Pathfinders of the West | Page 4

that he
went overland to the North and put his feet in the waters of the bay, the
English writers insisting that he only crossed over the watershed toward
Hudson Bay. Again, the fact remains that he did what others had failed
to do--discovered an overland route to the bay. I am sorry that Radisson
is accused in this Memoir of intentionally falsifying his relations in two
respects, (1) in adding a fanciful year to the 1658-1660 voyage; (2) in
saying that he had voyaged down the Mississippi to Mexico. (1)
Internal evidence plainly shows that Radisson's first four voyages were
written twenty years afterward, when he was in London, and not while
on the voyage across the Atlantic with Cartwright, the Boston
commissioner. It is the most natural thing in the world that Radisson,
who had so often been to the wilds, should have mixed his dates. Every
slip as to dates is so easily checked by contemporaneous
records--which, themselves, need to be checked--that it seems too bad
to accuse Radisson of wilfully lying in the matter. When Radisson lied
it was to avoid bloodshed, and not to exalt himself. If he had had
glorification of self in mind, he would not have set down his own faults
so unblushingly; for instance, where he deceives M. Colbert of Paris. (2)
Radisson does not try to give the impression that he went to Mexico.

The sense of the context is that he met an Indian tribe--Illinois,
Mandans, Omahas, or some other--who lived next to another tribe who
told of the Spaniards. I feel almost sure that the scholarly Mr. Benjamin
Sulte is right in his letter to me when he suggests that Radisson's
manuscript has been mixed by transposition of pages or paragraphs,
rather than that Radisson himself was confused in his account. At the
same time every one of the contributors to the Minnesota Memoir
deserves the thanks of all who love true history.

ADDENDUM
Since the above foreword was written, the contents of this volume have
appeared serially in four New York magazines. The context of the book
was slightly abridged in these articles, so that a very vital
distinction--namely, the difference between what is given as in dispute,
and what is given as incontrovertible fact--was lost; but what was my
amusement to receive letters from all parts of the West all but
challenging me to a duel. One wants to know "how a reputable author
dare" suggest that Radisson's voyages be taken as authentic. There is no
"dare" about it. It is a fact. For any "reputable" historian to suggest--as
two recently have--that Radisson's voyages are a fabrication, is to
stamp that historian as a pretender who has not investigated a single
record contemporaneous with Radisson's life. One cannot consult
documents contemporaneous with his life and not learn instantly that he
was a very live fact of the most troublesome kind the governments of
France and England ever had to accept. That is why it impresses me as
a presumption that is almost comical for any modern writer to
condescend to say that he "accepts" or "rejects" this or that part of
Radisson's record. If he "rejects" Radisson, he also rejects the Marine
Archives of Paris, and the Jesuit Relations, which are the recognized
sources of our early history.
Another correspondent furiously denounces Radisson as a liar because
he mixes his dates of the 1660 trip. It would be just as reasonable to
call La Salle a liar because there are discrepancies in the dates of his
exploits, as to call Radisson a liar for the slips in his dates. When the

mistakes can be checked from internal evidence, one is hardly justified
in charging falsification.
A third correspondent is troubled by the reference to the Mascoutin
Indians being beyond the Mississippi. State documents establish this
fact. I am not responsible for it; and Radisson could not circle
west-northwest from the Mascoutins to the great encampments of the
Sioux without going far west of the Mississippi. Even if the Jesuits
make a slip in referring to the Sioux's use of some kind of coal for fire
because there was no wood on the prairie, and really mean turf or
buffalo refuse,--which I have seen the Sioux use for fire,--the fact is
that only the tribes far west of the Mississippi habitually used such
substitutes for wood.
My Wisconsin correspondents I have offended by saying that Radisson
went beyond the Wisconsin; my Minnesota friends, by saying that he
went beyond Minnesota; and my Manitoba co-workers of past days, by
suggesting that he ever went beyond Manitoba. The fact remains that
when we try to identify Radisson's voyages, we must take his own
account of his journeyings; and that account establishes him as the
Discoverer of the Northwest.
For those