I’m glad 2021 is finally over. And 2022 is here. I always hope a new year brings a fresh start and better things to come. I don’t like wishing years away, but I sincerely hope 2022 treats us better than ’21’. Last year was wicked on many fronts for Canadians.
Before we get too far into ’22’, I’ll write a few lines about my website and where I’m heading this year.
Spent ten days in July out in Powell River, British Columbia, Canada hoping to escape the interior heat. Not a chance. Super hot on the West Coast of British Columbia as well. There was a run of fans and air conditioners in Powell River. Everything was sold out, but we managed to get one. The only other reasonable thing to do was stay near the water. Or the pub. (This view is from the south beach on Savary Island, north of Powell River.)
Despite the extreme weather in many parts of Canada, the hot summer in the Edmonton area, which lasted into fall, was great for gardening. I’ve never picked so many ripe tomatoes off the vine than in the summer of ’21’.
I’m uncertain how productive I’ll be this year. I go in for knee surgery on January 10th (if Covid doesn’t overrun us again). Probably won’t remember my name for a week or two after surgery. I’m in constant pain so this needs to get done. The other knee too.
I already have about five or six stories lined up for 2022. Hopefully I can get one more out before surgery. I don’t think grinding away on a stone maul is in the works after surgery for a while, so I’d like to update you on my progress trying to grind that lump of quartzite into submission. And yes, I’ve made progress. Not much, mind you. But progress nevertheless.
My quartzite maul after about five hours of grinding. At least now you can see the groove. I’m going to switch techniques and work on it for another three hours. Then I’ll write up my results. Stay tuned.
As usual my stories were all over the map in 2021. But I don’t plan to change my approach. If it’s Canadian, and might be of some interest to you, I’ll write about it. This diverse set of stories probably attracts a diverse set of readers. Some stories may be too technical for some of you but students and academics read my work. But no matter what the story, I try to make it informative, entertaining. And Canadian.
Here’s another reason I’m glad 2021 is over. We did a major ‘reno’ to our house which is almost done. It started in July. Getting real tired of the intrusion and mess which comes with any reno. Shown here, our newest open concept bathroom design. Not sure it will catch on…
I’m still thinking about monetizing my website. Most of my content, however, will remain free. I might write some longer, more technical pieces which I will charge for. I have also received a contract offer from a publisher for a historical fiction novel I’ve been working on. But the offer isn’t great, so I may self-publish it on my website and charge accordingly. I just want to recoup some of my costs running this website.
Covid and the size of Canada make it challenging to write stories that represent the entire country. Hopefully in 2022 I’ll be able to travel more and write about many more Canadian places and themes. However, there is another way of getting more diversity and stories from other parts of Canada onto my website. Guest Bloggers. If you read my website menus, you’ll notice my Guest Bloggers menu is empty. Nothing! Not one person has come forward with a Canadian story. If you think you have a good Canadian story, and I know there are some good ones out there, let me know. I’ll set you up as a guest author and let you go at it. If I don’t get any volunteers, you can expect the press gang to show up at your door…
My wife and I managed to get out to the Empress area to the confluence of the Red Deer and South Saskatchewan Rivers. We searched for the elusive Chesterfield House(s). Early 19th century fur trade forts that have yet to be found. Many of you (likely from the Archaeology Societies) are tuning into that story. If Covid simmers down and the knees hold up we may return this spring and do more work. And write another story.
I’ll end with a few basic stats about my website:
In 2021 I’ve had 3,305 visits to my site; all time visits to my site are 5,380;
In 2021 I posted 21 stories and a total of 42 stories since starting;
I’ve written a total of 72,500 words, or ~1,714 words per post;
I have 82 subscribers (Admittedly not Donald Trump numbers but given my content, I’m happy with them).
The top five most viewed stories for 2021 are:
How I lost My Head to History. The story of Anthony Henday… = 202 views;
Stone Tobacco Smoking Pipes… = 122 views;
Just Grinding and Pecking Away…. = 134 views;
At the Junction of the ‘Bad’ and Red Deers Rivers…. = 133 views;
Historic Maps: Alberta Through the Eyes of a Siksika Mapmaker…. = 126 views.
(These stats are liable to change and may be a bit skewed because some stories have been posted for a longer period of time than others.)
These stats suggest you like Canadian factual stories more than my fictional stories (none of which made the top five). Canada and the United States (in that order) led all visitors to my website. But readers from all over the world are checking in, including countries such as Malaysia and Taiwan.
