![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kmusserOnly 21 responses out of over 200 “friends”? Oh LJ, how far you have fallen. Anyway, maps are leading so you get a maps post.
This one was a request – a map showing the results of the Treaty of Prairie du Chien in 1829. This was really two treaties negotiated at the same time, one with the United Nations of Chippewa, Ottawa, and Potawatomi Indians and the other with the Winnebago (Ho-Chunk) Nation– largely a consequence of a brief Winnebago uprising which was used as an excuse to seize valuable lead deposits in what is now northwest Illinois around Galena.
What is interesting is trying to match the land cessions specified in the treaties to a modern map. The text fortunately survives – for the first treaty there are 2 sections defined:
Fortunately most of those borders follow rivers which are still around, the Rock and Fox are still named that, Ouisconsin is the Wisconsin river. I have as a source for most things, the National Atlas, for this I think I’ll need more detailed rivers which I can find with the National Hydrography Dataset.
The Winnebago village is long gone (it doesn’t say so here, but that’s Prophetstown), but a point on the Rock river 40 miles from its mouth can still be calculated, from there the border of the cession is traced clockwise, down the river to an imaginary line running from the southern end of Lake Michigan, along that line to the Mississippi - up the Mississippi to a reservation at the mouth of the Wisconsin river and then the "heads of the small streams" means the area that is being drained directly to the Mississippi - i.e. the border runs along the drainage divide back to our starting point. The National Atlas has the drainage divide, but the reservation mentioned might be a problem. Anyway lets take a look at the next section.
Our starting point, Antione Ouitmette’s field, might be a little difficult to find nowadays, fortunately we are given at least an approximate location - 12 miles north of Chicago, so we can go from there - tracing counter-clockwise - west to the Rock river, then to the same imaginary line used in the previous section to the Fox river - then a reference to a previous cession which we may have to dig up to figure out the path from the Fox back to Lake Michigan. Finally the Winnebago section:
I can’t find a Pee-kee-tol-a-ka, but I do find Sugar creek so can trace counter-clockwise from there. Then follow a road! Ack, finding the route of a 1829 road may prove difficult - at least I know where it’s going, the portage mentioned is the modern day town of Portage (note this is a different Fox river, trust Illinois and Wisconsin to both have prominent rivers named Fox) and the a straight line to the SE corner of Lake Puckaway, which fortunately is still named that today. From there it traces rivers and the border of the first cession till it gets back to the Rock river, and hey, there’s a citation for that reservation the first cession mentioned.
Fortunately I have another huge resource besides the treaty text – the Library of Congress, which conveniently has maps of all tribal cessions from 1899. That’ll take the guess work out of tracing all the lines described above, in fact I’d be tempted to not even make the map and just use theirs directly – except that the maps are by state and our area of interest crosses two states - plus on Wikipedia it's going to be shrunk down, so a simpler map would be good, but lets take a look at them, Illinois and Wisconsin. The cessions we're interested in are numbered 147, 148, and 149. The maps are great, they even have Mr. Ouilmette's field marked on there. The borders are where I'd expect them to be, plus I can get the lines from the earlier 1816 cessions. An execption is the line that's supposed to be running west from the southern end of Lake Michigan (the southern edge of our cessions), it appears to be well south of Lake Michigan - probably the result of surveying error - that gives a bit a quandary, should I map the line as in the text or as surveyed. I go for the as surveyed, as presumably that was the boundary that was enforced.
So on the the actual map, I've figured out the boundary lines of the cessions. Out of the National Hydrography Dataset I select the rivers and lakes that have been named, plus the Illinois River and Lake Winnebago since they'll make good landmarks. Out of the National Atlas I pull the state boundaries, the one drainage divide, and a few cities that I'll use as land marks, Chicago, Portage, and Prairie du Chien were all named in the treaty. Plus Galena, which is not, but was the center of the conflict that led to the treaty. The straight lines I can just draw on. The only place I really have to fudge it is the road from the end of Sugar creek to Portage, I have no digital source, but I can copy the approximate location from the LoC map. My colors and symbology are based loosely on Wikipedia mapping conventions - here I want to show the cessions from the two treaties in two different colors so I go for something that will hopefully be prominent without being garish. And finally the result:
This one was a request – a map showing the results of the Treaty of Prairie du Chien in 1829. This was really two treaties negotiated at the same time, one with the United Nations of Chippewa, Ottawa, and Potawatomi Indians and the other with the Winnebago (Ho-Chunk) Nation– largely a consequence of a brief Winnebago uprising which was used as an excuse to seize valuable lead deposits in what is now northwest Illinois around Galena.
What is interesting is trying to match the land cessions specified in the treaties to a modern map. The text fortunately survives – for the first treaty there are 2 sections defined:
Beginning at the Winnebago village, on Rock river, 40 miles from its mouth, and running thence down Rock river to a line which runs due W. from the most southern bend of Lake Michigan to the Mississippi river, and with that line to the Mississippi river opposite to Rock Island; thence up that river to the U. S. reservation at the mouth of the Ouisconsin; thence with the S. and E. lines of said reservation to the Ouisconsin river; thence southerly, passing the heads of the small streams emptying into the Mississippi, to the Rock river aforesaid at the Winnebago village, the place of beginning.
