Glenn

THE OHIO VALLEY-GREAT LAKES ETHNOHISTORY ARCHIVES: THE MIAMI COLLECTION
It is noted that the following work from the Miami Archives should be read and considered within the historical context in which it was composed and printed. The opinions expressed and the language used do not reflect the opinions or standards of the Glenn A. Black Laboratory of Archaeology, but are, rather, indicative of thought in that historical moment during which the document was published.

 

Shawneetown

(ca. 1750)

Caldwell, Norman W. in: Journal of the
Illinois State Historical Society,
vol. 32, pp. 193-205.

pp.

 

193, 194, 195, 196, 197,

 

 

198, 199, 200, 201, 202,

 

 

 

203, 204, 205.

(page 193)

SHAWNEETOWN
A Chapter in the Indian History of Illinois

BY NORMAN W. CALDWELL

 

The early French settlements in the Illinois Country were located among friendly Indians who were found on well-established sites. The infant settlements of the white man at fires relied largely upon the protection of the friendly savages who at the same time furnished a vineyard for the labors of the missionary and a source of trade for the voyageur. Indeed, the failure of La Salle and Tonti to found a permanent settlement on the Illinois River was chiefly due to their failure to attract any considerable group of Indians to that region which was then harassed by the Iroquois. On the other hand, the mission settlements established by the priests at Cahokia and at Kaskaskia were successful largely because they were founded among long-established and comparatively stable settlements of Indians. The Indians was necessary for the successful colonization of the country by the French.

When the French came to the Illinois Country they came by the Great Lakes route and during the first few years of their occupation this connection with the water routes to the north and east was valuable to their settlements in the region about Kaskaskia. In the meantime, however, Iberville and Bienville had founded the settlement at Biloxi and soon the French were pushing up the Mississippi, now approaching the Illinois Country from (page 194) the south. When Antoine Crozat was given the monopoly of the trade of Louisiana in 1712, the Illinois settlements were therefore detached from Canada and joined to the Louisiana jurisdiction. The main reason for this was to give Crozat a region of established trade, though excellent arguments could be advanced to show that the Mississippi was the logical highway from the Illinois Country to the sea.1

Now there were reasons why the approach from the sea found the settlements at Kaskaskia and Cahokia less favorably located than had been the case when the approach had been from the north. One was that the Ohio River was coming to be more and more important as an inland trade route from the northeast, and over this route were coming English traders who were competing with the French for the interior trade. Then, too, the opposition of the Chickasaw who were located in the upper Yazoo Valley and on the lower Tennessee and who were deadly enemies of the French, was becoming a serious menace to the trade route on the Mississippi. Logically, French power in the Illinois Country would be more effective if centered nearer the junction of the Ohio and the Mississippi, where the approach of the English from the Ohio as well as the menace of the Chickasaw from the Tennessee might be more effectively met. At the same time, French traders, with a strong base in that region, would have better control of the Indian trade there. Moreover, the long trade route up (page 195) the Mississippi would be shortened with the center of trade located so far to the south of Kaskaskia.2

There were obviously very great difficulties standing in the way of the accomplishment of any proposal to found a new post on the lower Ohio. Besides the expense involved in the construction of a strong fort and in the transplanting of a new settlement into that region,3 there was also the problem of attracting friendly Indians. Since the region about the lower Ohio was a sort of no-man's land among the Indians- an extension of Kentucky's "dark and bloody ground" as it were- it would presumably be very difficult to entice any northern tribe to locate in that region, the Chickasaw and the Cherokee being greatly feared. the story of how the French sought to solve this problem and how the Shawnee played into this scheme by moving into this region is the theme of this paper. Incidentally the development of this story also brings out the growing realization, among the people in the Illinois at that time, of the importance of the southern approach in the future settlement of the state. This approach from the south remained the most important until the third decade of the last century when, as we shall see, the northern approach again came into its own.