Walls of smoke and flames approaching the City of Slave Lake, Alberta, Canada, 2011. https://news-ca.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/640×360/017.jpg. You have favorite stories. So do I. One of my favorites is the fire ecology story I posted in February, 2021. It’s a timely piece. Global warming combined with our forestry management practices has led to a perfect storm. In the 1970s anthropologists in Alberta were telling us that Indigenous Peoples all over the world (including western Canada) managed their forests with controlled burning, resulting in less frequent and intense fires.
Let me know what you liked in 2021. And maybe what wasn’t so great.
Happy New Year. All the best in 2022.
Stay Safe, EH!
At Christmas time our family gets together for a tasting. Last Christmas we sampled three French Bordeaux’s. This year it was a selection of five Scotches recommended to us from the people at the Bothy (a Scotch bar in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada).
Wooden statue of trader, mapmaker, Peter Fidler, Elk Point, Alberta, Canada. Fidler served at the nearby Hudson’s Bay Company Buckingham House (c.1792-1800), located along the North Saskatchewan River, just southeast of Elk Point. https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3529/3967919062_060d0fee79_z.jpg
Note: This is a revised and condensed version of an article we recently published in the Saskatchewan Archaeological Newsletter Quarterly, May, 2021 edition, regarding our search for the the Chesterfield House fur trade sites in Spring, 2021. Readers are referred to this edition of the Quarterly for a more detailed version of our findings.
Time and the Unknown
Ah, the mystery of the unknown! It’s one of the things that first drew me to history and archaeology. The thrill of discovering new facts, objects or places, lost or abandoned centuries ago. It didn’t matter if they were only minor footnotes in the bigger picture of human history.
One of the most rewarding and challenging experiences in my career was searching for the many lost fur trade posts in western Canada. The remains of some lay hidden in front of our very noses. Others, so remote and covered by nature, it took considerable effort or sensitive equipment to eventually find them. Still others guard their hiding places well, and to this day, elude discovery.
The remains of the last Hudson’s Bay Company Fort Edmonton (c.1830-1915), located on the Alberta legislature grounds. A fort, whose location was known by only a few historians and archaeologists. In a survey, conducted while excavating this fort in the early 1990s, we discovered that over 60% of the public had no idea the original fort was located on the current Alberta legislature grounds in the heart of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
This is a story about a search for one of those fur trade post that has eluded us for many years – Chesterfield House. A search that began in the mid-1960s. But for me it began in c.2005 and continues to this day. Because no one has yet found Chesterfield House.
Searching for Canada’s Fur Trade Forts
In an earlier blog I talked about explorer and mapmaker David Thompson. One of the world’s most remarkable geographers and mapmakers. Thompson visited many western fur trade forts and wrote about them or mapped them. Often he left behind clues for us relocate them. Such as the NWC/HBC Fort Vermilion I (c1798-1830) site in northern Alberta. (https://canehdianstories.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=1894&action=edit)
In this post I focus on another lesser-known but equally competent trader, surveyor and mapmaker, Peter Fidler of the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC). And in particular, his brief, and sometimes scary stay in southern Saskatchewan at the confluence of the South Saskatchewan and Red Deer Rivers where he would build his fort.
In the fall of 1800 Fidler built Chesterfield House for the HBC. Soon after the North West Company (NWC) built alongside the HBC post, followed by the XY Company. Many (including me) have searched for them but, to this day, they have never been found.
The confluence of the South Saskatchewan and Red Rivers today, near the Saskatchewan-Alberta border, Canada. Somewhere down there on the river flats are the remains of three fur trade forts, over two-hundred years old. Their whereabouts remains a mystery.
Peter Fidler
Born at Bolsover, Derbyshire, England, Peter Fidler (16 August 1769 – 17 December 1822) joined the HBC in 1788. He was trained in surveying and astronomy by Philip Turnor who also trained David Thompson. Fidler became the Company’s chief surveyor and map-maker, much like David Thompson for the NWC.
While acting as trader, explorer, and mapmaker, Fidler also observed and wrote about the Indigenous peoples of the region. He married a Cree woman and learned Native languages to carry out the trade. Occasionally he convinced his Native informants to draw maps of their territories for him. Today these are some of the few surviving Native maps of western Canada (see a former post on the Ki-oo-cus map of southern and central Alberta. (https://canehdianstories.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=266&action=edit). His journeys, largely undertaken in western Canada, covered an estimated 48,000 miles on horseback, foot, canoe and dog team.
