Appendix II — The Problem of “Colter’s Route in 1807”
It may seem unfruitful at this time to attempt a solution of the problem of John Colter’s 1807 route of discovery in Yellowstone. Many people require no proof of anything cited in the records of such great scouts as Jedediah S. Smith, Kit Carson, and John Colter. Their integrity need not be questioned. Still, it is within the province of the historian to sift and test all of the evidence until the truth falls into place as elements in a jigsaw puzzle. Even myths and legends should be examined for any implications and bearing they might have upon a fact. It is in this light that the following discussion of the Colter discovery problem is presented. This case is entirely hypothetical, since no specific reference to his route has been found anywhere among source material, except as it is approximated upon the Map of 1814.
Beyond the known facts of Colter’s journey in 1807, the Map of 1814, and the “Colter’s Hell” legend, there is a complete hiatus, or vacuum. However, the Map of 1814 is certainly a tangible thing; let it tell its own story: It is known that William Clark had a friend in Philadelphia named Nicholas Biddle who arranged for the publication of The Lewis and Clark Journals. In order to properly depict the journey, Mr. Biddle secured the services of a prominent Philadelphia cartographer named Samuel Lewis. Twice in 1810 Clark sent sheets of map material to Mr. Biddle.352 John Colter reached St. Louis in May, 1810. It is certain that he called upon Clark and gave him information, if not sheets, depicting his famous journey of 1807. This data was undoubtedly sent on to Mr. Biddle, either as Colter drew it or as it was accurately redrawn by Clark. At least one of Colter’s sheets was incorporated in the final Map of 1814.353 The first, or eastern prairie, side of the Colter plat traced his journey up Pryors Fork, about fifty miles west of Fort Manuel, through Pryors Gap. Then he crossed over to Clarks Fork, which he ascended, probably to Dead Indian Creek. From this creek Colter crossed over a divide to the North Fork Shoshone River where he first smelled sulphur. This he called Stinking Water River, most probably referring to the present De Maris Mineral Springs near Cody, Wyoming.
On Stinking Water River he encountered the “Yep-pe Band of Snake Indians 1000 souls.” This was evidently a clan of the Crow tribe. From these Yep-pe Indians, denizens of both prairie and mountain, he undoubtedly learned of the Yellowstone geysers and other marvels. This accounts for his side trip which brought him back to the Yep-pe camp. It is likely that some of these Indians directed Colter along another route in returning to Manuel’s Fort. Obviously they went down the North Fork Shoshone, or Colter’s Stinking Water River, to its junction with Shoshone River. This, he followed to Gap Creek (now Sage Creek) which he ascended to Pryors Gap.354 By this alternate route Colter again reached Pryors Fork where he crossed over to return to Fort Manuel.
From this examination it is obvious that the western boundary of Colter’s first map lies east of 110° longitude, and up to that point no difficulty whatever is encountered with either the route or the map. This line undoubtedly defines the west border of Colter’s first sheet. It became a part of the Map of 1814 without change. Hence, it is a correct representation of the “Buffalo Bill country” around Cody, Wyoming. Published in 1814, it could only have been the work of John Colter, because no other white man had visited that area. Because of the accuracy of Colter’s first plat, or east portion of the map, his course to the Yep-pe Indian camp can be followed like tracks in the snow. Just so, the return route east of 110° can be identified as coming down Sunlight Creek and back up Dead Indian Creek to the Yep-pe Indian camp. From there he followed a shorter route, in returning to the eastern edge of the map sheet, that is to say, the head of Pryors Fork.
Thus, it is evident that the eastern courses of Colter’s journey, both going and coming, are accurately depicted on the Map of 1814. East of 110° it is an accurate and authentic mapping of the area, just such a one as an intelligent trapper would make. Whatever is depicted corresponds to actual geography. It is factual, tangible, verifiable, and indisputable.
This part of the map proves that Colter did take an extended journey in a southwesterly direction, but it does not prove that he discovered Yellowstone Park. The dependable part of the map simply accounts for the eastern part of the figure eight which is essential to describe the complete journey.355 The reliable part leads him only to the southeastern border of Yellowstone Park and brings him back from farther north along its eastern boundary.
