“…whether Indians or white men had now gone by...©”

Authors Note: This is the first part of a two part series of related articles and was originally published by the Journal of the Early Americas, Volume III, Issue I, March/April 2013, p. 6.  A follow-on article called "...we must here mention that there manner of walking differs from that of white men", found [HERE].

In addition, in this increasingly politically correct world, I felt it wise to emphasize the following disclaimer: George Henry Loskiel, writing in 1794, stated that European colonists were called “white people…thus the Europeans and their descendants are called in America, to distinguish them from the Indians”. I will use this terminology throughout the article, in keeping with the conventions of the colonial and post-colonial era.
Several months ago I was reading, “The Escape Of McKean’s Scouting Party In Otsego County”, in Josiah Priest’s Stories of the Revolution; when I was struck by several passages,which went as follows:

“…we discovered the track of a white man¹, which was easily distinguishable from that of an Indian.

…After having squatted a long time, our Captain rose up and beckoned us together, stating that he would go alone to the path and endeavour to discover whether Indians or white men had now gone by and how many there were.

…Accordingly he did, and followed on till he came to a wet spot; he soon returned, saying, they are Indians, and not less than fifty in number

…this very hour fifty-four Indians and tories have called here to tarry all night…” ²

These passages raised two questions for which I had no answers.  Exploring these questions brings to light some interesting facets of colonial North American life, and in particular some details about 18^th century methods of tracking.  Additionally, having the answers to these questions would make Josiah Priest’s account of McKeen’s scouting party all the more intriguing, as we would understand how and why Captain Robert McKeen³ and his rangers came to the conclusions that they did, and also what they actually saw when they studied the first and second set of tracks.

Firstly, why were the tracks of white people easily distinguishable from those of Indians?  And secondly, if the tracks of white people were so easy to distinguish, why did Captain McKeen mistakenly think that the party that had gone by had been made up of only Indians; when in fact it had been made up of both Tories and Indians? 

So why did Captain Robert McKeen and his rangers find that the tracks of white people were so easily distinguishable from those left by Indians?

Trackers can determine many things from the tracks that a person leaves behind.  Tracks can tell a tracker such things as the direction the person was travelling, whether the person was walking, running or carrying a heavy load, and how many people had passed by.  A geography written in 1807, noted that Indian trackers could discover from the tracks left behind, the time since the tracks had been made, the sex, the stature, and the tribal nationality of the person who had made the tracks.⁴

During the 18^th century, the type of tracks that a person left, whether they were made by shoes or were made by a moccasins or shoepacks, would give a tracker clues as to that person’s ethnicity, whether they were white people or Indians, and in some cases their nationality, whether they were of British or French origin. 

Because of the heels, shoes leave tracks that are different from those left by moccasins and shoepacks: shoes leave a two piece track, with a gap between the heel and the rest of the shoe.

Shoe tracks, photographed from personal experimentation

Shoe tracks, drawn from personal experimentation

Moccasins and shoepacks are a type of heel-less foot covering, shoepacks were described as being “…a kind of half shoe and half moccasin…”.^5. Doddridge described shoepacks as being fashioned like a moccasin, except that “To the shoepack a sole was sometimes added…”.⁶

Because both are heel-less, moccasins and shoepacks leave a one piece track that shows the imprint of the whole foot.

Center seam moccasin tracks, photographed from personal experimentation

Center seam moccasin tracks, drawn from personal experimentation

Prior to the 17^th century, European shoes typically did not have heels; shoes with heels became fashionable because of King Louis XIV of France, who reigned during the late 17^th century.  King Louis was a very short man, who was obsessed with fashion and in particular with shoes.  He took to wearing shoes with heels to make himself appear taller.  The well to do and the nobility quickly adopted this royal fashion and the poorer classes followed.  The fashion of wearing shoes with heels spread throughout Europe and her colonial dependencies and was firmly established by the 18^th century, where by the end of the century shoes with heels had become the norm for both men and women.⁷

Because the wearing of heeled shoes was a European fashion, if a tracker found shoe tracks, then it was a strong indication that a white settler had passed by. 

That 18^th century trackers distinguished between the tracks that shoes made and those that moccasins or shoepacks left, when guessing the ethnicity of the person who made the tracks, is clearly shown in the passages below.