Fidler’s superiors admired his toughness and fortitude. For example, while traveling and wintering with the Chipewyan in northern Alberta and the NWT, a near-starving Fidler mentioned what parts of a game animal they ate to stay alive: “We eat everything except the manure.”
Fidler had some incredible adventures as a trader and explorer for the HBC. A few could have ended his life. One of these adventures required constructing a fur trade post on the Western Canadian prairies. He built the fort with the intent of trading with Plains First Nations peoples. After only a few years, Fidler and the other Companies abandoned their forts, barely escaping with their lives.
A map, by Peter Fidler, of the Upper Assiniboine and Swan Lake Regions. Fidler was a very accurate surveyor and cartographer. Not only did he map the lakes, rivers and important land features, he also accurately plotted the locations of the various fur trade post on those maps. This point becomes important later.Like David Thompson, Peter Fidler used a line-track survey method when mapping the South Saskatchewan River. He would take a compass bearing and then estimate a distance to map that part of the river. This is part of Fidler’s survey of the South Saskatchewan River, up to the confluence of the Red Deer River, superimposed over today’s South Saskatchewan River route. Based on these and other evidence, we assume that Fidler was an accurate surveyor, especially calculating latitude.
Where did the Companies Build?
For many years I heard about the mysterious Chesterfield House(s) and attempts to find them. All searches ended in failure. But why? How could three forts of considerable size, just disappear, without a trace, in the valleys of the Saskatchewan and Red Deer Rivers? Or perhaps, as some researchers suggested, had those waters already swallowed them up leaving no trace behind?
In 2005, while visiting and hunting in the area, and intrigued with the lost Chesterfield House, I too joined the search.
The South Saskatchewan River Valley near Empress. So beautiful with its wide open prairie expanses and bright blue skies.
As with other similar searches, nothing is ever as simple as it first appears. This quest was no exception. It has taken me since 2005 to finally piece enough evidence together to make the modest claim that I might have a candidate where these fur trade forts were built. And I, like others before me, could be totally wrong.
Let’s start our search with Fidler’s Chesterfield House HBC journals (1800 – 1802). In them he gives only a few but very specific references to the fort’s location.
This photograph was taken from the east looking towards the forks of the South Saskatchewan and Red Deer Rivers. Fidler’s two references to the fort’s location are pretty specific. At first I thought he might have built on the island you see in this image which is in front (east) of the juncture of the two rivers. But then in the second quote he specifically says they built on the north side of the river(s). The ‘Bad’ River refers to the South Saskatchewan River. But Fidler has some reservations building on this spot: “Crossed the river to north side and looked out for a place to build at. The woods here are few and bad for building with.” (From Alice Johnson 1967:268. Saskatchewan Journals and Correspondence 1795 – 1802. The Hudson’s Bay Record Society, Volume XXVI) So, Fidler either moved to where there was more suitable wood to build with or he cut wood from elsewhere and hauled it to the junction of the two rivers.
Fidler gives the latitude of the south bank of the Red Deer River where he intends to build: 50o, 55’, 5” (50.9222o). Fidler’s latitude calculations were quite accurate. Longitude was not. But, if we take Fidler at his word, we really don’t need longitude because Fidler gives us a fairly precise east-west reference point where he built the fort – the confluence of the two rivers.
A satellite image of the confluence of the two rivers. The problem with river confluences, is that they can move. You can see the old Red Deer River channels in this image (shown in dark green). At one point in time it flowed into the South Saskatchewan River further north. Some researchers believed this was the original confluence in 1800 and looked for the forts in that area. But, Fidler’s 50o, 55’, 5” (50.9222o) is much closer to the present confluence than to the northern older one. Peter Fidler’s longitude for the confluence of the rivers was out a considerable distance. Not unusual in those days when highly accurate time pieces were required to estimate how far west from Greenwich Mean time you were located. Fidler’s latitude however, was remarkably accurate, being approximately 15″ or +/- 450 metres out.
While rereading Fidler’s published journals (for the umpteenth time) this spring, I noticed at the end of the 1800-01 trading season a note by the editor: “[Meteorological and Astronomical Observations, made at Chesterfield House, covering 15 manuscript pages, not printed]” (From Alice Johnson 1967:268. Saskatchewan Journals and Correspondence 1795 – 1802. The Hudson’s Bay Record Society, Volume XXVI). I wondered if Fidler gave a more accurate reading of latitude and longitude for Chesterfield House in those unpublished notes. Fortunately I was able to get hold of a copy of his original journal, including the missing 15 pages.