Fort Chartres, the stronghold of the French in the Illinois, had been built in 1720 on the Mississippi about equidistant from Kaskaskia and Cahokia. The original structure, which was of wood, was becoming dilapi- (page 196) dated and the question of rebuilding the fort came up just as the French were becoming interested in the project of establishing a post on the lower Ohio. It was first decided to rebuild at Kaskaskia, and in 1738 the materials were gathered for reconstruction work there. In the following year, however, this work was suspended, both because Governor Bienville was becoming interested in the project of relocating the fort on the lower Ohio, and also because the contractors at Kaskaskia had been found guilty of fraud in connection with the work there.4 Bienville, in considering the location of a post on the lower Ohio had of course advocated that some Indian tribe be induced to settle there. He had attempted to entice the Kickapoo and Piankashaw to go there but they had at first refused, alleging that the ground was subject to floods.5 Nevertheless, Bienville continued to work on the scheme, seeing in it a way in which he might check the Chickasaw whom he had not been able to conquer by arms.6

The series of attacks by the Chickasaw on the French convoys on the Mississippi and lower Ohio in 1740 and 1741 served to increase the interest of the government in Bienville's project. In 1742 the Minister of Marine ordered Vaudreuil, the successor of Bienville, to make further investigations as to the proposed construction (page 197) of the fort.7 Vaudreuil, in his reply, reported favorably on the project both as a means of protecting the water routes from the hostile Indians and also as a check on the advance of the English from the Ohio. He proposed building a stone fort and submitted estimates of its cost.8 At this juncture of affairs the Shawnee then living in Pennsylvania suddenly migrated to southern Illinois, thus seemingly solving one angle of the French problem. The reasons for this migration and its importance at this time demand our serious consideration.

The Shawnee belonged linguistically to the central Algonquian stock and their name comes from shawunogi, meaning southerners. In language they were thus related to the Sauk-Fox group, but they had long lived in the region of the upper Tennessee River and Carolinas. The white men found these Indians living in two groups- one in the region of the present South Carolina and the other on the Tennessee River- separated by the Cherokee who lived between them. The Carolina Shawnee were called Savannahs by early settlers, hence the name of the river. Likewise the Tennessee River was long called by the French La Rivire des Chouanons. About 1690 the Carolina Shawnee began to migrate northward and finally settled on the Susquehanna in Pennsylvania. This migration was largely due to the fact that the English alliance with the Catawba in Virginia had alienated the Shawnee. Later, some of these Shawnee, having quarreled with the Delaware, removed to the Monongahela River not far from where Pittsburgh now (page 198) stands. Some of the western Shawnee are also thought to have moved to the upper Ohio region after a devastating war with the Cherokee in the Tennessee Valley, and probably some of these people had lived for a short time near the present Shawneetown in Illinois, prior to 1730. The rest of the western Shawnee seem to have drifted southward among the Alabama Indians.9

At the time of the migration of the Shawnee from the Monongahela to Shawneetown they numbered not more than two hundred fighting men.10 Though nominal allies of the French these Indians, being located so near the Iroquois, were subject to English influence and constantly received English traders and envoys. One of the influential members of the tribe, Peter Chartier, a French half-breed, was much interested in the fur trade with the Pennsylvanians, and thus was the leader of the element which was friendly to the English. In order to maintain French control over the Shawnee, the Canadian authorities had, as early as 1739, considered moving that tribe to the westward and had consulted with the chiefs on this subject. Since the Shawnee had recently been subject to attacks from hostile neighbors, and since their kinsmen, the western Shawnee, were already living in the south, the French proposal was received with favor.11 But Chartier's influence with the tribe remained the chief obstacle to the consummation of the project. At one time the French Governor even went so far as to suggest the assassination of the half-breed, despite the fact that Chartier went down to Montreal in 1740, along (page 199) with the other chiefs, and there promised to use his influence to secure the migration of the tribe.12

