Talk:Lewis and Clark Expedition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] State Of The Article

This aricle is in sad shape (much shorter than it should be). Here is a sentence that should be put in when when the article is expanded:

Scouting ahead of the expedition, Meriwether Lewis and four companions sighted the Great Falls of the Missouri River on June 13, 1805, confirming they were heading in the right direction.[1]

-- mav 08:32, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The "Route of the Expedition" map has 2 inaccuracies. That map shows Maine, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota as "grey" and not part of the US. This land was part of the US since the beginning of our country - the treaty with Great Britain in 1783. The other problem is it shows West Florida as part of the Louisiana Purchase. At the time of the L & C expedition in 1804, Spain claimed this land, and it was never part of the Louisiana Purchase.

For a better map of US territorial acquisition, look here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:U.S._Territorial_Acquisitions.png

R.S. - 2008-May-14 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.25.10.86 (talk) 17:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Native Americans

There could be more here on the expedition and Native Americans. I am thinking of how to add something short enough. I'm particularly concerned that verbage like "that was a "Real American Moment", for York, who was a slave, and Sacagawea, who was an Indian and a woman, voted along with the rest of the men of the party." misrepresents the ways the expedition fits into the negative aspects of early 19th century American history glossing over, conflict, exploitation, and disease. York, for example, was not given his freedom at the end of the expedition despite Clark's promise to do so. Sacagawea's democratic priviliges do not seem to have extended to having much input into the fate of her own son. While the party's interactions with Native Americans were often friendly and intimate (and regularly sexual) in nature, violence was also an aspect of the expedition. In addition the Corp's mission of extending U.S. sovereignty into the West would ultimately prove disastorous for the Native populations in the region.

I agree. Rather than just referencing a few meetings with Native populations, the article should have a section devoted entirely to Native American relations. Since Lewis and Clarke's journey was often the first meeting any of these tribes had with Europeans, there should definitely be some emphasis placed on that aspect of the expedition. Silly sad machine 16:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


I moved the recent addition "roughly a decade after Alexander Mackenzie, the first European to cross North America by land north of Mexico, arrived at Bella Coola on the Pacific coast in 1793" from the first sentence. Yes, t's an important fact, but hardly the most important thing about the voyage. Placing it where it was comes across as hamfisted criticism. -- Decumanus 16:30, 2004 Dec 28 (UTC)

I don't understand the beginning. Sure L & C were the first Americans to cross the continent, but Alexander MacKenzie has priority for crossing the continent 10 years earlier. Is this is situation of some simply not knowing the facts b/c MacKenzie was in British North America (now Canada)? Fremte 19:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


This article should be much, much longer. Can anyone fix it?


This article needs a serious re-write. Much of if sounds as though it was written by a fourth grader.

"Lewis and Clark played a key role in the putting together of the United States. They had to act largely as diplomats for the President because when they met an Indian tribe, they had to tell them that the land now belonged to the United States. Without these calm meetings, the white settlers from the East would have stormed the Indian Country much too soon, and there would have been total chaos."

You gotta be kidding me. --64.30.11.107 19:33, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

...so fix it, then. - jredmond 19:45, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Expedition Members

I have added notes to each of the expedition members, in part to forestall the creation of stubby articles on each that would have little hope of growth. I also wrote a few new articles. I have left only two redlinks, on members I think could maybe have decent articles, though if someone were to remove their brackets, I wouldn't object. We could change some of the stubbier existing articles into redirects to the main article, though I am not burning to do so. -- Mwanner 23:50, August 31, 2005 (UTC)


[edit] syphilis or 180 gallons of whiskey?

tt

What a random topic that "tt" has added, will you please explain?

[edit] United States article on featured candidate nominations list

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United States

Cast your vote! The more responses, the more chances the article will improve and maybe pass the nomination.--Ryz05 t 22:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Medical Perspective

I'm about halfway through reading The Journals of Lewis and Clark edited by DeVoto, and one common thread that I thought I could get answered here was the persistent medical issues that came up, chiefly boils and tumors. If someone with appropriate knowledge and background could write a piece about these ailments, their sources, and the medicines and procedures employed to combat them, that would be very helpful. It seems to be acknowledged, mostly outside this article, that venereal disease was one issue, but it could not have been the only one. Were there parasites that were common given the diet of the party, or was it more likely water-borne pathogens like Giardia? I've also been told that some of the camps have been found by searching for trace elements of mercury, which apparently was part of the 'cure' for these various conditions at that time. I think this is relevant because this was a journey with more than just obstacles in the landscape, and it would be helpful to have some background on the types of medical issues the party contended with and how they dealt with those issues. --Rdd98103 04:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)RDD98103