Yes, indeed. Fidler gives two readings for latitude at Chesterfield House: 1) 50o55’12” (50.920o); and, 2) 50o55’21’’ (50.9225o). Both readings are relatively similar to his original north riverbank reading recorded at the confluence of the two rivers where initially he wanted to build. Had they been significantly different then it might suggest he built elsewhere (than right at the confluence).
Next I looked at a few historic maps of the area. One map shows the location of Chesterfield House, marked by a dot, on the north side of the South Saskatchewan River, some distance downriver from the forks. But Fidler stated, “…opposite the mouth of the Red Deers River where we are to build…”
This particular map of the western prairies, shows the confluence of the South Saskatchewan and Red Deer Rivers, with a dot depicting the location of Chesterfield House. That dot is east of the forks on the north bank of the South Saskatchewan River. It likely refers to the later post built by the HBC downriver from the forks in 1821 (which also has never been found). (https://earlycanadianhistory.ca/2018/06/18/what-peter-fidler-didnt-report/)
Then I found another map drawn by both Fidler and his Blackfoot informant, Ak ko Wee ak in 1802. Does the straight line across the Red Deer River, with Chesterfield House’ written on it, indicate where the fort was built? If so, it was built upriver from the confluence of the two rivers.
A map drawn by Fidler’s Blackfoot informant Ak ko Wee ak in 1802. Fidler wrote the names of places on the map. On that map there is a straight vertical line across the South Saskatchewan and Red Deer Rivers. If the line represents where the fort was built, then Chesterfield House was located some distance (distance unknown, because there is no scale) up the Red Deer River. (From HBCA PAM: E.3/2 fos. 103d)On this map, drawn by Fidler’s informant, Ak ko mok ki, in 1802, there is a little drawing of Chesterfield House located on the north side of the river(s). But its location is very general. The fort could be anywhere within miles of the forks. (From HBCA B.39/a/2 fo.93)
Unfortunately no one, while searching for the forts, has taken the Native maps or Fidler’s latitude reading of the forts location very seriously. Keep in mind, Fidler was a very accurate surveyor for his day, especially when it came to calculating latitude. His readings were out by about 15 seconds of latitude, or +/- 450 metres.
If we ran his latitude for Chesterfield House as a straight straight line across a current map, assuming about 15 seconds (~450m) of error (shown by orange dashed lines on either side of the black line), where might the fort(s) be located?
Peter Fidler’s latitude projected onto a current map of the confluence of the South Saskatchewan and Red Deer Rivers. The orange dashed lines represent the margins of error around his calculations. The orange elliptical shapes are where other archaeologists have searched for the lost forts. The blue elliptical shapes are where no one has searched but are well within Peter Fidler’s margin of error for latitude.Peter Fidler’s latitude for Chesterfield House, and margins of error, superimposed on a current satellite image of the area. The small yellow rectangle represents the area we are interested in and will discuss shortly. The other dashed line further north is another area archaeologists searched for the forts. The latitude of this area is well beyond Fidler’s margins of error.
Another little hint, where the Chesterfield forts might have been built, was a comment in Peter Fidler’s journals. “Dug up the small bateau that was laid up in the spring: the heavy rise of water in the summer had buried it four feet deep in sand.” (From Alice Johnson 1967:268. Saskatchewan Journals and Correspondence 1795 – 1802. The Hudson’s Bay Record Society, Volume XXVI). Presumably the boat was near the fort. If so, it suggests the fort was located on an inside meander of the river, where flood sediments are deposited. Instead of the outside meander where high water cuts away the bank.
We haven’t looked for these forts at all the possible places that are within Fidler’s range of error for latitude. And there are reasons for it. This is large area filled with dense wolf willow scrub and wild rose bushes that is not too pleasant to walk through, or find things. And Fidler’s reference to the forts being built at the forks of the rivers has perhaps been taken too literally. Would the London Committee reading his journals really care if he built a mile or two either way of the forks?
Searching for rock historic building chimney piles in the dense bush on the lower terraces of the Red Deer River. In some places visibility is poor and walking is tough. Currently there is no LIDAR (laser imaging, detection, and ranging coverage) for this area, which would help immensely to expose detailed surface ground contouring and possible evidence of the sites.
To add yet another obstacle to our search, not everything historical in this area is related to the early 19th century fur trade. This area was occupied and traveled over for thousands of years by First Nations Peoples. It became an important Metis settlement, Riviere La Biche, in the 1870s and 1880s, which would have left physical remains similar to those present at earlier fur trade forts.
