Monday, December 22, 2014

The WWI Christmas Truce


"…looking back on it all, I wouldn’t have missed that unique and weird Christmas Day for anything." – Private Bruce Brairnsfather



In July of 1914 the world participated in a war like none other; it was, as H.G. Wells put it, “the war to end war.”[1] Initially a handful of military juggernauts dominated the fighting; but by the end of the war over 100 countries chose sides and found ways to contribute to their cause. It was truly a global war.
One of the first attacks of the war featured Germany’s march on Paris. They marched through Luxemburg and Belgium and were subsequently halted on the boarder of Belgium and France; both sides dug in and the Western Front was born. The Western Front became a 430-mile series of trenches that stretched from the Belgium/French coastline all the way down to the Swiss boarder.[2] This front was predominantly British, French, Belgian and German soldiers during the first half of the war. The grimy battle of attrition lasted throughout the war and was the setting for several major offensives, including one of the bloodiest battles in history—the Battle of the Somme.
At the same time, the Western Front was the setting for several surprising truces and friendly returns from enemy soldiers. The most notable is the Christmas Truce of 1914, the first Christmas of the “war to end wars.” This particular truce was not official. It was sparked by an idea presented during the beginning of December when Pope Benedict XV pleaded with the belligerents "that the guns may fall silent at least upon the night the angels sang."[3] Though officially ignored, his plea was taken in by a number of soldiers who held to a “live and let live” philosophy.
After several months of intense fighting, soldiers on both sides started to wear down and even had a modus vivendi at times. Often mornings would be greeted with silence, mundane jobs would be left in peace, and soldiers would banter across no mans land.[4] In some areas the trenches were only meters apart and it was easy to talk to enemy soldiers, sometimes they would engage in shooting contests—remaining in their trenches the entire time. This attitude coupled with Pope Benedict’s plea for a Christmas peace seemed to be the right combination for a Christmas to remember.


The unofficial truce really began to manifest itself on December 24th and lasted until the end of December 25th. Christmas Eve is a day of bigger celebration to the Germans than the actual day of Christmas, thus they were greatly enticed to relax their grips on their guns and spend time singing and even celebrating by putting up trees! Several accounts mention soldiers putting up trees as a way to celebrate, one soldier wrote, “Then the Germans started shouting across to us, 'a happy Christmas' and commenced putting up lots of Christmas trees with hundreds of candles on the parapets of their trenches.”[5][6] Christmas tree’s were becoming a common sight in several parts of the Western Front. Still other soldiers wrote that, “On Christmas Eve we were surprised to see Christmas trees alight on the tops of the enemy’s trenches” and “They’ve got Christmas trees all along the top of their trenches!”[7]
This was not the entire story of the Western Front, as many positions never partook of a truce and just kept on shooting through the holiday. “Friendly overtures and resulting fraternization in no man's land were not universal.”[8] One soldier exclaimed, “Xmas come and gone and nothing changed.”[9] It was a series of unofficial truces that peppered the Western Front, nothing universal or groundbreaking.
The celebrating continued though the night and into Christmas day. Soldiers tentatively left their trenches to exchange greetings, songs, smokes, tobacco and a host of other things. One account of this mentioned, “Some of the fellows went across and met some Germans half way and exchanged souvenirs,” but also went on to say that, “Two of our men went too far and went into their trenches and haven't since returned, so I suppose they are prisoners.”[10]
The Christmas Truce was quite memorable with hundreds of stories of gift giving and games (“…two of our platoons had a game of football.”[11]), but it was still the middle of a war and boundaries remained. Several letters from the front mention soldiers going as far as visiting trenches and not returning, making the truce all the more curious. One soldier’s letter stated that, “Neither side would let the other over the half way line,” but in another sentence he wrote, “lots of English and Germans met between the two lines and had talks; the Germans giving boxes of cigars to our men and we giving them hot tea.”[12]
While both sides seemed to relish the idea of taking a small break, they still did not let down their guard. Some even took the opportunity to grab some foolish prisoners. One letter recounted, “In our centre the only incident was the capture of two of the enemy who came across to our trenches uninvited ostensibly to wish us the compliments of the season.”[13] Another declared the Germans did not deserve a truce,We have issued strict orders to the men not to on any account allow a truce, as we have heard rumours that they will probably try to. The Germans did. They came over towards us singing. So we opened rapid fire on them, which is the only truce they deserve.”[14]
 Several captains and other superior officers were unsettled by the truces and fraternization during the Christmas season. One journal announced that war was not sport and had no place for such a truce. It went on to say, “…and we are sorry to say that those who made these overtures, or took part in them, did not clearly understand the gravity of the situation.” This was a sentiment shared by the military and “an Army Order issued on December 29th forbids for the future similar fraternization, and any rapprochement with the enemy in the trenches. All acts contrary to this order will be punished in high treason.”[15]
The Christmas Truce of 1914 was the first and last truce of its nature. Future holidays were received with increased raids and heavy artillery fire, making the truce of 1914 all the more unique. The beginning of the war showed a “live and let live” mindset; but as the war progressed, that philosophy ebbed away and the casualty rate piled up. The following years have stories of scattered truces on the Western Front, but nothing like Christmas in 1914. While it was not the romantic fantasy that some may say, it was a glimpse into the attitudes of soldiers during the First World War—it was an escape from the grit and grime of war.