The western portion of the dotted line on the Map of 1814 is purely fictitious and encompasses an area far beyond that occupied by Yellowstone Park. Indeed, this part of Colter’s route winds among a labyrinth of geographical unreality.356 Therefore, Colter’s route, as represented by the western loop of the dotted line, is likewise invalid. Here, then, is the problem of Colter’s discovery: How could the map of his exploration, which necessarily described a figure eight, be at once so authentic in the east and so fictitious in the west? The Yellowstone area of the Map of 1814 is certainly one of organized confusion, but it does not follow that Colter drew that portion of the map as it appears.
Actual geography and common sense prove that a trapper on foot could not possibly have seen both the Arkansas and Platte rivers. Just as surely, geography and common sense attest that in traveling a normal western loop of the figure eight he would have seen precisely what the map does not depict, namely: Upper Yellowstone River, Snake River, Yellowstone Lake, and the thermal areas at Thumb of Lake and near Hayden Valley.
Thus, by elimination, an obvious conclusion evolves, namely that the western loop is not as Colter drew it. Instead of actuality, there is fiction; nothing in this part of the map conforms to reality. That geography only exists upon the Map of 1814. John Colter died in 1813 so he never even saw the route as depicted, to say nothing of traveling along it.
The failure of writers to recognize the fictitious character of this portion of the Map of 1814 has led to a comical performance. They have assigned to Colter the role of a human helicopter who hopped over mountains and valleys visiting the drainage basins of all the river systems within a radius of five hundred miles of the Yep-pe Indian village. First they trail him on Teton River, Big Sandy, Gros Ventre, and Greybull. Then they track him over South Pass, Teton Pass, and Union and Twogwotee passes. These authors have never trudged the wilds of which they write nor even measured them on a real map. Where, then, did Colter travel? The answer to that problem largely depends upon a rational interpretation of that fantastic map sheet. Perhaps an investigation of the process by which the map was produced will offer a clue.
As stated before, Clark sent map materials to Biddle, who in turn passed them on to Samuel Lewis, a professional cartographer, to be worked into a map of the Trans-Mississippi West. This was a very difficult assignment because the sheets were of various scales, which necessitated overlapping, crowding, and uncertainty as to latitudes and longitudes.357 The manner in which Lewis fitted them into a mosaic represents a remarkable work of art. Deficiencies are largely attributable to the inadequate data received, but in the case of Colter’s journey another element is involved.
In the course of compilation, between 1810 and 1814, Clark must have sent a redrawing of the route of Colter’s journey.358 By way of review, let it be remembered that Colter reached St. Louis in May of 1810. He called on Clark and evidently presented several sheets of trapper map to him. This was the material which depicted his journey of 1807, and it seemed to be highly appreciated by Clark. That it was given preference by Clark over the contemporary exploration of Zebulon M. Pike simply substantiates the belief that Colter’s journey made a profound impression upon Clark at that time.359 On December 20, 1810, Clark apparently sent the original Colter sheets, or properly redrawn copies of them, to Nicholas Biddle. Clark also inserted, or superimposed, two rivers upon the Colter drawing. They were Clarks Fork and Bighorn rivers.
It is important to remember that Clark had full confidence in Colter’s representation of his journey at this time, that is, December, 1810. The following year Andrew Henry returned from his exploration of the Madison and Snake river regions. He had seen only ordinary country. This report seems to have destroyed Clark’s belief in Colter’s story of marvels. Not wishing to deceive anyone by the delusions of a deranged trapper’s mind, Clark apparently directed Samuel Lewis to retain Colter’s east plat, that is, the Buffalo Bill country, but suppress the western section, the Yellowstone Lake region. In lieu of Colter’s depiction of the western loop of his figure eight Clark evidently sent the draft that now appears on the Map of 1814.