A late 19th century chimney and fireplace, built by trappers, the Adsett brothers, still stands in one of the local farmyards in the area. The former Metis settlement of Riviere La Biche, was located around the confluence of the South Saskatchewan and Red Deer Rivers. People built chimneys and fireplaces, similar to these, during the early fur trade. These and other building remains, such as cellars, would be indistinguishable from one another without detailed archaeological exploration. However, unlike the Metis cabins which are scattered over a large area, the Chesterfield House forts, and their buildings, were built in a smaller area, surrounded by stockades.
The Search Continues, Spring 2021
This spring (2021), when preparing this blog, I wanted a good satellite image of the forks area where Chesterfield House might be located. While doing so I noticed a long rectangle-shaped, light-colored outline on the satellite image.
This is the image of the Red Deer River flats on one of the meanders that I first looked at. At this height do you see what I see? Or, do I just have an supercharged imagination?
Here is a closer view of the satellite image. Do you see the long rectangle, lightly highlighted, oriented in a northeast-southwest direction in this image? Quite often simple aerial photography and other types of imagery can pick up features from the air, not seen on the ground by the naked eye.
This is the feature I see when looking the the satellite image. The long rectangle is relatively well-pronounced. The other lines to the west are not as definite. The NWC and HBC were built together, enclosed in a common stockade, which is explains the long, rectangular outline. Fidler states the XY Company built just west of his fort.
After reviewing the historic documents, satellite images, and constructing arguments that this might be the lost Chesterfield House forts, the next step was to re-revisit the site and look for physical clues on the ground.
So, my wife, Gabriella Prager, also an archaeologist, and I drove to the Empress area in April to see what we could see. When I visited this same location in 2005, I saw some rock scatters and slight depressions. It was time to reevaluate what those features might be, relative to this new-found evidence.
Once there, we looked for depressions, pits, rocks or mounds or any other evidence that could indicate a human occupation. The surface of this area is quite undulating and uneven from repeated flooding and scouring over the years. Just how much sediment covers the original 1800 ground surface is uncertain without excavating. However, based on other floodplains of this vintage (e.g., the NWC/HBC Fort Vermilion I site, northern Alberta), there could be as much as one-half metre or more sediments covering the original land surface and the remains of anything built on that surface. Fidler’s description of the bateau buried in over four feet of river sediments is most telling in this regard. And that was just one of many flooding events since then.
The area in question, where the long rectangular outline in the satellite photograph appears. Slightly elevated, the area contains little shrubbery, as was also the case in 2005.
When walking the area we noticed the ground was slightly elevated on the east and south sides. These elevated areas were likely responsible for the light-colored lines we saw on the satellite image. Normally, old stockade lines are slightly depressed, even after flooding. We did however also notice a few rock scatters and slight depressions with the rectangular outline.
Walking along the elevated ridge on the east side of the rectangle. This could be an old river terrace edge. The south edge is also elevated. However, there are no visible surface signs of anything where the west and north lines occur on the satellite image.
A small scatter of rocks. Possibly the remnants of a fireplace. But from what time period? Remember, this is a floodplain and rocks don’t float. So, it’s not a natural event. This definitely is evidence of human activities.
Gabriella Prager taking notes and GPS coordinates of a small depression on the site.
What We Concluded
It would be folly to state, without first excavating and testing this area, that we have discovered the Chesterfield House sites. We first need to find certain kinds of other archaeological evidence to suggest that these features, and that intriguing rectangular satellite image, are related to the early 19th century fur trade, and not some later period Metis household: 1) footer trenches representing palisades; 2) early 19th century artifacts representing the time period in question; 3) more building remains confined to the rectangle; and, 4) considerable amounts of animal bone from both human consumption of wild game and making meat provisions for the trip downriver.
There are things about this site that are troubling and do not fit what I expect to see on the surface of the ground; if this were a historic fur trade fort. First is the lack of more obvious visible surface features such as chimney piles and cellar depressions. Second, is the lack of visible faunal debris, or any artifacts. Given the amount of meat consumed, animal bone remains are typically considerable at forts such as this.
To some degree, this lack of evidence might be explained by the amount of flooding that has occurred in the area. If substantial, it may have covered any historic remains with considerable sediments and infilling most depressions that would be cellars, privies, and refuse pits. However, at other fur trade sites abandoned for over 200 years and constantly flooded, we have observed more pronounced surface features than we see here. However, currently we know little about flooding episodes and depositional rate of sediments of the Red Deer River, which could be quite different from our northern rivers.