[edit] Missing key part of the story

A key part of this story is that Lewis first met with Clark in the Louisville, Kentucky area (more specifically, at Clarksville, Indiana, at the Falls of the Ohio River). Also, Clark specifically recruited nine young men from the area to join the Corps of Discovery. Later, when they all returned from the Pacific, they traced back to Louisville, where they celebrated their homecoming at Historic Locust Grove (in current-day Louisville). Being a Louisvillian, I've been a bit shocked that Louisville's part of this was left out. Since I'm new to this specific article and its approach, I'll be happy to discuss how best to integrate this info. Please let me know how to proceed. Thanks. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 05:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


I don't know about everyone else, but I think the key part that is missing from this whole article is the mention that Lewis and Clark traveled along "ancient indian trails". These trails had been in use for thousands of years and so should be acknowledged so as to not give people the impression that Lewis & Clark were complete "trail blazing discoverers". I'd like to make an overlay of their trail and all the known ancient indian trails but haven't had the time. Can anyone else help me? Any 4th graders out there with time to kill? --Lebite 18:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Precision Surveying of Historic Trails: Lewis and Clark in Idaho

Abstract: Indian trails and government wagon roads played a major role in the expansion of the nation westward in the 1800s. Modern road building and agriculture have erased the traces of these routes of commerce for much of the eastern and central United States. However, public lands in the west still preserve their erosion traces in spite of their lack of use for over a century. Our history concerning these routes can still be preserved if they are surveyed and photographically documented so land managers can protect them. The Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail in north-central Idaho has an erosion trace that was so deep in the soil that much of it still exists today. Until now, no one has known the precise location of this trail although many attempts have been made. In this talk we will use photographs, topo maps, precision GPS, and ARCVIEW to present the methodology of discovering and documenting this trail in one of the most remote and rugged areas of the continental U.S.

For most of the journey the Corps traveled by rivers. The only portion of the trip that required any significant overland travel was across the Rocky Mountains. If you're going to poke holes in the mythology of Lewis and Clark as great explorers, its more important to note that only those few hundred miles across the Rocky mountains had never been trod upon by white folks.

John11222 23:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

On the Clearwater and Lolo National Forests, in the mountains of northern Idaho and western Montana, there is an ancient trail system that has been used for hundreds of years as a land bridge between the Columbia River basin and the Missouri River basin. The approximate route of this trail is westward up Lolo Creek from Lolo, Montana to Lolo Pass and then along the dividing ridge between the North and Middle Forks of the Clearwater River until reaching the Weippe Prairie near Weippe, Idaho. Recent research, using a combination of historical records, computer analysis tools, and extensive field exploration has now provided conclusive proof that the erosion trace of this ancient trail system still exists and can be located in many places along the 130-mile length of the trail.
The first use of this land bridge, by aboriginal peoples traveling on foot, occurred at least hundreds of years ago and possibly more than a thousand years ago. These people left an archaeological record that is just now beginning to be examined. When the Native American tribes of the northwestern United States acquired horses over two hundred years ago, the land bridge increased in importance because of the improved transportation provided by these horses. The use of horses also caused increased erosion along the old trail and created the extensive and deep tread that can still be found today.
Meriwether Lewis is notorious for misspelling words in his journals. In this regard he did not discriminate between languages -- he also did not spell several Indian words correctly. One example is Cokahlarishkit (and he spelled this a couple different ways). His Nez Perce guides sent him on a route they called Ooq' aalx'Iskit which means Road to the Buffalo. Lewis translated the word as Cokahlahishkit.
Returning eastbound in 1806, the captains made a switch from waterborne craft to horse transportation here. Since the spring snow melt made rapids in the narrows impossible to pass, the party portaged overland on an ancient Indian trail that points upstream.


