.
Lawrence is equally well settled.
But as to La Salle, here the confusion
begins. This anony-
mous writer states that he went to
Onondaga, and Parkman
leaves him there with the simple
suggestion that he might have
been "More fortunate in procuring
guides" at that place than
he had been at the Seneca village. The
position in which he is
here left was an impossible one from
which to reach the waters
of the Ohio by any waterway or
succession of waterways. The
village of Onondaga was the most
important one in the entire
Iroquois nation. Champlain's expedition
against that important
stronghold in 1615 had made the name of
that village known
throughout France, and there can be no
uncertainty as to its
general location, although the exact
location has not been, and
probably cannot be now certainly
established. The consensus of
opinion is that it was somewhere not far
distant from the loca-
tion of the present city of Syracuse. If
this unfortunate passage
of this anonymous Frenchman was correct,
then La Salle would
necessarily have to re-trace his way
along the entire south shore
of Lake Ontario on the route over which
he had just gone. The
distance would have been at least two
hundred and fifty or more
miles. He could not have started on his
return before the first
of October, because the separation with
the priests occurred Sep-
tember 30th. The stormy season on the
lakes would soon begin,
and this long journey would be next to
impossible at that season
of the year with the light birch canoes
with which La Salle was
equipped, besides the village of
Onondaga was three or four, or
more, days journey inland. Their canoes
could not be used.
But having arrived at Onondaga there was
no possible passage
by water in the direction of the waters
of the Allegheny. All
the waters between these two points flow
either north into Lake
Ontario or south into the Susquehanna or
Delaware. No rivers
or streams of any kind suitable for
canoe navigation run east
and west between these two points, and
the entire distance is
over the highlands of New York which
divide the waters of the
north from the waters of the south. The
position of Onondaga
was simply impossible at any season of
the year for the portage
Vol. XIX. -25.
386
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society
Publications.
of canoes, and necessarily unfit for an
expedition. At that
son of the year the highlands of New
York are all deeply cov
with snow, and the journey they could
not have made excel
snow shoes. A further difficulty would
have been that
would have had to pass entirely through
the countries bot
the Cayugas and the Senecas, and it
would have been impos
to pass through either of these nations
without discovery.
impossible to suppose that La Salle
would undertake to pa
any way through the country of the
Senecas who had so I
refused to allow him to pass, and from
which he was gla
escape with his life. Further, it is
impossible to suppose
La Salle, ardently seeking to reach the
country of the (
would travel three hundred miles
directly away from it. Fur
it is still more impossible to suppose
that the "Shawnee gu
which he had procured at the Neutral
village to pilot hi
the Ohio, would take him three or four
hundred miles dir
opposite the course which he desired to
travel and from
country which he desired to reach. For
these and other rea
when I came to examine this question, I
dismissed the w
matter as being entirely erroneous and
worse than worthless
historical statement.
My own view and solution of it is that
when the pr
parted with La Salle and descended the
Grand River to
Erie and turned west, La Salle followed
on the same r
as soon as he had reason to believe that
the river was
of the priests, who intended to turn
west along the north s
of Lake Erie, and that he coasted around
the east end of
Erie past the head of Niagara River and
on until he rea
a point opposite Chautauqua Lake. There
was no other r
which he could have taken from the point
where he wa
reach the waters of the Allegheny at
that season of the
It was the shortest and most direct
route to the country w
he wished to explore. The correct and
literal translatio
this French narrative is as follows:
"La Salle continued his way (from
the point wher
started with the priests) by a river which
went from ea
west and past Ononatague then to six or
seven leagues be
Lake Erie." As before seen, there
was no river running
La Salle's Route Down the Ohio. 387
east to west from Onondaga, and
if there had been, the dis-
tance from there to "beyond Lake
Erie" instead of being six
or seven leagues would have been more
than one hundred
leagues. The "six or seven"
leagues would nearly enough
describe the distance between Lake Erie
and Lake Chautauqua,
but still more nearly the distance from
the outlet of Lake Chau-
tauqua, to the Allegheny.