To be clear, without further investigations, what we (and others) have found is definite proof of a human occupation of some sort at this spot. Based on the historic evidence regarding Chesterfield House, this location is a suitable candidate for these early NWC, HBC and XY Company forts. But, that’s as far as we can go presently. The area warrants further archaeological investigations to either refute or verify our claim.
EndNote
For those of who you who are aspiring students of history or archaeology, there’s a simple lesson here. Combining the evidence from two disciplines (history and archaeology) usually results in a more complete understating of human history. Not always, but better two independent lines of evidence to examine a problem of history, than only one. And perhaps, with the new remote sensing imagery, more than only two disciplines is necessary to eventually find these rather elusive historic forts.
In my last post, I talked about the importance of finding more balance when naming places on the Canadian landscape. Many places once had or could have, equivalent Indigenous names. Those Indigenous names were forgotten, replaced with Euro-Canadian names, or original names were not kept because they were not relevant to the new Euro-Canadian colonizers. And as one Edmonton alderman put it (and who later apologized for his remarks), some Indigenous names were just too difficult to pronounce and should not be used for signage. I guess I’m out of the race then. There will never be a ‘Pyszczyk’ Avenue in Edmonton if we apply those guidelines.
Historic maps can be a great source of information about long-lost places and names. But even here there is a fundamental problem. Most Canadian maps were drawn by early Euro-Canadians who had their own agenda of what was important to record, and what was not. In the words of historian, Theodore Binnema:
“Map makers must interpret landscapes, select the most important features of those landscapes, and depict those features in a way that their audience will understand… No part of this enterprise is objective. Each is heavily influenced by the society in which it occurs. Maps then, are artifacts that preserve potentially valuable information about human societies and the relationships they have had with their surroundings…” (an excerpt from an unpublished manuscript, written by Dr. Theodore Binnema, University of Northern British Columbia)
Indigenous maps would inform us of what was once important to the individual who drew them. There are few Canadian Indigenous maps. Indigenous maps of Alberta are even more rare. There are a few exceptions, however. This is the story of one such rare map, drawn by a Siksika man, in 1802. The map was copied by explorer, and trader, Peter Fidler of the Hudson’s Bay Company, while staying at the short-lived, ill-fated Chesterfield House (located at the confluence of the South Saskatchewan and Red Deer Rivers). When viewing Kioocus’s map, we get a glimpse of parts of central Alberta and Saskatchewan through this man’s eyes. 1
Dr. Binnema’s words are best supported by some examples. Look at the three maps below. They show the same area of Alberta and Saskatchewan, each drawn at different time periods, by different people.
A modern map of parts of Alberta and Saskatchewan. We are a people of highways. Geographical features on the landscape are no longer as important as they were when travelling by foot, on horseback, or by canoe. Only good to look at.
A map drawn by British map maker Aaron Arrowsmith, c.1802. Arrowsmith emphasized accuracy, major rivers (important for travel during the fur trade) and the location of certain Indigenous groups (also important for the fur trade). Geographical features still largely dictated what was placed on his maps.
According to fur trader and map maker, Peter Fidler (HBC) this was a map drawn for him by a Siksika man, named Kioocus (Little Bear) in c.1802. It was transferred to his journals. 2 It depicts key rivers and places that Kioocus and his band found important. Many geographical features were omitted because they likely were not important. Simplicity, and mapping only a few important elements, was the key to navigating through this large area of western Canada and the United States.
If you compare these maps to one another they support Dr. Binnema’s point – the incorporation of places and their names lies not only in changing transportation technologies and settlement, but also in the eye of the beholder, or map maker.
The Kioocus Map
Dr. Binnema and I have stared at the Kioocus map for quite some time now. Whenever I drive through certain parts of the two prairie provinces, I look for the places Kioocus shows on his map. Some are easy to find, some very hard, and others still elude me.
The Kioocus map covers parts of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Montana, USA. The top of the map is oriented roughly north. When you first glance at it, you will probably have a hard time figuring out where you are. There is no scale and there are no roads. Here are a few key reference points that might help. Buffalo Lake (# 7), Alberta occurs at the top left side of the map. Manitou Lake (God’s Lake), Saskatchewan (#31) is located on the top right corner of the map. If you follow the South Saskatchewan River west, you will come to the confluence of the South Saskatchewan and Red Deer Rivers, where the Northwest Company and Hudson’s Bay Company built Chesterfield House. The typed names on the map are recent additions. The small open dots mark camping places as Kioocus’s band travelled across the landscape. The names of places are in Blackfoot, translated by Fidler.