What possible reason can be assigned for this action? It is anybody’s guess; no one can now determine what Clark thought, but following is a rational hypothesis: In the close of the year 1811, Andrew Henry and his men returned from their trapping venture in the Upper Snake River basin. They had skirted the western border of Wonderland along the line of the Madison and Gallatin rivers and explored the sources of Henrys Fork of the Snake River. Yet, Henry had not seen any hot springs, geysers, or great lakes. No doubt Henry had heard trappers joke about “Colter’s Hell.” Personally, he showed no confidence in it. Evidently both he and Clark considered that Henry’s and Colter’s journeys overlapped. Actually, the Gallatin Range intervened between them. It is reasonable, therefore, that Henry’s report and attitude affected Clark’s original belief in Colter’s story. Where he first believed he now doubted. Perhaps Clark concluded that Colter’s terrible experiences had deranged his mind. It is certain that Clark sent his new knowledge of the Henrys Fork country to Biddle in 1812 because it appears on the Map of 1814.360 It was undoubtedly at this time that Clark sent in his redrawn, guesswork version of the western portion of Colter’s map. No one knows exactly what changes Clark made, but the Map of 1814 proves conclusively that Clark did not depict the “Colter’s Hell” country which contains the wonders of Yellowstone Park as it was originally presented to him.
It was a valid reaction for Clark to have become suspicious of Colter’s reliability, and the substitution of his own geographical speculation for Colter’s Yellowstone sketch was probably sincere. Clark was too honest to depict the delusions of an “insane” man. Also he was very anxious to have a reasonably complete and integrated map. The only alternatives were to allow the Colter marvel sheet to appear or else to mark a considerable area “unexplored.” He was caught in the bonds of uncertainty and made a compromise. The result was a sheet of bogus geography which is entirely incongruous, not only with the facts, but with Clark’s uniformly excellent map work.361
Clark’s choice of alternatives only complicated the problem of his cartographer. Lewis no doubt recognized the vast discrepancies between Colter’s genuine depiction and Clark’s counterfeit so he evidently decided upon a compromise of his own. How this expert reconciled the conflicting data of the two map sheets into one pattern is at once a masterpiece in cartography and psychology. The technique he adopted might be called “double entry map making.” He used the Yellowstone Lake part of Colter’s sketch as an element for a concealed map; it appears as a mountain range. Such a grotesque range cannot be found in any of the surrounding territory, but when visualized as a lake it is amazing how it conforms to what a trapper traveling a logical route would have seen of Yellowstone Lake, namely, the South Arm and Thumb. Lewis shied away from any clear-cut representation of the geyser region. However, besides including the disguised lake portion of Colter’s map, he did other things to “poke fun” at Clark’s speculations. He drew Lake Eustis in the manner of a gargoyle. It must have been deliberately “satanized.” Nothing with such a preposterous shape was ever known among men. Why didn’t Clark revolt at this representation? Surely he never drew anything like that himself. That is not all of Lewis’ “fun making.” He drew still another lake and gave it the shape of a deformed piece of liver. Its appearance is ridiculous in the other extreme,362 but, as if to add insult to injury, Mr. Lewis raised a question as to this lake’s legitimacy. Clark named it Biddle in honor of his patron, Nicholas Biddle, whereas, upon the English version, the name appearing is Riddle! Lewis was able to “get away” with this performance because Clark did not see any proofs, only the published work.
Remembering that Samuel Lewis was employed to reproduce a map conforming to data and specifications furnished by Clark, what more could he do to manifest his skepticism, if not displeasure, over the incorporation of fictitious geography upon this super-important map of the West? Remember, Lewis was a professional cartographer; he had seen, and had already drawn, Colter’s sheet of real country. On the original draft the southwest Arm and Thumb of Lake Yellowstone undoubtedly appeared. Now he was asked to redraw it into counterfeit geography. Disturbed by the substitution of Clark’s sheet of “Gulliver’s geography” for Colter’s journey, he disguised a lake in a mountain range, drew a gargoylian lake (Eustis), and raised the enigma of Biddle-Riddle.363 After all, cartography is simply a scientific refinement of pictography, or storytelling. The message of Samuel Lewis, as revealed in the Yellowstone segment of the Map of 1814, might reasonably be: “This portion of the map is bogus. I do not know what the true conditions are. Colter’s data appears all right; Clark’s later information says it isn’t. It’s all a Riddle; I leave a clue.” Against this background, with the fiction cut away, it may now be possible to explore the problem of Colter’s route through the Yellowstone country.
Did Colter make a western loop trip beyond the Yep-pe Indian camp? Of that there can be no doubt. Clark’s representation does not impugn Colter’s word in respect to the reality of the journey itself but only as to where he went and what he saw. If an approximation of his route can be reproduced, the question of what he saw will automatically fall into place like the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. The problem, then, is to correctly reconstruct the west loop of the figure eight. This procedure has become possible by reason of the proposition that has been established in this discussion, particularly when it is remembered that Colter knew his way around and could be relied upon to make a proper orientation to the total environment. Now his course can be followed by segregating another feature from what has been referred to as “Lewis’ Concealed Colter Map.”
West of longitude 110° it will be noted that two features stand out in bold relief, namely, a mitten-shaped mountain labeled FOSSIL (probably the Trident) and the crude outline of South Arm and Thumb of Yellowstone Lake. These two landmarks may be used as guide posts in following Colter’s reconstructed loop through Yellowstone. Colter’s authentic east loop journey, already described, brought him approximately to the 110° meridian. Colter’s mitten-shaped landmark lies about seventy-five miles due west of the border on his second map sheet, but Clark’s dotted line depicts Colter’s route fifty miles south of the mountain shaped like a mitten and marked FOSSIL. It is valid to inquire how Colter could discern its shape or know of its fossils from that distance. His Indian friends knew nothing about fossils. The dotted line does not cross or even skirt this mountain. To reach the “Fossil Mountain” from Salt Fork, Colter could ascend by Elk-Wapiti or Fishhawk creeks. Each meets the requirements of direction and distance, and there is a good chance that somewhere along one of these routes a large petrified fish, or something like a fish, was seen then and may be eventually found. Such a discovery would remove all doubt about the direction in which he traveled.364
From the “Fossil Mountain” Colter probably descended Pass Creek to Thorofare Creek, which he followed to the Upper Yellowstone River. Then he might have ascended either Falcon, Lynx, or Atlantic creeks, preferably the latter, to Two Ocean Pass. Crossing the Continental Divide, he would then descend Pacific Creek, skirting Big Game Ridge, and cross the South Fork of Snake River, within the present confines of the Park. Thence he could go along Chicken Ridge, from where he would frequently view South Arm, headed toward Flat Mountain Arm. After crossing Solution Creek he would strike West Thumb.365 The validity of this itinerary is wholly sustained by the genuine features of this area as they appear upon the Map of 1814. Indeed, the route seems obvious and indisputable in view of the actual conditions existing. On a crude map, where there are numerous, similar streams, various combinations are, of course, possible.
Leaving West Thumb, Colter would have circled the lake to its outlet and followed it to the Hayden Valley thermal area. Dragons Mouth and Mud Volcano were undoubtedly features that contributed to the vivid impression he carried away and transmitted to others. Even the “Hot Spring Brimstone” characterization on the Map of 1814 mildly suggests explosive thermal activity. The phrase also suggests that Colter mapped a geyser basin.366
Colter’s return route from the area near the outlet of Yellowstone River supplies the final link in the figure eight. To reach the Yep-pe Indian camp he might have veered to the northeast, crossed Yellowstone River at the ford below Mud Volcano, and ascended Pelican Creek or one of the tributaries of the Lamar River. After crossing the Absarokas he evidently descended one of the creeks that empty into Clarks Fork. No one on earth can be certain about this part of his journey. There is no reference anywhere, and the Map of 1814 gives no clue. Still he did reach a tributary of Clarks Fork which he followed to its junction with Dead Indian Creek, thence to the Yep-pe band.