[1] Bertrand Russell, Prophesy and Dissent, 1914-1916. (London: Rutledge, 1988), 10.
[2] Matt Anderson, Don’t Forget Me, Clobber. (Aspley: ANZAC Day Commemoration Committee, 2006).
[3] Terry Philpot, “World War I's Pope Benedict XV and the pursuit of peace,” National Catholic Reporter, 2014. Accessed Nov 17, 2014. http://ncronline.org/news/peace-justice/world-war-pope-benedict-xv-and-pursuit-peace
[4] Peter Hart, “Christmas Truce,” Military History, January 2015, 66. 
[5] Corporal Leon Harris, “January 2 1915: Wonderful Xmas. Exonian Tells of Xmas Trees Before the Trenches,” Operation Plum Puddings, 1999. Accessed Nov 18, 2014. http://www.christmastruce.co.uk/devon.html
[6] Operation Plum Puddings is a website that is dedicated to finding and transcribing first hand letters and newspaper stories about the Christmas Truce onto the internet.
[7] Private Farden & Sergeant A. Lovell, “Germans Who Played the Game” and “The Wonderful Christmas in the Trenches,” Operation Plum Puddings, 1999. Accessed Nov 18, 2014. http://www.christmastruce.co.uk/essex.html
[8] Peter Hart, “Christmas Truce,” Military History, January 2015, 68. 
[9] Unknown, “Eyewitness,” Operation Plub Puddings, 1999. Accessed November 18, 2014. http://www.christmastruce.co.uk/cumbria.html
[10] Private E. Newell, “Christmas Truce. Mingling with the Enemy,” Operation Plum Puddings, 1999. Accessed November 18, 2014. http://www.christmastruce.co.uk/norfolk.html
[11] Private Farden, “Germans Who Played the Game,” Operation Plum Puddings, 1999. Accessed Nov 18, 2014. http://www.christmastruce.co.uk/essex.html
[12] Unknown, “Christmas at the Front. German Cigars for British Tea,” Operation Plum Pudding, 1999. Accessed November 18, 2014. http://www.christmastruce.co.uk/norfolk.html
[13] Unknown, “Too Friendly,” Operation Plum Pudding, 1999. Accessed November 18, 2014. http://www.christmastruce.co.uk/norfolk.html
[14] Billy Congreve, Armageddon Road, A VC’s Diary, 1914-1916. (London: William Kimber, 1982), 96.
[15] Taegliebe Rundschau, “Germans and the Christmas Truce,” Operation Plum Puddings, 1999. Accessed Nov 18th, 2014. http://www.christmastruce.co.uk/essex.html