It is impossible to do justice to the entire map in this post. So I will focus on the eastern part of Alberta and the western part of Saskatchewan and particularly Kioocus’s journey from Chesterfield House north across the plains to the Neutral Hills, located just north of present-day Consort, Alberta. I’ve driven that stretch of Highway 41 from Oyen to Consort many times. There is a lot of nothing out there – endless stretches of prairie with very few reference points to guide you. According to my late cousin, Ralph Berg, this is an area where even Jackrabbits packed lunch pails.
Some Familiar and Long-Lost Places
Chesterfield House: Kioocus’s band came from northern Montana, by foot and on horseback, skirted the western edge of the Cypress Hills and temporarily visited and traded at Chesterfield House before continuing north. Along that trek, Kioocus pointed out a number of places to Fidler. Some of those locations are easy to identify because they have retained similar names. Others are difficult to locate and verify with any other evidence. In the list of places below, refer to the Kioocus map and the numbers Fidler puts near those places.
The confluence of the South Saskatchewan and Red Deer Rivers, the location of Peter Fidler’s Chesterfield House. The fort sites have never been found. (But, that’s another story). Later in the 1870s, the area became an important wintering site for the Hivernant Metis.
#29. Ocks as sax e kim me — berries: There is a set of hills, south of Sounding Creek and southeast of the Misty Hills to the east of the travel route that fits this location. Kioocus depicts hills on his map by wavy lines which you can barely see on #29. (Numbers 2 and 4 are better examples). These hills occur just northeast of Salt Lake, putting them at N51o 38’49.58” and W110o13’54.58”. They have no name, only that you can find berries there.
#28. A qun is que — plenty of berries: This location could be any place on Sounding Creek, Alberta. But there must have also been hills or steep banks there, according to Kioocus’s map. However, if we draw a straight line between Chesterfield House and the ‘Nose of the Buffalo'(#30) and assume that Kioocus’s band travelled in a relatively straight line, then the spot on Sounding Creek becomes relatively more well-defined. There are archaeological sites, and possibly a bison pound, roughly where that line crosses the creek. This was definitely a well-travelled route and camping location by First Nations people.
#27. Chis seeks — little poplar (Below): This place refers to the Misty Hills, Alberta. These high hills line up along Kioocus’s route between the ‘Buffalo Nose’ (#30) and Chesterfield House. A creek and spring run through them where there are trees, plenty of berry shrubs and game animals. The area contains major archaeological sites as well as stone chert and quartzite outcroppings which were essential for stone tool making. The hills are very prominent and would have been an easy landmark to spot from far away for people travelling on foot or horseback. I have visited these hills and have taken extensive pictures. The view from the top is spectacular. The view from a helicopter is even more so.
Looking east towards the Misty Hills. In the foreground are the open prairies where Kioocus’s band likely travelled, then turned into the creek valley running into the Misty Hills. They would have found fresh water, berries and wood, and a variety of game animals as well.
#26. Eech e suk kitche stoup — a little poplar (Below): Mud Buttes, Alberta are located south of Consort, Alberta west of Highway 41 (you can see them when driving along Highway 41). The buttes are a very prominent landmark in the area and, like the Misty Hills, somewhat of an oasis in the prairie. They would have contained wood and water, and most likely outsourced chert pebbles, which were a major type of stone used for making stone tools by prehistoric Indigenous peoples.
Mud Buttes, Alberta. Visible west of Highway 41. Courtesy of Billy Robson
#30. ‘Buffalo nose’: This location refers to a singular, very prominent hill, just north of Veteran, Alberta, called Nose Hill by the Cree and Blackfoot. The hill is located near the westernmost edge of the Neutral Hills. It seems to signify the northernmost boundary of Blackfoot territory during that time period. Not only was the Nose a very prominent landmark, but it was also a major source of pebble chert for stone tool making. There are dozens of archaeological sites on the top of this hill representing many camping episodes by First Nations Peoples.
Nose Hill or the ‘Nose’ of the buffalo. Located just north of Veteran, Alberta, the hills are very prominent from a distance and contain a strong human historic presence (archaeological sites).
#7. E new o kee, Buffalo Lake: This is present-day Buffalo Lake, located just north of Stettler, Alberta, and north of the furthest northern point on the Red Deer River, in today’s Alberta parklands. This is one of the few places on the map that is in the parklands, past the ‘woods edge’ shown on the Kioocus map. According to explorer John Palliser, the lake received its name from, “…its outline of a buffalo hide stretched out…”. However, Kioocus would not have known its shape from the ground. The more likely reason for its name is that the lake and surrounding area were very important for the buffalo-pounding/wintering campsites that occur all along the parkland/prairie transition zone. On the east side of Buffalo Lake, there is an enormous prehistoric site that has been occupied almost continually for 8,000 years (known as Boss Hill). There is also a large bison pound between Buffalo Lake and the Red Deer River.