The French at first hoped to remove the Shawnee to the neighborhood of Detroit using them to supplant the Huron whom the government was trying to persuade to go to the vicinity of Montreal. The Huron had also shown signs of defection from French allegiance and it was thought that they could be more easily controlled if located closer to the seat of governmental authority. Therefore, in 1740, the Governor sent a trader and Indian agent named Poudret to the Shawnee. Poudret found them much inclined to undertake the migration at that time because of recent attacks which the Flat Heads had made against them.13

In the following year, however, the chiefs refused to go to Detroit, alleging that some of their people had once been burned there and that they could not go to live where their blood had been shed. They pretended to prefer to go to a place called the Prairie of Mascoutens, which was probably some site on the east bank of the Wabash River. With the Governor's approval the French then attempted to get the tribe to migrate to this second site. Though the French distrusted Chartier and sent out much propaganda against him, it is not certain that the half-breed was at this particular time on very good (page 200) terms with the English, for we know that the Pennsylvanians feared trouble with the Shawnee, and indeed parties from that tribe did make raids on the Maryland frontier during that time.14 Nevertheless, the Shawnee soon changed their minds about going to the Prairie of the Mascoutens, and next talked of removing to a site near the mouth of the Tennessee River where some of them had once dwelt.15 This site did not meet the approval of the French, despite their desire to get some friendly tribe to locate in that region, because they did not yet have permission to locate the post on the lower Ohio. Accordingly, they feared that they would not be prepared to supply the Shawnee with merchandise as a consequence of which the English would still come to them from the Tennessee Valley. After much negotiation, the Shawnee finally agreed to go to the Wabash Country, and in 1743 they signed a treaty to that effect. The trader Poudret and another Frenchman were to assist the tribe in the migration and to help them to light the fire in their new home.16 While preparations were being made for the removal, the Governor sent out from Montreal extra war parties against the Flat Heads to prevent the Shawnee from being molested.17 That the French policy was bearing fruit is shown by the fact that in 1744 at the council which the English (page 201) held with the Indians at Lancaster in Pennsylvania, only one Shawnee was reported present, and the English were greatly puzzled as to what the tribe was doing. Some feared that the Delaware and Shawnee were banding together against the English, or that both were planning to migrate to the West.18

The outbreak of war with the English in 1744 necessarily caused the French to give less attention to the project of the removal of the Shawnee to the West. In fact, the Shawnee took advantage of the Governor's embarrassment to raise their demands, asking for additional protection in the form of a large French force. They also refused to send raiding parties against the English frontiers. The French could do no more than send the trader Poudret back to the tribe to keep them in as good humor as possible. On the other hand, Chartier now entered into friendly relations with the French, the English having by this time distrusted him. In 1744 he sold out his trading interests in Pennsylvania and, according to English reports, was received into the French forces, being granted a reward and commission for this action.19

The following year, apparently without official French cognizance, the Shawnee suddenly began their migration westward. Moving northward to Lake Erie, they followed the south shore of the lake to the present Sandusky, Ohio, where some English traders were located. Taking these men prisoners, they then turned southward and followed the Wabash River to the Ohio, locating first somewhere on the north bank of the river between the mouth of the Wabash and the spot opposite (page 202) the mouth of the Tennessee. The English traders were surrendered to the French at Fort Chartres, with the exception of two who had been killed.20