Another controlling fact in my mind is
that La Salle re-
ceived a gift or present before parting
with the priests of a
Shawnee who was held captive by the Onondagas at that point;
which, it seems, La Salle was greatly
gratified to receive, and
well he might be as no better guide
could have been found any-
where than a Shawnee whose home was in
the Ohio country,
and of which he necessarily had
knowledge and would be the
best guide which could possibly have
been procured. It is
absurd to suppose that a Shawnee Indian
acting as a guide
to the Ohio country would go directly
away from the country
which he had wished to reach. This
Shawnee liberated from
captivity and presented to La Salle for
a guide would surely
be glad to act as such and to pilot La
Salle in the direction
which he wished to go.
It may be further assured without a
shadow of doubt,
that he knew the best route and that he
took the best route.
The Indians always knew the best route
in any country over
which they roamed, and the Chautauqua
route was certainly
the best from the point where his office
as guide began to the
Ohio country. To my mind it is not only
entirely probable,
but certain, that La Salle in the
"conversations" gave the anony-
mous writer some other name than
Onondaga and that the nar-
rator's memory was at fault as to the
name or location men-
tioned by La Salle, and this
forgetfulness has lead to the con-
fusion. The narrator says (literal
translation) that La Salle
"continued his way by a river which
went from east to west."
A recent writer has undertaken to make
this passage read "up
a river," and to apply it to the
Maumee, which is entirely with-
out warrant or authority. La Salle was
on the upper waters
of the Grand River a short distance west
from the head of
Lake Ontario when the priests parted
from him and proceeded
388
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
to Lake Erie by way of that river. I do
not deem it of the
slightest importance that the narrator
may have said that the
river by which he proceeded ran east and
west or from north
to south, or in any other direction, for
there is nothing more
easily forgotten or to be mistaken about
than statements ver-
bally made in respect to directions and
-distances, but the fact
is that at the point where La Salle was
on Grand River the
course is from east to west for a
considerable distance before
turning to the south in its course to
Lake Erie. If we reject
Onondaga as being a. mistake in the
recollection of the nar-
rator and accept the language
"continued his way by a river"
(that is by way of a river), and that
the six or seven leagues
beyond Lake Erie described a country
between Lake Chau-
tauqua and the Allegheny, we have not
only a rational, natural,
but, as I think, the correct route over
which La Salle passed
in the autumn of 1669.
In Volume 12, of the Ohio
State Archaeological and His-
torical publications, Mr. Charles E.
Slocum has a paper on
"La Salle." In this paper he
quotes the passage contained
in Margry correctly enough but then he
proceeds to give it
what he terms a "very liberal"
translation, and then states that
"this is necessary to make it
intelligible." He then gives his
"very liberal translation"
found on page 108 of the above
named volume. I think this translation is entirely misleading
and an actual perversion of the original
text, and, I think, the
worst attempt at translation that I have
ever seen. For in-
stance, where the original text reads
thus, "continued his way
by a river which went from east to west and passed to Onona-
tague," the translator has
converted that into "continued his
way with Onondaga (aborigine, as guide) up
a river (the Mau-
mee river) sixty leagues beyond Lake
Erie." Thus the plain
words of the text "by a river and
past to Onondaga six or
seven leagues beyond Lake Erie," he
converted into "con-
tinued on his way with the
Onondaga" (whom he gratuitously
assumes to be the Shawnee guide),
"and up the river" which
he also assumes to be the Maumee river
"sixty leagues beyond
Lake Erie," when the plain text is
that it was six or seven
leagues. This is an entire perversion of
anything that may
La Salle's Route Down the Ohio. 389
legitimately be claimed from the text
whether the text be faulty
or not. It is interesting to observe
that he converts the word
"Onondaga" into the name of
the Shawnee guide, and thus gets
rid of the embarrassment which the word
caused in the original
text. The idea of applying the word
"Onondaga" to a Shawnee
guide is certainly original, and
certainly without support even
by suggestion in-so-far as I have ever
seen or heard. The idea is
entirely original with Mr. Slocum and
seems to have been made
arbitrarily and wholly without
foundation or support. "Onon-
daga" is an Iroquois name and the
Shawnees were at enmity
to the Iroquois as far back as we have
any traditions. But this
is not the worst. The original text of
the anonymous writer
is "passed to Onondaga." That
is the correct rendering of the
original text, but Mr. Slocum has given
it this rendering, "con-
tinued his way with Onondaga, the
Shawnee guide." We need
nothing but want of accurate information
in the original writer
to explain the text. He was probably
doing the best he could
to narrate what La Salle said to him in
the "conversation," and
to my mind it is easily explained, as
before suggested, that the
writer did not correctly remember the
name indicated by La
Salle. At that time the Niagara River
was known among the
inhabitants as "Ohnghiara" and
this might easily be converted
into "Onondaga" or any other
name or place by want of under-
standing on the part of the narrator.
But this is not the greatest violence
which Mr. Slocum has
done in the translation of the original
text. He has voluntarily
ventured to substitute names and places
which are not indicated
in the original text. He substitutes the
Maumee as the river
"up which La Salle passed,"
forgetting that it would seem that
at that time and for a considerable time
afterward, the Ohio
was called "Quabache," which
was long subsequently applied
only to the river Wabash. Another
spelling of the name of
the Ohio, as has been left us by the
original explorers, was
"Aaboukingon" so that the
original text, even if correctly trans-
lated, would not mean the present
Wabash, but would mean
the Ohio, and the effort of Mr. Slocum
to transfer the route of
La Salle to the Maumee and the Wabash in
reaching the Ohio
390
Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
river must necessarily fail, -
notwithstanding the arbitrary
manner in which Mr. Slocum has seen fit
to declare it.
Another infirmity which appears right on
the face of the
text is in regard to the statement that
La Salle's people deserted
him, "twenty-three or four in
number" - while the fact is that
La Salle had four canoes on this
expedition and seven men,
making, with La Salle and the priest,
twenty-four men. Now,
the text says that his men all deserted
him "twenty-three or four
in number," while it is entirely
certain that the two priests and
seven men parted with La Salle on the
head waters of La Grand
river, leaving him with but fifteen men,
leaving this as the num-
ber which could have possibly have
deserted. It is probable that
a few of his men did desert him at that
point, and there is some
authority for that, but that there was
any general desertion
cannot be true, otherwise his expedition
would have ended at
that place. Mr. Slocum has added to this
romance of desertion
by adding to the twenty-three or four
men, "including the Shaw-
nee guide." There is no suggestion
anywhere that we are aware
of to sustain this statement outside of
Mr. Slocum's assertion.
Mr. Slocum further leaves the point at
which the desertion took
place "all in one night, somewhere
beyond the Maumee in the
wilds of northern Indiana." He
further says that some of the
men deserted to the Hollanders and
others to New England.
From the point where he necessarily
leaves the desertion it was
at least eight hundred miles to the
Hollanders on the Hudson,
and twelve hundred or more miles to the
New England settle-
ment. The whole story of the desertion
en masse, as given in
the original text, and very much
enlarged upon by Mr. Slocum,
is necessarily an error, and the whole
story of wholesale deser-
tion must be taken with every allowance
as to correctness. The
whole life and character of La Salle is
a most positive contra-
diction that any such desertion could
have taken place at any
time in his whole strenuous career. He
was by nature and habit
a leader of men and one whom inferior
men instinctively obeyed.
I think the whole confusion arises from
the fact that ten years
later, when he first reached the
Illinois country and established
the Fort Recuvier, on the Illinois
River, from which he re-
turned to Lake Ontario and the St.