Tuesday, November 18, 2014

The American West: First Impressions, Part II

Part two of a two part series on Lewis and Clark




After several tense minutes, Black Buffalo ordered his warriors to pull back and gathered them together in order to hold a private council. Clark took it as an opportunity to reconcile and hopefully rebuild their suddenly precarious relationship; he approached Black Buffalo and offered his hand. Even though an alliance seemed to be flushed down the drain, he still wanted a peaceable result and at least a diplomatic, cordial relationship with the Lakota. Black Buffalo refused Clark’s hand, so he walked back to the pirogue. Once Clark reached the boat, “both the chiefs and two warriors waded in after him” and they were allowed on. Clark thought that it appeared to be an attempt to be friendly again, and the group of men spent the night on the pirogue. It looked like the Corps of Discovery dodged a bullet with that encounter, literally. Lewis and Clark were almost certainly beginning to gain a little more hope that a diplomatic agreement could be reach, especially with their interactions the following day.
On September 26th, the Native Americans offered hospitality if the expedition would go to their village, Clark believed it was because the confrontation the previous day “seemed to have inspired the Indians with fear of us.”[i] An alliance my still yet be possible! By the afternoon they reached the village and were met by a flock of men, women and children who were decidedly friendly and Clark was finally at ease with the Lakota. The rest of the expedition was still on guard, but agreed to spend the night as the Lakota wanted to, “Show their good disposition towards us.”[ii] A night of feasting and dancing was prepared; Lewis and Clark went with a small group of men into the council house of Black Buffalo. Within the room almost seventy men stood in a massive circle around the chief, and in front of them was a old Spanish flag laying next to the United States flag that Lewis and Clark gave Black Buffalo the previous day.[iii] The fact that the chief placed both flags next to each other showed signs that they believed the Spanish and Americans to be equal, almost refusing to recognize that the United States now claimed full ownership over the territory. Lewis and Clark both probably recognized the meaning behind this, but said nothing.



While several plump dogs roasted on a large fire, an old man beseeched Clark and asked him “to take pity on their unfortunate situation” and applauded him for how the expedition handled the previous day.[iv] Clark was correct in his earlier assumption; the Lakota recognized the show of power by the expedition the previous day. They almost certainly wanted to convince Lewis and Clark to only trade with them, not with the other tribes upriver. This was the difference though; the Lakota were interested in forming a diplomatic alliance, but did not want other tribes and nations to be included. The Lakota had a powerful influence over trade in the region and didn’t want anyone to encroach on their trading territory. They feared that the expedition, the United States, was going to usurp their domination of the Native American trade economy.
Black Buffalo offered a sacrifice to the US flag as a sign of peace, and then the peace pipe was removed from its perch and presented to Lewis and Clark. They smoked and ate away the following hour until voluptuous women came out and danced to music. They held various weapons and poles with scalps on them and men using animal skins and hooves as instruments provided the music. During the interludes of dancing the men would tell stories that were “voluptuous and indecent.” Not much has changed since then.
The flow of entertainment was shattered by an angry musician who, in a fit of rage, smashed his drum and threw it into the fire because he claimed that he did not received “a due share of the tobacco” that Lewis and Clark distributed previously that evening.[v] The event was quickly hushed over by the other Native Americans and the festivities continued. By midnight Lewis and Clark retired to their boat and the chiefs “offered us women, which we did not accept.”[vi] On the way to the boat, Lewis and Clark saw a group of about fifty Maha prisoners shackled; they asked the Lakota to release them and make peace with the Maha nation, which they agreed to do. During Lewis and Clark’s exchange with the chiefs, a Maha prisoner covertly warned one of the interpreters that the Lakota were plotting and said that, “we were to be stopped.”[vii]
The next morning was slow and the expedition prepared to continue their journey tomorrow, they handed out gifts and spent most of the day relaxing. The Lakota’s gregarious nature was apparent, but something else was going on at the same time. Their sneaky nature is reinforced in the journal of Private Whitehouse when he warned, “they will Steal and plunder if they git an opportunity” and also exclaimed, “they are very dirty.”[viii] No one seemed fully comfortable during the stay with the Lakota Sioux; this was the opposite of when the expedition spends the winter with the Mandan’s, a Native American nation they became close with. During the day, Clark recorded that “they again offered me a young woman and wished me to take her & not despise them, I wavered the Subject.”[ix]
Clark’s rejection of the women not only bewildered the Lakota, it was an affront to them. Sex was a custom that “combined hospitality and diplomacy;” his rejection was inadvertently telling the Lakota that the expedition was not willing to fully accept their hospitality or foster a diplomatic alliance.[x] While the Corps of Discovery did want to create a trading network with the Lakota, Clark’s actions said he wanted nothing to do with them! This seemed like a very trivial thing to the expedition, as the only person who mentioned it was William Clark himself. He also did not mention it in his journals, but in his field notes from the journey. The only time this is acknowledged by the expedition is essentially as an afterthought, a footnote! Possibly their biggest mistake with trying to form a relationship with the Lakota, and they had no idea.
Doing a little research on the time period turned up a few interesting findings. The late 17th and early 18th century featured quite a bit more sexual mischief then is commonly believed. To be blunt, it was as common back then as it is today. In America, one in three women were pregnant by the time they married.[xi] There are also a plethora of lawsuit records and private documents that showed the promiscuity of the century. Even the Corps of Discovery featured plenty of lechery! William Clark, John Ordway and others recorded several sexual encounters with other Native American women. Several of them even father children, including Clark! He supposedly had a son with the daughter of the Nez Pierce chief; just like the Lakota, they viewed sex as an exchange of power. The men in the Corps of Discovery valued it as recreational, while the Native Americans viewed it with reverence and great importance. The reason why Clark turned down the Lakota is unclear, he does not record why. We know that he was not yet married, and would become sexually involved with later tribes. It seems there is not a real reason why he would reject this offer of sex, all we do know is his rejection upset the Lakota and contributed to their conflicted meeting.
When evening fell, several men in the expedition were invited to join the dancing and festivities, identical to the previous night.[xii] The entertainment went even later the second night, well past midnight. As the men returned to their boat, they accidently swung it around and broke the it’s anchoring cable.[xiii]  The sudden commotion from the cable breaking surprised the chiefs who were with them and they instantly gave alarm and beckoned almost sixty men over; they claimed it sounded like the Mahas had attacked and were only concerned for everyone’s safety. It seemed more likely that the Lakota believed the expedition was secretly leaving and wanted to stop them; yesterdays warning from the prisoner stuck in Lewis and Clark’s minds—“we were to be stopped.”[xiv] the rest of the night the expedition “kept up a strong guard.”[xv] Clark began to believe that the previous day of entertainment was nothing more than a stall tactic. He was right. Historians have found records saying that the Lakota were waiting for another Sioux band to come to the village. They believed that “if the party could be delayed long enough, reinforcement might arrive.”[xvi]
The next morning, September 28th, only solidified this as the expedition prepared to set sail.  As they prepared their pirogue to sail down river they recorded that it was with “great difficulty that we could make the chiefs leave the boat” and after they left, “several of the chief’s soldiers sat on the rope which held the boat to shore.” Clark demanded the Native Americans stand down or the expedition would be forced to fire upon them, Clark had little patience for their stall tactics. Black Buffalo told him that his warriors only wanted a bit more tobacco. Clark threw him one extra carrot of tobacco and told the chief, “You have told us that you were a great man, and have influence; now show your influence, by taking the rope from those men…”[xvii] Clark’s appeal to pride succeeded; Black Buffalo ordered the warriors to take the tobacco and release the cable.
A feeling of relief went over the men, they dodged another bullet with the Lakota. The expedition sailed a few miles down river and suddenly spotted Buffalo Medicine hailing them, the lowest ranked of the three Lakota chiefs. As they were pulling up to him they quickly hoisted a white and red flag on the boat, it was a warning that meant the expedition was ready for “peace or war” and were “determined to fight our way.”[xviii] Initially Clark rowed out in a pirogue to meet the chief, but then brought him onboard. The expedition listened as Buffalo Medicine told everyone that Partisan, the chief second to Black Buffalo, was the one who actually ordered them to be stopped. There was a power struggle going on between him and Black Buffalo and in an attempt to show power and authority, Partisan had some of his warriors attempt to stop the expedition from continuing. It was probably him that also requested help from the second Lakota band. Clark responded by telling Buffalo Medicine that the Lakota, as a whole, must stop attempting to delay the expedition and that “if they persisted in their attempts to stop us, we were willing and able to defend ourselves.”[xix] The Corps of Discovery did not want any more contact with, as they described them, such a “banditti of Villains.”[xx]
Buffalo Medicine carried the message back to the village, and it seemed to be the end of Lakota problems to Lewis and Clark, but it was not. The following morning they saw Partisan along with two women and three men standing on the shore. Partisan offered the women to Lewis and Clark for the third and final time. As expected, they turned down the offer. The chief then requested to be taken aboard and allowed to travel with the expedition; Clark also rejected that request. Clark’s warnings from the previous day seemed to fall on deaf ears, but he was firm in his refusal to be deterred and allow anyone onboard. He was well informed about Partisan’s wily attitude and desire to exhibit his power and abilities.
Even with Clark’s rebuff of Partisan, the small group of Lakota followed them down river, and after a few miles the chief directed his attention to the boat again. Partisan made one last request, asking for more tobacco. Clark agreed to Partisans final request on his own terms; he threw some tobacco on a sandbar and refused to go on shore. Partisan used his request for tobacco as his final attempt to get the expedition to stop and come on shore; unfortunately for him, Clark was wary of his tricks and did not even go to shore to hand the tobacco to Partisan. The expedition then promised to not leave their pirogues until they “came to the nation of the Aricaris, commonly called Rickarees.”[xxi] Clark had enough of the Lakota and only wanted them to go away. He gave them even more tobacco than he should of, telling them it was “a present for that part of the nation which we did not see.” With that, Partisan and his group left. This was the last time Lewis and Clark saw Partisan, but it was not the last they saw of the Lakota.
The final day of September featured wind and rain. After trudging a few miles in the weather a Native American ran up to the expeditions boat and begged to be brought on board. Still frustrated from the previous day, his request was refused. It was not until they sailed over a hill that they saw the four hundred Native American warriors waiting. At this point the expedition shored their boat and greeted the large group; it was a Lakota hunting party and part of the village they just left. Almost certainly it was the group that Partisan was waiting on and the reason he was trying to stall the expedition. Lewis and Clark offered the chiefs in the group tobacco; they seemed to be very friendly, a relief to be sure. They also proceeded to complain to the chiefs about Partisan and the rest of Black Buffalo’s people, exclaiming, “We had been badly treated by some of their band.”[xxii] Not knowing anything except the Corps of Discoveries side of the story, the chiefs were extremely apologetic and Clark readily accepted their apology.
After their conversation they agreed to take the chief with them for a while. After a few miles they encountered rough waters, and it scared the chief. He demanded to leave the boat and promised that the expedition would be able to “proceed unmolested” and that, “all things were clear for us to go on, we would not see any more Tetons.”[xxiii] Teton is another word for Lakota, in particular it is the word that Lewis and Clark use in their journals. Clark gave him some more presents and spent some time smoking with him before continuing on, making sure the chief left more happy then scared. Thus, the Corps of Discovery’s first experience with the Lakota finally ended.