On June 10^th 1778, at a settler’s house, near present day Muncy, Pennsylvania three white settlers were either taken captive or killed during an Indian raid.  Colonel Hosterman, when describing the results of the attack, clearly differentiates between the tracks made by moccasins and the tracks made by shoes when he described the scene of the attack. 

“…near the House, saw several mockasen & shoe tracks…”⁸

On May 21^st, 1791 Joseph Cutter was taken captive by Indian raiders near Cincinnati, Ohio.  He was the only white settler taken captive during the raid and it appears from the account, that the Indians were clad in moccasins, while he was wearing shoes.  The trackers in the rescue party were able to spot the differences between the shoe tracks and the accompanying moccasin tracks and noted that the person leaving the shoe tracks had lost a shoe.  Apparently they had already found one of Cutter’s shoes and that is how they knew that he was still with the raiding party, as their captive.

“They soon were able to distinguish Cutter’s tracks, in consequence of his losing one of his shoes; and discovered also, that the Indians were equal to themselves in number.” ⁹

In the account of the 1793 capture of Major Goodale in Ohio, the tracker distinguished between the tracks shoes made and the tracks that moccasins made when determining the fate of Major Goodale.

“…The tracks of two Indians with mocasins on, and those of the Major with shoes on, between the Indians’ tracks, showed the manner in which he was led off into captivity.”¹⁰

The fact that it was the print of the heel that made the track of a shoe clad white settler easily distinguishable, from that of a moccasin clad Indian, for the 18^th century tracker can be seen in the account of the capture of Mrs. Glass.  Samuel Kercheval, writing about the results of an Indian raid in western Virginia on March 27^th, 1789 in which Mrs. Glass was taken captive, describes how the heel mark of her shoe was the characteristic that set the shoe track apart from all the other tracks:

“Mr. Glass could distinguish the track of his wife by the print of the high heel of her shoe.” ¹¹

The shape of the shoe tracks, also gave the 18^th century tracker clues as to the nationality of the person who had left the tracks: the French wore shoes with sharp, narrow toes and based on the Fort Ligonier finds, the British typically wore shoes that had wide, rounded toes¹².  The first person accounts below show how 18^th century trackers used the shape of the track to determine the nationality of the person who had passed by.

Captain John Knox, writing during the Canadian campaigns of 1757 to 1760, implied that the tracks left by shoe wearing Frenchmen, were different from the tracks left by shoe wearing Englishmen.  He also noted that there were a clear differences between these shoe tracks and the tracks left by moccasins.

“…we came upon human footsteps: some had the impression of a Moggosan, or Indian slipper; and others a sharp-toe’d shoe, with a high short heel; these last, as our guide informed us , are what are usually worn by the French regulars, and sometimes by Canadians,…”¹³

William Thompson, writing from Fort Littleton, Pennsylvania, on August 17^th, 1756 also noted the difference between moccasin tracks and shoe tracks.  He noted that the tracks left by shoe wearing Frenchmen were noticeably different from the tracks left by shoe wearing Englishmen.

“When viewing the Place where they Indians were supposed to be, found Tracks, and following them down the Creek the [sic] Increased to a Larger Number, and Several Shoe Tracks with Narrow Toes being among them, there is no doubt both French and Indians are in the Gang.”¹⁴

When Captain McKeen and his Rangers first saw “the track of a white man” ¹⁵ it would appear that what they saw were tracks made by someone wearing shoes.  This is the only way that the tracks would have been easily distinguishable from those made by a moccasin clad Indian.  In fact, Captain McKeen and his Rangers believed that the tracks belonged to a Tory named Regnal, who lived on the east side Otsego Lake near its outlet,¹⁶ and who might have seen them pass by at the beginning of their scout.

Secondly, if the tracks of white people were so easy to distinguish, why did Captain McKeen, after studying the tracks at the wet spot, conclude that the raiders that had passed them on the trail had consisted of only Indians, when later on a witness confirmed that the raiding party had been made up of both Indians and Tories?

When the tracks that had been left behind had been made by moccasins or a shoepacks, then there were fewer clues left behind for the 18^th century tracker, since both Indians and white people wore moccasins and shoepacks.  That 18^th century trackers had difficulty in determining the ethnicity of the person who was wearing moccasins or shoepacks is clearly shown in the following first hand accounts.

Colonel Adam Stephen, writing from Fort Cumberland, on September 27^th, 1755, stated that by wearing something other than shoes, the tracks that his scouts made when on patrol would go unrecognized by French and Indian trackers as being made by white people.

“The Indians discover our Parties by the Track of their Shoes.  It would be a good thing to have Shoe-packs or Moccosons for the Scouts.” ¹⁷

Even Daniel Boone, who was recognized as an expert tracker, had difficulty determining the ethnicity of a moccasin or shoepack clad person.  This is shown in a letter written by Colonel Williams from Boonesborough on January 3^rd, 1776 where he describes the aftermath of an Indian ambush that took place on December 23^rd, 1775 and that had been investigated by Colonel Boone.

“…could make no other discovery than two mockisson tracks, whether Indians’ or not, could not be determined.” ¹⁸

So what did Captain McKeen actually see when he went back to the trail to discover who had gone by and “followed on till he came to a wet spot…”,¹⁹ where he would have found clear, well defined tracks? 

It is obvious that the tracks he saw were not made by shoes, since if they had been shoe tracks; he would have correctly concluded that they had been made by white people.  Instead, what Captain McKeen must have seen in the mud of the trail were tracks that had been made by people who were all wearing moccasins or shoepacks. 

In fact, the party that had passed them by on the trail had been made up of both Indians and Tories, but due to the difficulty in distinguishing between moccasin tracks made by Indians and those made by moccasin clad white people, he mistook their ethnicity, when he guessed that the entire raiding party was made up of Indians. 

So, now we understand more about the practices of 18^th century trackers and their ability to gather information from the tracks left behind.  Also, we now know what Captain McKeen and rangers actually saw when they came upon the first and second set of tracks and why they came to the conclusions that they did: this is what makes Josiah Priest’s account of “The Escape Of McKean’s Scouting Party In Otsego County” all the more intriguing.

Notes

¹ George Henry Loskiel, writing in 1794, stated that European colonists were called “white people…thus the Europeans and their descendants are called in America, to distinguish them from the Indians”.  I will use this terminology throughout the article, in keeping with the conventions of the colonial period.

George Henry Loskiel, History of the Mission of the United Brethern among the Indians in North America, (London, printed by John Stockdale [1794]), 3 Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=BGUFAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA3&dq=%22thus+the+Europeans+and+their+descendants+are+called+%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=oLggT4r6G6rd0QGr5rzvCA&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22thus%20the%20Europeans%20and%20their%20descendants%20are%20called%20%22&f=false (accessed October 13, 2011)

² Josiah Priest, Stories of the Revolution, (Albany: printed by Hoffman and White [1836]), 16. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=8LMCsxk_0vcC&pg=PA16&dq=%22we+discovered+the+track+of+a+white+man%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8TAaT4nhBqLw0gHwqZDeCw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22we%20discovered%20the%20track%20of%20a%20white%20man%22&f=false (accessed July 8, 2010)

³Josiah Priest misspelled the Captain’s name in his account, it is actually spelled McKeen

Franklin B. Hough, editor, Diary of the Siege of Detroit, (Albany: printed by J. Munsell, [1860]), 250-251. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=wMMTAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA251&dq=%22Robert+Mckeen%22+%22cherry+valley%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=5zQaT8v9HqGy0AG8_eXhDQ&ved=0CEUQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=%22Robert%20Mckeen%22%20%22cherry%20valley%22&f=false (accessed July 25, 2011)

⁴ “They perceive the track of a foot on the smoothest grass, and on the hardest substance.  From the track they discover, with amazing certainty, the nation, the sex, the stature of the person who has passed; and the time that has elapsed since the track was formed.”