Though the migration of the Shawnee to the lower Ohio had given the French a friendly tribe there, it was nevertheless a great embarrassment to them at this time because they could not immediately supply them with goods. The great difficulty of keeping merchandise for the trade in the Illinois Country was well-known, and the additional demands of a new tribe in that region, especially when a war was being waged and supplies were dear and irregular, created a very serious problem indeed. There were also apprehensions that the problem would become aggravated when other Indians began to talk of moving into that region. In 1746, M. de Bertet, Commandant at the Illinois, reported that he Kickapoo and Mascoutens were considering a migration thither, and Vaudreuil, in the following year, reported that the Sauk, Foxes, and Winnebago had also expressed a desire to come.21 But as we have noted, the French could not adequately furnish even the Shawnee with merchandise and that tribe soon began to talk of a further migration. To forestall this the French did all they could to use the Shawnee as a medium to negotiate for peace with the Chickasaw. If peace could be established with this deadly foe, it would still be possible to keep the Shawnee on the lower Ohio and supply their needs.22 (page 203) But even this failed when the King announced in 1746 that he could not allow the construction of the fort on account of the lack of funds.23 Then too, a bitter controversy which had arisen between Vaudreuil and Le Normant, the new intendant, had made it impossible to send even the normal amount of goods to the posts for the Indian trade that year.24 Although later in the year the King did grant conditional permission to build the fort, no money was made available and Vaudreuil could do nothing about it.25 In the spring of the following year De Bertet reported that only plentiful supplies of goods, sent immediately, could keep the Shawnee on the lower Ohio and stop the influence of the English among them.26

In 1748 the King withdrew his permission for the building of the fort and the project was dropped from consideration.27 As for the Shawnee, they soon left southern Illinois, some of them moving southward to (page 204) join their kinsmen among the Alabama Indians and the others going up the Ohio to Scioto; here, joined by renegade Delaware and others, they formed a village which soon became a trade center for the English in that region.28 Efforts of the French to persuade them to return to Louisiana or to go to Detroit were of no avail.29

From the presence of the Shawnee at that site the modern Shawneetown gets its name, though the white man was not yet to build there. In the early years of the following decade we know that the French contented themselves with strengthening Fort Chartres, and though they did build Fort Massac at the site of the present Metropolis in 1757, it was then too late to carry out the real concentration of French power in that general region. Indeed French power was already passing into English hands. In 1765 when George Croghan visited the site of the old Shawneetown, on his mission of good will among the western Indians, he but casually mentioned it as "a place called the Old Shawnesse Village, some of that nation having formerly lived there."30 Little did the great English Indian agent dream that this place had but lately held a position of the highest potential importance to the French in their life and death struggle to maintain their hold upon the Mississippi Valley.

Nevertheless, the tradition of the importance of the region about Shawneetown survived. The approach from the south which the French had come to emphasize (page 205) too late for their own benefit was the approach used by settlers coming from the east and south to Illinois. Indeed it was not until the Erie Canal had been built that the approach from the north came into its own. Therefore, Shawneetown became in one sense the place which the French had visioned it was to be, and a traveler as early as 1808 reported finding there twenty-four cabins of the new inhabitants of Shawneetown, clustered about the two old burying-pits of the Shawnee- whose clearing could still be seen in the form of a patch of second-growth timber surrounded by the virgin forest. The inhabitants were engaged in a thriving salt business from the neighboring salines.31 Shawneetown quickly became one of the most important towns in Illinois, and for many years fulfilled the dreams of Bienville who saw in that site the logical point for the location of the metropolis of the Illinois Country.
______________________

1 The Canadian government never became reconciled to the loss of the Illinois settlements to Louisiana, and the licensing of trade in the Illinois Country was never surrendered by the Canadian Governor. The subject of whether the Illinois Country should remain with Louisiana, especially after the lapse of the trade monopolies, was bitterly contested between the two governments. For a detailed discussion of this subject see the author's paper, "The French in the West, 1740-1750" (doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, 1936). Much of the material used in the preparation of this paper is taken from that work.

2 After 1740 there was not a single French post on the Mississippi between the Arkansas Post and Kaskaskia in the Illinois- a distance of about three hundred miles by river. It was on this last long lap of the journey up the river from New Orleans that French convoys were most often attacked by the Chickasaw.

3 Of course it was not advocated that the established settlements at Kaskaskia and Cahokia should be moved to the lower Ohio. The idea was rather that new settlers should be brought in from Canada or from France.