It was nearly two years later when they met the Lakota again on August 30, 1806, and this experience was when William Clark recorded Black Buffalo’s “great oath.” The bellicose result of their meeting two years prior gave the expedition no desire to converse with them, instead Clark just threatened them.[xxiv] The failed Lakota diplomacy was not just a threat to the Corps of Discovery, but seemed to be a threat against the United States as a whole. With Lewis and Clark acting as US ambassadors, any threat against them was a threat to the nation; likewise the Lakota were almost certainly not happy and did not agree with their treatment by the expedition. 
Lewis believed that the Lakota were dangerous, manipulative and oppressive to non-Sioux tribes. They dominated their neighbors, and went as far as conquering and controlling entire tribes. He wrote specifically about the Ricârâs Arikara tribes, mentioning that they were essentially slaves to “that lawless, savage, and rapacious race, the Sioux Teton.”[xxv] Whenever Lewis was given an opportunity to disparage the Lakota he would eagerly jump at the chance. He wanted to be sure to malign them; to show that his floundered interactions with them were because of the Lakota’s fault and diplomacy was destined to fail.
In his 1806 letter to congress, Meriwether Lewis aggressively described the Lakota as “the vilest miscreants of the savage race…” He would go on to exclaim that, “Unless these people are reduced to order, by coercive measures, I am ready to pronounce, that the citizens of the United States can never enjoy, but partially, the advantages which the Missouri represents.”[xxvi] His anger towards the Lakota showed how dramatically their efforts to establish a diplomatic relationship with them failed, the hope of including them in the United States trade network seemed impossible. Lewis believed the Lakota to be nothing more than a thorn in the side of the United States’ trade hopes.
On July 20th of the same year, William Clark also wrote about the Lakota in an unsavory light, suggesting that strong-armed tactics might be the only way to leave “peaceably” with the Sioux.  He explains that, “until some effectual measures be taken to render them pacific, [they] will always prove a serious source of inconvenience…” Clark wrote to Hugh Henry about the Native Americans, suggesting that coercion might be the only way to get all of them to cooperate. While the US wanted to show their strength and power through the most peaceful means possible, the possibility of ostracizing the Lakota Sioux was certainly a probability according to Clark.[xxvii]
Lewis and Clark succeeded in creating diplomatic ties with most of the Native Americans they met on their expedition; all of their problems came from the Sioux tribes. Their ambition of propagating positive relationships with the Native Americans fell short because of their gaffe with the Lakota. Bernard DeVoto declared that Lewis and Clark essentially defeated the Lakota; they forced them to back down, and turned them into “women” in their neighbors’ eyes. The Lakota were just “bully boys” and became “just beggars” once they left.[xxviii] That was hardly the result Jefferson wanted when he commissioned Lewis and Clark.
Thomas Jefferson’s staunch belief that the United States was destined to settle the entire continent left little opportunity for cohabitation with the Native Americans. The United States seemed intent to build an imperialistic empire through colonialism. The process of expanding into new territory and creating new colonies led to colonialism, which is, as Jeffery Ostler put it, “[making] explicit the fact that expansion almost always involves conquest, displacement, and rule over foreign groups.”[xxix] The beginning of the United State’s exploration of the American West was a rousing success in almost every way—except with Native American diplomacy. In a letter to the secretary of the Navy, Robert Smith, Jefferson admitted the Unites States was “miserably weak,” in its newly acquired western lands. [xxx] Lewis and Clark entered a unique realm of Native American politics and failed to make a proper connection, which was what Jefferson feared.
Navigating the tangled web of Lakota politics and their imperial interests was a daunting task for Lewis and Clark, easily their most difficult task in regards to Native American diplomacy. The Lakota were a nation familiar with conquering and controlling others; believing themselves to be superior and stronger than any other, and Lewis and Clark did little to change that. The Lakota’s perspective of themselves was much like the United States; they were powerful nations that clashed with each other. It was almost certain that these two titans could not co-exist. The failed diplomacy by the Corps of Discovery gave the United States an early glimpse at the future conflict between these two nations.