Another key part missing is that President Jefferson planned the expedition in secret, before the Louisiana Purchase. <a person who doesn't know how to use Wikipedia's talk page> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.135.76.221 (talk) 05:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William Clark

The only reason I haven;t done this myself (yet) is because it would take a lot of research. Why is there not yet a William Clark page on wikipedia? It seems ridiculous, especially considering how many other Lewis(the first person spelled it wrong) and Clark oriented pages exist.--Dr who1975 21:53, 20 September 2006 (UTC)--

William Clark exists. Perhaps it just appears empty -- this happens sometimes. Run the purge function on the page and see what happens. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 23:24, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. That was weird.--Dr who1975 14:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV

This article seems to be excessively positive and unquestioning about the highschool textbook account of Lewis & Clark. There is substantial academic opinion from historians that Lewis & Clark are mainly of symbolic importance today rather than practical importance during the pioneer years. See for instance this Slate article. The article should acknowledge these skeptical views and the historical fact that Lewis and Clark were not considered so important until the 20th century. The "Achievements" section particularly needs a going over. Bwithh 13:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

What do you think of the Spanish section? I did a paper on it for graduate school, and I lifted most of the part about the Spanish from it? Besides, I don't want this article to be like the Wright brothers article, which is more interested in debunking the Wrights than actually discussing the brothers.--Bedford 13:58, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's always possible to create a separate article covering this skepticism, assuming that this is a topic that could get too lengthy and tangential to what needs to be concentrated on here. This article needs to concentrate on the actual expedition and not so much on its relative significance. After all, even if Lewis and Clark did just become historically important in the 20th century, it's not like we can decide to reverse that development. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 14:17, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I find the removal of the POV tag with the citation of WP:POINT and a curt dismissal offensive and patronizing by the way. That kind of thinking undermines the very purpose of the POV tag, aside from being condescending (why is it "absurd"?). I'm reinserting the tag. You can remove it again, but I'll hope you'll give a more reasonable explanation. Bwithh 22:24, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, you were changing it from one tag to another to another to try to make a (weak) point. And the last tag added was just plain absurd. If it's "curt", so be it. There's nothing much unusual about this article compared to other historical articles. If you want to be seen as acting constructively, give us examples of how particular parts of the article should read, in your opinion, for starters. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 04:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Before we do that, I think we need to see more than one article that debunk's the Expedition, especially since that article did not come from a scholarly work.--Bedford 14:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The article is based on scholars' opinions- read it through and you'll see that it's cites several books and quotes from academics. Even leaving aside the issue of academic's opinions, the article itself is a bit too gushy in style Bwithh 22:24, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
I did read the article. Find us more articles backing that belief and then your point may be validated.--Bedford 00:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Constant vandalism: call for semi-protection

I have now reverted vandalism on this page several times in the past few days, and frankly it's getting old. Can we sprotect this page or something in the hopes of stemming this continual nonsense? This is one of those frustrating things about Wikipedia… --Makaristos 19:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I repeat this call. Is anybody paying attention while these IPs just eat up all our time making us revert their crap? --Makaristos 18:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Thankfully, it's sprotected now. This article has been on WikiProject Louisville's special watchlist for some time now due to the rampant vandalism. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 19:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Guys, I plan to remove the semi protection in a few days, give me a shout if I forget! Ta/wangi 10:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
It's been one days since the removal of semi-protection, and I count about ten instances of vandalism. This is such a pain to deal with, to have to revert constantly and perform maintenance rather than doing actual work on the article. Can we get the sprotection back, or something? --Makaristos 01:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I agree. I just had to remove some vandalism by some guy who put ' poop poop ben ALEXANDER was here dooop' inbetween the jefferson link and the words that folowed. Can someone make it right? I had to put what I thought went there because I didn't know what was origionaly there. F3CNW 1:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC) P.S. I just de-vandalized the talk section below this talk article. This is getting rediculous, I have to write a paper on Lewis and Clark and how am I suposed to do that when there is vandalism all over the place? F3CNW 1:07, same day as before
It looks like vandalism is a constant problem for this page. I just undid some vandalism on the main page, which is about the 4th time in the last 24 hours. In this case, some Comcast user out in NJ might be getting a notice... Pooua (talk) 05:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] L & C in popular culture

Does anyone object to a section for Lewis and Clark in popular culture? There are some references which may seem trivial but other articles have them and it does add interest at another levelJulia Rossi 06:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be all right. You may want to check out the last version of this article that had such a section and mine it for material. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 06:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the link and the okay Julia Rossi 06:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Please add some recent, very fine novels about Lewis and Clark: Brian Hall's "I Should Be Extremely Happy in Your Company" (Viking, 2003). Michael Pritchett's "The Melancholy Fate of Capt. Lewis" (Unbridled Books, 2007). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.73.225 (talk) 21:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not enough info.