Beginning on the western shore of Lake Michigan, at the NE. corner of the field of Antoine Ouitmette, who lives near Gross Pointe, about 12 miles N. of Chicago; thence running due W. to the Rock river aforesaid; thence down the said river to where a line drawn due W. from the most southern bend of Lake Michigan crosses said river; thence E. along said line to the Fox river of the Illinois; thence along the northwestern boundary line of the cession of 1816 to Lake Michigan; thence northwardly along the western short of said lake to the place of beginning.
Fortunately most of those borders follow rivers which are still around, the Rock and Fox are still named that, Ouisconsin is the Wisconsin river. I have as a source for most things, the National Atlas, for this I think I’ll need more detailed rivers which I can find with the National Hydrography Dataset.
The Winnebago village is long gone (it doesn’t say so here, but that’s Prophetstown), but a point on the Rock river 40 miles from its mouth can still be calculated, from there the border of the cession is traced clockwise, down the river to an imaginary line running from the southern end of Lake Michigan, along that line to the Mississippi - up the Mississippi to a reservation at the mouth of the Wisconsin river and then the "heads of the small streams" means the area that is being drained directly to the Mississippi - i.e. the border runs along the drainage divide back to our starting point. The National Atlas has the drainage divide, but the reservation mentioned might be a problem. Anyway lets take a look at the next section.
Our starting point, Antione Ouitmette’s field, might be a little difficult to find nowadays, fortunately we are given at least an approximate location - 12 miles north of Chicago, so we can go from there - tracing counter-clockwise - west to the Rock river, then to the same imaginary line used in the previous section to the Fox river - then a reference to a previous cession which we may have to dig up to figure out the path from the Fox back to Lake Michigan. Finally the Winnebago section:
Beginning on Rock river at the mouth of Pee-kee-tauno or Pee-kee-tol-a-ka, a branch thereof; thence up the Pee-kee-tol-a-ka to the mouth of Sugar creek; thence up the said creek to the source of the eastern branch thereof; thence by a line running due N. to the road leading from the Eastern Blue Mound, by the most northern of the four lakes, to the Portage of the Wisconsin and Fox rivers; thence along the said road to the crossing of Duck creek; thence by a line running in a direct course to the most southeasterly bend of Lake Puck-a-way, on Fox river; thence up said lake and Fox river to the Portage of the Wisconsin; thence across said portage to the Wisconsin river; thence down said river to the eastern line of the U. S. reservation, at the mouth of said river, on the S. side thereof, as described in the second article of the treaty of Aug. 24, 1816, with the Chippewas, Ottawas, and Potawatamies; thence with the lines of a tract of country on the Mississippi river (first paragraph above), running southwardly, passing the heads of the small streams emptying into the Mississippi, to the Rock river at the Winnebaygo village, 40 miles above its mouth; thence up Rock river to the place of beginning.
I can’t find a Pee-kee-tol-a-ka, but I do find Sugar creek so can trace counter-clockwise from there. Then follow a road! Ack, finding the route of a 1829 road may prove difficult - at least I know where it’s going, the portage mentioned is the modern day town of Portage (note this is a different Fox river, trust Illinois and Wisconsin to both have prominent rivers named Fox) and the a straight line to the SE corner of Lake Puckaway, which fortunately is still named that today. From there it traces rivers and the border of the first cession till it gets back to the Rock river, and hey, there’s a citation for that reservation the first cession mentioned.
Fortunately I have another huge resource besides the treaty text – the Library of Congress, which conveniently has maps of all tribal cessions from 1899. That’ll take the guess work out of tracing all the lines described above, in fact I’d be tempted to not even make the map and just use theirs directly – except that the maps are by state and our area of interest crosses two states - plus on Wikipedia it's going to be shrunk down, so a simpler map would be good, but lets take a look at them, Illinois and Wisconsin. The cessions we're interested in are numbered 147, 148, and 149. The maps are great, they even have Mr. Ouilmette's field marked on there. The borders are where I'd expect them to be, plus I can get the lines from the earlier 1816 cessions. An execption is the line that's supposed to be running west from the southern end of Lake Michigan (the southern edge of our cessions), it appears to be well south of Lake Michigan - probably the result of surveying error - that gives a bit a quandary, should I map the line as in the text or as surveyed. I go for the as surveyed, as presumably that was the boundary that was enforced.
So on the the actual map, I've figured out the boundary lines of the cessions. Out of the National Hydrography Dataset I select the rivers and lakes that have been named, plus the Illinois River and Lake Winnebago since they'll make good landmarks. Out of the National Atlas I pull the state boundaries, the one drainage divide, and a few cities that I'll use as land marks, Chicago, Portage, and Prairie du Chien were all named in the treaty. Plus Galena, which is not, but was the center of the conflict that led to the treaty. The straight lines I can just draw on. The only place I really have to fudge it is the road from the end of Sugar creek to Portage, I have no digital source, but I can copy the approximate location from the LoC map. My colors and symbology are based loosely on Wikipedia mapping conventions - here I want to show the cessions from the two treaties in two different colors so I go for something that will hopefully be prominent without being garish. And finally the result: