Treaty of Wataga

I found this old postcard in the Kentucky Virtual Library (http://kdl.kyvl.org/catalog/xt7x696zwx82_1_1373), which seems to be a fantastic place to locate information and images about Kentucky and local history. The postcard documents one of the most important moments in early Kentucky history: the "sale" of Kentucky to the Transylvania Land Company. I put the word "sale" in quotation marks because this transaction wouldn't meet our standards for a fair or just deal. The land was "sold" by a group of Cherokee to the land speculators from the east. The main problem with the deal was that the Cherokee didn't live in Kentucky. In fact, no native tribes did by the 1770s, but many tribes did use the land as a hunting ground. The Cherokee were one of these groups, but not the only one and not the major one. Shawnee hunters were the most frequent visitors to the region during the proceeding period, followed by Mingos. Ultimately, the Cherokee who "sold" Kentucky to the Transylvania Company had no real right to do so.

The image itself offers rich opportunities for analysis. I am struck by the division of the people into two clear groups, distinguishable by their clothing. The meeting does appear to be among relative equals. It is notable that the white men have their weapons more prominently displayed and that there are fewer of them. This gives the impression of a few representatives of a more technologically advanced culture pushing out the more numerous, but less advanced, native cultures. It is also interesting that the white men have on coonskin caps, powdered wigs and tri-corner hats; this isn't very likely. I wonder what individuals are supposed to be represented here? I wonder what body of water is in the background? The Kentucky River? If so, this could be near the spot of Boonesborough. I'm also struck by the whites' canine companion. What is his (or her) role in all of this?

Daniel Boone: The Life and Legend of an American Pioneer

Daniel Boone: The Life and Legend of an American Pioneer (1992) by John Mack Faragher examined both the man and the myth. Faragher brought Boone to life as a complex man, motived by a wide array of human emotions. Boone, according to Faragher, was much more than the caricature of frontier masculinity, ruthlessly killing dangerous Indians who were intent on his destruction. Faragher's Boone is much more interesting than the Indian hunter of pop fiction. In fact, according to Faragher, Boone only killed 3 Indians in his entire life and he was never proud of those deaths. He prefered to work things through peacefully if possible. I wonder why the murderous version is so much better remembered?

Boonesborough enters into Faragher's story in the middle and Boone only called the place home for around a decade. It does give a lot of description and detail on these years and the early establishment of the capital of the Transylvania Company. I thought that was particularly interesting, that it was established by a land company funded by eastern speculators. We don't think of Boone as a capitalist or as someone concerned with money, but according to Faragher, he definitely was. Faragher also called attention to the fact that Boone was an eager participant in the market economy via his trade in skins. These economic motives seem to be at the root of the establishment of Boonesborough. It leaves me wondering if they were successful? Did these folks get rich?

Another really interesting thing in Faragher's work are the numerous appearances of dogs on the Kentucky frontier. They served a variety of functions including hunting specialists, defensive warning system, Indian trackers, Indian torturers, loving companions and food supply of last resort. I wonder if settlers could have beaten out the native hunters without their canine accomplices?

The above engraving of Boone and his dog comes from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longhunter#mediaviewer/File:Daniel_Boone_engraving.png

***BAD blog post, for demonstration purposes only***

An inadequate research blog post might look something like this:

"I read an article online about Boonesboroge. It was a Fort, which is like a little castle. But not really. The wood seemed to be really old. He was a really good guy who did a tone of great stuff for our country. If it weren't for him, the world would be totally different (and worse) than it is today.

This was a cool article, but I think the site is kinda stupid really. I woun't go if I were you.

Also, did you see the Simpson's marathon on FXX??!?"

***Again, this is a poor blog post. It is intended as an example of what NOT to do in your own blog.***

Daniel Boone & the History of Fort Boonesborough

This photo comes from Daniel Boone Section of the Fort Boonesborough Living History website. I found it while poking around the internet trying to find background information on the state park. It was written by Bill Farmer, a member of the Boonesborough Foundation.

This page outlines some of the basic history involved in the Wilderness Trail across the Appalachian Mountains into Kentucky. Rather than blazing an entirely new trail, Boone and his fellow travellers actually linked many smaller sections of trail together. The enormous labor put in by Boone and others resulted in a very rough path, "generally conceded to be the roughest, most disagreeable road on the continent," but nonetheless played an important role in facilitating settlement of the first "west."

The site also gives a bit of information on the founding of the Fort. It started as a few temporary log huts, but quickly grew into a more substantial defensive structure during the 1770s. The modern, re-constructed Fort opened in 1974.

The source raises several questions for me. First, why a "fort"? Second, why were pioneers like Daniel Boone coming to Kentucky in the first place? Third, who or what created the initial trails that Boone and his company combined into a single continuous path? Fourth, why was the Fort re-built and opened as a tourist attraction in the 1970s? Fifth, who were the people in Boone's party? Finally, I am curious to find out what the connection is between this Boonesborough site and the Civil War site nearby I visited previously.

Greetings!

Greetings WRD students and welcome to my research blog.

I'll be updating this space throughout the semester as we work through our major research projects. It should also give you some idea of the types of things I am looking for in the research blogs that you will be producing over the next several months.

As a first entry, I submit a photo from a trip to Clark County this summer.

This image raises a number of questions for me. First, why the old cannon? Second, why is the field empty? Third, when was it taken? Fourth, who took it? And why?

Luckily, I can answer most of these. The cannon is from a rarely-visited park commemorating the Union defense of the Kentucky River during the Civil War. It looks abandoned because it is a significant hike to get to the field and it is not a popular tourist destination. I took it this July to help myself remember the terrain and a pleasant day trip with my wife.

These might seem like unimportant questions with inconsequential answers, but they can actually serve as the launching point for a sustained and in-depth research project. Your own research blog will trace a similar journey from first steps through final product.