Why did they start the expedition, hello? Add that.


Hey, Bwindex

[edit] Random sentence that someone really loves

Under the "Lousiana Purchase and a western expedition" section, someone has added a line they apparently really love. The statement is out of place and redundant, rehashing a sentiment that is apparent earlier in the article and is mostly apparent if you have common sense.

The paragraph is as follows: "Because of bureaucratic delays in the U.S. Army, Clark officially only held the rank of Second Lieutenant at the time, but Lewis concealed this from the men and shared the leadership of the expedition, always referring to Clark as "Captain". Many people back in Lewis and Clark's day did not know what the West held. [4]"

The line in question, obviously, is the last one — "Many people back in Lewis and Clark's day did not know what the West held." I have to restrain myself from saying "duh." The line also does not strike a scholarly tone, as it's fairly colloquial to use the word "day" to refer to someone's past. The line also includes a citation, but the citation refers to the line before the line in question — the one about Lewis always referring to Clark as "Captain."

I corrected this error last night, but when I rechecked this morning the line was back. Someone apparently really loves this line, but I can't understand why.

Silly sad machine 14:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Number of members listed

According to the article, The party of 33 included 29 individuals who were active participants in the Corps’ organizational development, but counting up the members listed gives 37 if you don't count Clark's slave or the interpreters. Can anyone resolve the discrepancy? --Blainster 17:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lack Of Explanation

"Thomas Jefferson had long thought about such an expedition" It has no overview of the expedition on the article at the moment.. 76.168.59.171 15:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed some vandalism

I just removed some apparent vandalism: subject headings "Backhair" and "Chocolate is Tasty" along with the non-sequitur comment "happy easter". Someone else can feel free to improve on the headings I inserted: "Origins of the Expedition" and "The Beginning of the Voyage."

"Louisiana Chase with Gunfire" is also presumably somebody's idea of a joke, but I couldn't guess what the section should be called.

It's such a shame this article is both incomplete and the subject of vandalism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.39.191.81 (talk) 20:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for trying to fix the vandalism. Actually though, rather than guessing at what the headings are supposed to say, it is best to take a look at the page history and simply change the article back to a previous version. In this case the vandal made several other edits you didn't see. Happy editing! And please think about signing up for an account. Katr67 21:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

"In 1785,Perkins learned that King binky of France planned to send a mission there, reportedly as a mere scientific expedition." - Looks like somebody has been playing pseudohistorian again. Bluesoulsearcher 08:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks. Katr67 13:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Botany Bay?

The introduction includes the following line: "In either event, the mission was destroyed by bad weather after leaving Botany Bay in 1788." Botany Bay? I don't know enough about American geography to know whether there is such a place, but there is no other reference to it in Wikipedia. Australia, yes, but not America. 83.254.84.142 08:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC) (John Nixon)

The sentence refers to the expedition planned by King Louis XVI of France, not the expedition that's the subject of the article. The information is provided to give a background for President Jefferson's motivations in ordering the expedition. —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 03:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] In popular culture

While we don't want a simple trivia listing, talking about how a subject is approached in popular culture is indeed encyclopedic. So, we need to figure out a way to convert this section into prose rather than outright deleting it. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 21:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Other than the one referring to the movie The Far Horizons (which doesn't even have an article about it yet), I really don't see the point in keeping the rest of them. Just my own opinion. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 12:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sacagawea

Why is there no mention whatsoever of Sacagawea in the article? I know her name is hard to spell, but come on! Salathi 21:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually she's in there four times... Katr67 01:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Info about other expeditions cut from intro

(Alexander MacKenzie was the first European to cross the continent north of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean in 1793.[1] The spaniard Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca traveled from Tampa Bay, Florida to Galveston, Texas and then into northern Mexico to "fifteen leagues from the ocean" by foot from 1528 to 1536. He went in the company of Alonso del Castillo Maldonando, Andrés Dorantes de Carranca, and Estevan, an african slave, until 1532. Afterwards Núñez went alone, completing a journey of 8 years and becoming the first european to reach the american western regions.[2]).
  1. ^ Library and Archives Canada, "ALEXANDER MACKENZIE REACHES THE PACIFIC" accessed 10 Aug 2007
  2. ^ PBS, "The West - Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca" accesed on 20 Aug 2007

This is all very interesting, but the intro to an article about Lewis and Clark shouldn't be more than half filled with info about other expeditions. Could we perhaps format this as a footnote and replace it? Any other ideas? Katr67 17:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How Racist Can You Get?