#8. E new oo suy yis, Buffalo tail Creek: Tail Creek, running out of the south end of Buffalo Lake into the Red Deer River, forms the tail of the buffalo. When we consider numbers 7, 8, and 30 together, we have the buffalo nose (3), body (7) and tail (8) stretching across the prairie-parkland transition – the important wintering grounds of the plains bison. Tail Creek also became an important wintering site for the Hivernant Metis later in the 1870s.
#31. N_ too o kee or Gods Lake: Gods Lake refers to Manitou Lake, near Marsden, Saskatchewan (see the enlargement on the Kioocus map). It is the largest saltwater lake in the Prairie Provinces. There are many known archaeological sites near the lake. There is a high hill just south of the lake, listed as #34 on the Kioocus map (which might already be destroyed by mining activities). Both the Blackfoot and the Cree claimed the waters of the lake had healing powers. There are 27 different types of salts dissolved in the water.
Mantou Lake, Saskatchewan, Canada, as it looks today from a campsite on the west side of the lake. 3
#32. Now tok que a lake (Below): Sounding Lake, Alberta is located south of the Neutral Hills, south of Provost, Alberta. The lake is very prominent in Blackfoot and Cree lore. According to one legend, the lake received its name when an eagle with a snake in its claws flew out of the lake making a loud sound like thunder. There is a high archaeological site density in the area and along the entire Sounding Creek drainage.
Sounding Lake, Alberta. In the background loom the Neutral Hills. Interestingly Kioocus does not map the Neutral Hills, only the ‘Nose’ which is the westerly most point of the hills. Why? Perhaps the ‘Nose’ was the best geographical reference point for the Siksika and others.
Distance and Some Unmarked Places Along the Way
Distance and Travel Time: Below is an aerial photograph of Kioocus’s route. It shows the distance between Chesterfield House to the Buffalo ‘Nose‘, and then to ‘Gods Lake‘ (Manitou Lake). If each circle represents a stop between Chesterfield House and the ‘Nose’, then the band would have travelled the approximately 100-mile distance (165km) in ten days, covering about 10 miles (16.5km) per day. Men, women, children, horses, dogs, and their belongings. No small feat.
An aerial photograph of Kioocus’s journey.
Consort Quarry Site (Below): If you draw a straight line between Chesterfield House and the Nose, Kioocus’s band would have come very close to the Consort Quarry site (shown in the aerial photograph) – possibly one of the most unique, perplexing places in Alberta. There are various theories on how the rather large holes (numbering over 100) were created (meteorite hits, ice wedges, or purposely dug by hand to extract the chert pebbles). Regardless of how they were made, black, flat chert pebbles were abundant and there is evidence that Indigenous peoples visited the area.
The author with Blackfoot elders at the Consort Quarry site. The landscape is pock-marked with large pits which exposed black chert pebbles that were ideal for making stone tools.
Bodo Archaeological Site (Below): if Kioocus’s band travelled down ‘Snake Creek’ (now called Eyehill Creek) they would come to a sand hill formation south of Bodo, Alberta. This was an important place for Indigenous people for thousands of years, as is evident by the vast amount of archaeological remains.
The Bodo archaeological site is located south of Eyehill Creek, south of Bodo, Alberta. The site contains considerable archaeological resources, including a bison pound. It is open for viewing to visitors in the summer.
A Few Concluding Remarks
These are just a few of the places Kioocus shows on his map. They represent what was important to the Siksika in the early 19th century. There are more places of equal interest on the Kioocus map that will have to await a future post. My objective here was not to give these places names or promote any of them for signage. That is not my role. It is up to the Indigenous community to determine what is significant and what to name some of those places. I simply point out that these places were once important, at least to one Siksika man and his followers. I have visited some of these places with Blackfoot elders, to look for themselves and have shown them the Kioocus map as a reference. Even for them, many of these places were no longer in their collective memories or recorded in their oral histories.
Perhaps someday we will see a Kioocus Way along the Highway 41 route. Of course, his name may be too hard to say for some politicians, thereby deeming it unworthy of historic recognition.
Footnotes:
For an overview of other Indigenous maps in Canada check out the article by Judith Hudson Beatie[↩]