Lawrence, leaving his lieu-
La Salle's Route Down the Ohio. 391
tenant, Tonti, in command, there was a
desertion from that
fort, but in La Salle's absence. The
whole matter has been
jumbled up together in a very singular
manner, as would natur-
ally be the case in a man trying to
remember conversations
which occurred many years before, and
about locations and places
of which he had no knowledge.
To have reached the Maumee, as Mr.
Slocum insists, La
Salle would have to pass by: first, the
Lake Chautauqua route;
second, the Cuyahoga and Muskingum
route; the Sandusky and
Scioto River routes, all before reaching
the Maumee. It can-
not be supposed that he could have
passed all these ways to the
country which he wished to reach and
have gone on to the
Maumee and Wabash route to reach the
Ohio River. Either
of the three routes first mentioned were
as easy and more direct
to the country which he desired to visit
than the Maumee and
Wabash route, which would have carried
him to the very south-
west corner of the State of Indiana and
far beyond what was
known to him to be the Ohio country. The
interpolation of the
Maumee and Wabash, and of "Little
River," which was a
branch of the Wabash, are all not only
gratuitous and entirely
voluntary, but also misleading.
My own conclusion is, after giving the
matter the most careful
consideration that I could, that La
Salle, after parting with the
priests on Grand River, followed the
course of that stream to
Lake Erie that passed the head of
Niagara (Ohnghiara) thence
along the south side of Lake Erie to
Chautauqua Lake, thence
to the waters of the Allegheny and the
Ohio. This was surely
the best and by far the most direct
route to the country of the
Ohio, or its headwaters, and precisely
where he desired to go.
If you will examine Mr. Slocum's paper
in Volume 12,
above cited, you will see that he
attempts to support his
theory by a further letter without
date. An analysis of
that letter will show that it furnishes
no support whatever to
Mr. Slocum's theory. All that letter
means is that the Maumee
and the Wabash furnished a way to the
Ohio; a matter which
was never in dispute. But as for
confirming the theory that La
Salle sought to reach the Ohio by this
route, the letter, quoted
by Dr. Slocum on page III, furnishes no support whatever to
392 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
the theory that La Salle sought the Ohio
or passed to that river
over the Maumee and Wabash rivers. An
examination of this
last letter shows the facility with
which Slocum could twist
things to suit his own theory. The
letter which he quotes shows
that the river which he was following-if
it shows anything-
"and five or six others quite as
large and flowing with great
rapidity along the declivity of a
mountain, (higher ground) and
discharges into the Illinois
(Ohio)." It is diverting to see with
what easy facility Mr. Slocum reduces
the "declivity of a moun-
tain" to "higher ground"
and transposed the "lake," which was
undoubtedly Chautauqua in New York
State, into a swamp in
northern Indiana. It was this article of
Mr. Slocum's which
lead me two or three years ago to
examine into the route which
La Salle actually took.
Mr. Slocum also mentions a
"swamp" somewhere west or
north of Fort Wayne, which he says at
that time discharged
quite a column of water. Now, the fact
is that the carrying
place from the Maumee to Little River is
a dry and excellent
carrying place, and there are no
mountains in Northern Indiana,
and never has been, while the country
between the outlet of
Lake Chautauqua and the Allegheny was
suitable for the de-
scription of the country which is
described in the original text.
It was a rough and even mountainous
country and the waters and
streams flowed with great rapidity which
accords fully with the
description given in the text. You will
see by looking at the
end of my article in Volume 14, page
394, publications of this
Society, there is a description of that
carrying place, written by
General Hamilton, of the English army,
which entirely negatives
the impression which Mr. Slocum's
article gives.
There are many other reasons why La
Salle did not at-
tempt to reach the Ohio by that route,
and many more reasons
which I could give why he should adopt
the Chautauqua and
Allegheny route to the Ohio.