4 The report was that 224 tons of stone, 224 tons of lime, and 26,000 clapboards had been gathered at a cost of three times the allotted sum. This material was later disposed of by allowing the parish to use it in the construction of a church. Minister to Bienville and Salmon, Oct. 28, 1740, Archives Nationales, Colonies, B, 70:472-73; Minister to Vaudreuil and Salmon, Oct. 22, 1740, ibid., B, 74:651.

5 The low ground along the rivers was of course a factor in this decision of the tribes, but not the chief one. Fear of enemies was of much greater consideration for the savages.

6 Bienville to Minister, April 30, 1741, Arch. Nat. Col., C13A 26:81-87. Bienville's failure to crush the Chickasaw in 1739-1740, after an expensive campaign, had ruined his prestige and was to lead to his resignation in 1742.

7 Minister to Vaudreuil and Salmon, Nov. 15, 1742, Arch. Nat., Col., B, 74:683-84.

8 Vaudreuil to Minister, New Orleans (undated), Arch. Nat., Col., C13A, 28:245; same to same, New Orleans, Nov. 4, 1745, ibid., 29:66-69. See also Pierre Margry, Decouvertes et Etablissements des Franais dans L'ouest et dans le Sud de L'Amerique Septentrionale (Paris, 1888), VI:661-62.

9 F. W. Hodge, Handbook of American Indians (Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 30, Washington, 1912), II:530-36.

10 Memoir of 1746, Arch. Nat., C13A, 30:258-59.Col.,

11 Governor Beauharnois to Minister of Marine, Quebec, Oct. 9, 1739, Arch. Nat., Col., C11A, 71:49-50; the Governor to the Shawnee, Aug. 1, 1739, ibid., 51.

12 Minister to Beauharnois, Versailles, May 2, 1740, Arch. Nat., Col., B, 70:342; the Shawnee to the Governor, June 25, 1740, ibid., C11A, 94:62-63. Every spring it was the custom for the loyal chiefs to go down to Montreal where the Governor distributed presents among them and harangued them on their duties as French allies.

13 Beauharnois to Minister, Quebec, Oct. 1, 1740, Arch. Nat., Col., C11A, 74:80-84; same to same, Oct. 21, 1740, ibid., 96. The term "Flat Heads" (in French, Tetes Plates) was generally applied to the Muskhogean peoples. They had the custom of binding the heads of their infants between two boards until the skull had been flattened. Among the Choctaw this custom was almost universally practiced; the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Seminole, and others practiced it to a lesser degree. Since the Choctaw were loyal to the French, the Cherokee or Chickasaw are probably referred to in this instance.

14 Beauharnois to Minister, Quebec, Sept. 17, 1741, Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections, 34:207-208; Memoir on Indians, 1742, Arch. Nat., Col., C11A, 78:388-92; Council Minutes, July 19, 1742, Pennsylvania Colonial Records, IV:586-87; see also Weiser's report of his conference with the Shawnee in ibid., 640-46.

15 The Shawnee to the Governor, Aug. 3, 1742, Arch. Nat., Col., C11A, 77:250(?).

16 Beauharnois to Minister, Quebec, Sept. 24, 1742, Arch. Nat., Col., C11A, 77:108-112. For the treaty see the Governor's speech to the Shawnee, July 18, 1743, ibid., C11A, 79:102. Beauharnois was now confident of being able to effect the removal of the tribe. Beauharnois to Minister, Quebec, Oct. 13, 1743, ibid., 171-72.

17 Minister to Beauharnois, April 26, 1743, Arch. Nat., Col., B, 76:300; Beauharnois to Minister, Quebec, Oct. 18, 1743, Documents Relative to the Colonial History of New York, IX:1097.

18 Council Minutes, July 31, 1744, Pa. Col. Rec., IV:739-40.

19 Beauharnois to Minister, Oct. 11, 1744, Arch. Nat., Col., C11A, 81:170-72; Council Minutes, April 25, 1745, Pa. Col. Rec., IV:757-58.