How come there is no mention of (guides and personal servants):

  • York
  • Sacagawea
  • Edward Rose
  • Pierre & George Bonga
  • James P. Beckwourth
  • John Marsant
  • John Stewart

only pointless privates. These people actually did something.

For example,

  • York— William Clark’s personal servant. He was considered a full member of the expedition and carried around his own gun. He saved Clark during a flash flood in Missouri and was also in charge of bringing back game and food for the expedition. He was well liked by the curious Indians.
  • Sacagawea— a young Shoshoni Indian girl (14+ years) who knew how to speak various languages including French and functioned as a way for the expeditionary crew to obtain Shoshoni horses to cross the Rockies. She was the surveyor of the land, a person who could read the landscape and figure out what general direction they were headed to and also had a good sense of what was edible and what wasn’t.

go research on it and please add the important people to this article: the unsung heroes of this expedition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.246.38 (talk) 07:14, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Excellent suggestions. Please feel free to add this information to the article. It hasn't been done yet because no one volunteered to do it yet.  :-) —EncMstr 07:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Map of Expedition

This article could really use a free map of the route taken by the expedition itself, since text alone is hard to decipher, and one that is little easier to read than the historical one. Thegeneralguy 01:04, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good Map from Commons...In French

Image:Carte Lewis-Clark Expedition.png This is being used in the French Wikipedia, and is based on the one used in the German Wikipedia. In case anyone feels embarrassed that the English Wikipedia doesn't have a nice map, it would be great if it was recreated in English so we could add it to the article. I don't have the graphics skills. Katr67 20:44, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Expedition Party

It would make sense to create a chart or table that would provide (in tabular format) the name, rank, and importance of each party member, rather than a an enumerated list. It could also be color-coded to show whether or not the party member is military or civilian. Picture in this section should be moved to right side margin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rainier5 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this suggestion, and would add that a 'other spellings' column be added, as I am currently reading The Journals of Lewis and Clark edited by DeVoto, and I note that one of the frequently mentioned people in the journals is spelled as "Drewyer", which I had to determine must be synonymous with the interpreter listed as "Drouillard" in this Wiki. This text falls short of explaining which spelling is correct, but I am inclined to believe the spelling in this page to be the correct one. No doubt there are several other instances of this, but this is the one that I noticed right away. --Rdd98103 04:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)RDD98103

[edit] Plagerism

The following is farily obviously plagerized:

"Often referred to as the recruitment phase of the expedition, it was that, but so much more. The Ohio was where the all-important foundation—the nucleus—of what became the Corps of Discovery was formed. On the Ohio, Lewis and Clark met to form their partnership in discovery. On the Ohio, the famous "Nine Young Men" from Kentucky were recruited and enlisted. On the Ohio, York, Clark's slave, George Drouillard, and at least two others joined the expedition. While on the Ohio, these men began forming relationships and friendships, and a dedication to their mission and to each other that would carry them, through dangers and hardships, to the Pacific and back. Some of these men were also among the most important members of the Corps."

apparantly taken from: http://www.lewisandclarkinkentucky.org/places/ohio_river_journey.shtml

I can't remove it because the page is locked.76.161.209.27 (talk) 16:08, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

                            Bye from Lewis& Clark,  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.52.75 (talk) 00:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jefferson Peace Medals

Doing research for another article, I came up mention of Jefferson Peace Medals, twelve of which were taken by Lewis and Clark to give to Indians as peace tokens. I was surprised there wasn't an article for these, and didn't notice any mention of them in this article. Maybe someone that's more of an L&C junkie than myself can provide some history on these objects? Murderbike (talk) 08:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

see Indian Peace Medal. I think I would prefer your Jefferson Peace Medals or Presidential Peace Medals as a title, however. Good writing! Just me! (talk) 01:41, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


hi my name is danyailla and im doing a report on these people so pleas help

[edit] Louisana purchase date

The deal was signed in 1803, New Orleans transferred in 1803, transfer of rest of the land occurred in 1804. This is why the expedition did not leave until 1804. -Fremte (talk) 22:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)