[i] Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:52.
[ii] Thwaites, Original Journals, 1:166-67.
[iii] Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:53.
[iv] Thwaites, Original Journals, 1:167; Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:53.
[v] Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:54.
[vi] Osgood, The Field Notes of Captain William Clark, 150.
[vii] Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:56.
[viii] Whitehouse, “The Journals of Joseph Whitehouse,” 87-8.
[ix] Osgood, The Field Notes of Captain William Clark, 150.
[x] Ronda, Lewis and Clark Among the Indians, 36.
[xi] Andrew G. Gardner, “Courtship, Sex, and the Single Colonist.” The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, December 2007, accessed: Sept 2, 2014. http://www.history.org/Foundation/journal/Holiday07/court.cfm
[xii] Gass, “The Journals of Patrick Gass,” 46.
[xiii] Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:56.
[xiv] Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:56.
[xv] Whitehouse, “The Journals of Joseph Whitehouse,” 89.
[xvi] Osgood, The Field Notes of Captain William Clark, 145.
[xvii] Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:57.
[xviii] Whitehouse, “The Journals of Joseph Whitehouse,” 90.
[xix] Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:57.
[xx] Whitehouse, “The Journals of Joseph Whitehouse,” 90.
[xxi] Gass, “The Journals of Patrick Gass,” 48.
[xxii] Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:57-58.
[xxiii] Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 1:58; Thwaites, Original Journals, 1:174.
[xxiv] Gass, “The Journals of Patrick Gass,” 274; Biddle, The Journals of the Expedition, 2:538.
[xxv] Thomas C. Cochran, The New American State Papers 1789-1860 Vol 1. (Delaware: Scholarly Resources, 1972), 28.
[xxvi] Ibid, 1:33.
[xxvii] Jackson, Letters of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, 1:310-312.
[xxviii] Bernard DeVoto, The Course of Empire. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co, 1952), 445,48.
[xxix] Ostler, The Plains Sioux, 2.
[xxx] Ronda, Lewis and Clark Among the Indians, 30.