20 Vaudreuil (Governor of Louisiana) to Minister, New Orleans, Oct. 31, 1745, Arch. Nat., Col., C13A, 29:89-90. Alvord's belief that the French were privy to the sudden migration of the Shawnee is seemingly erroneous. See C. W. Alvord, The Illinois Country, 1673-1818 (Centennial History of Illinois, I, Springfield, 1920), 187.

21 In 1746 the Shawnee were encamped about three leagues below the junction of the Tennessee and the Ohio on the north bank of the latter stream. Vaudreuil to Minister, Feb. 6, 1746, Arch. Nat., Col., C13A, 29:28-30; same to same, March 22, 1747, ibid., 21:45-46. The name "Shawneetown" comes from the fact that these Indians once lived in that region.

22 French success even here depended upon a more plentiful supply of merchandise. If peace were made with the Chickasaw, would there not be an extra tribe to supply? Vaudreuil to Minister, March 9, 1746, Arch. Nat., Col., C13A 29:23-24; same to same, Mobile, April 12, 1746, ibid., 30:58.

23 Minister to Vaudreuil, April 30, 1746, Arch. Nat., Col., B, 83:18.

24 Vaudreuil accused Le Normant of selling goods to people in lower Louisiana which should have been sent to the posts for the Indian trade. Minister to Vaudreuil, April 30, 1746, Arch. Nat., Col., B, 83:38; Vaudreuil to Minister, Nov. 20, 1746, ibid., C13A, 30:72-75; same to same Mobile, April 12, 1746, ibid., 60-61.

25 Minister to Vaudreuil, Oct. 10, 1746, Arch. Nat., Col., B, 83:40.

26 Vaudreuil to Minister, April 8, 1747, Margry, Decouvertes et Etablissements, VI:662-64.

27 Minister to Vaudreuil, Feb. 23, 1748, Arch. Nat., Col., B, 87:1. Of interest at this time was a proposal by a French nobleman to found a colony- at the mouth of the Ohio- in a private capacity. This scheme proposed the construction of a strong fort with a series of adjacent smaller posts. A number of settlements were to be placed about these strongholds, the settlers being given land under seigniorial tenure. It was urged that his plan would give the French government the bulwark it needed in that region at a minimum expense because the King was asked only to furnish transportation and certain other expenses which it was estimated would not amount to more than 30,000 livres. Nothing seems to have come from the proposal which is found joined to some of the papers of Madame de Pompadour, the famous mistress of Louis XV. Evidently the person interested in this scheme was trying to use the strong influence of this interesting woman to gain the approval of the King. Memoir of M. le Bailly, Mgr., joined to a letter of M. Poisson to his daughter, Mme. Pompadour, Dec. 17, 1749, Arch. Nat., Col., C13A, 33:219-21.

28 Minister to La Galissonnire, Feb. 23, 1748, Arch. Nat., Col., B, 87:31; Minister to La Jonquire, May 4, 1749, Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVIII:19-22.

29 Minister to Vaudreuil, Oct. 25, 1747, Arch. Nat., Col., B, 85:20, Vaudreuil to Minister, April 8, 1747, ibid., C13A, 31:53-54; Minister to Vaudreuil, Sept. 30, 1750, ibid., B, 91:21.

30 See Croghan's journal in Early Western Travels, 1748-1846, edited by Reuben Gold Thwaites (Cleveland, 1904), I:137-38.

31 See Fortescue Cuming's account in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, IV:270-71.


Return to TOC, p. 11
Continue to next part of Miami Collection
[return to Miami Collection Menu]
[return to Glenn A. Black Laboratory of Archaeology List of Publications]
[return to Glenn A. Black Laboratory of Archaeology Home]

Last updated: 27 November 2000
URL: http://www.gbl.indiana.edu/home.html
Comments: webmaster@www.gbl.indiana.edu
Copyright 1996, Glenn Black Laboratory of Archaeology and The Trustees of Indiana University