A Literary Society, A System of Geography, Vol. I, (Trongate; Glasgow; printed by Niven, Naples and Khull [1807]), 202. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=vSYwAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA202&dq=%22they+perceive+the+track+of+a+foot%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1TYaT6OyPKTx0gGTzKDMCw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22they%20perceive%20the%20track%20of%20a%20foot%22&f=false (accessed December 7, 2011)

⁵ James Bradley Finley, Autobiography of Rev James B. Finley: or, Pioneer Life in the West, (Cincinnati, printed by R. P. Thompson, [1853]) 74. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=HCIFAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA74&dq=%22a+kind+of+half+shoe+and+half+moccasin%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iTcaT73mGubr0QHnx7CaCw&ved=0CFkQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22a%20kind%20of%20half%20shoe%20and%20half%20moccasin%22&f=false (accessed June 6, 2011)

⁶ Rev. Dr Joseph Doddridge, Notes on the Settlement and Indian Wars of the Western Parts of Virginia & Pennsylvania, from the year 1763 until the year 1783 inclusive, (Wellsburgh, VA; printed at the office of the Gazette, [1824]) 144 Reprinted in http://www.archive.org/details/notesonsettlemen00dodd  (accessed July 26, 2011)

⁷ Anthony G. Randolph, Jr., The Analysis and Conversation of the Belle Footwear Assemblage, (A Thesis submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A & M University, [December 2003]), 75-77. http://anthropology.tamu.edu/papers/Randolph-MA2003.pdf (accessed August 16, 2011)

⁸ Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives, Volume VI, (Philadelphia, printed by Joseph Severns & Co., [1853]) 590. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=Y3AFAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA590&dq=%22near+the+house,+saw+several+mockasen%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qDkaT56eHNK60AG9hPXNCw&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22near%20the%20house%2C%20saw%20several%20mockasen%22&f=false (accessed April 14, 2011)

⁹ James Hall, The Western Monthly Magazine, Vol I, (Cincinnati, printed by Corey & Fairbank, [1833]) 489-494. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=U1kUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA494&dq=%22They+soon+were+able+to+distinguish+Cutter%22%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=WzsaT-SnBqLV0QH8rPGcCw&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22They%20soon%20were%20able%20to%20distinguish%20Cutter%22%22&f=false (accessed October 12, 2011)

¹⁰ Caleb Atwater, History of the State of Ohio, (Cincinnati, printed by Glezen & Shepard, [1839]) 152. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=W14VAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA152&dq=%22The+tracks+of+two+Indians+with+%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yj8aT8-JNabZ0QGzkZXHCw&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22The%20tracks%20of%20two%20Indians%20with%20%22&f=false (accessed May 20, 2011)

¹¹ Samuel Kercheval, A History of the Valley of Virginia, (Winchester, printed by Samuel H. Davis, [1833]) 314. http://books.google.com/books?id=WjoSAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA314&dq=%22Mr.+Glass+could+distinguish+the+track%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=5UAaT_ydJafj0QHCq5SHBw&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22Mr.%20Glass%20could%20distinguish%20the%20track%22&f=false (accessed October 13, 2010)

¹² Of the 63 shoes discovered at the Fort Ligonier archeological investigation during 1960-1965, where the toe tip could be identified from the sole, 44 shoes or 69% of the discoveries were described as having wide, rounded toes.  Of the remaining 19 shoes, 22% or 14 shoes were described as having wide, square toes. 

Jacob l. Grimm, Archeological Investigation of Fort Ligonier, 1960-1965, (Pittsburgh, PA, Annals of Carnegie Museum, [1970] 105, 135.

¹³ Capt. John Knox, An Historical Journal of the Campaigns in North-America Vol. I, (London, printed by W. Johnston, [1769]) 81. Reprinted in http://www.archive.org/details/historicaljourn_01knox (accessed October 19, 2010)

¹⁴ Samuel Hazard, Pennsylvania Archives, Vol II; (Philadelphia, printed by Joseph Severns & Co., [1853]) 752. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=kBgUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA752&dq=%22When+viewing+the+Place+where+they+Indians%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bEIaT7-MCfSt0AG63ZzpCw&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22When%20viewing%20the%20Place%20where%20they%20Indians%22&f=false (accessed December 9, 2010)

¹⁵ Josiah Priest, Stories of the Revolution, (Albany: printed by Hoffman and White [1836]), 16. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=8LMCsxk_0vcC&pg=PA16&dq=%22we+discovered+the+track+of+a+white+man%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8TAaT4nhBqLw0gHwqZDeCw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22we%20discovered%20the%20track%20of%20a%20white%20man%22&f=false (accessed July 8, 2010)

¹⁶ “…we discovered the track of a white man, which was easily distinguishable from that of an Indian.  Immediately we felt assured that our plan was discovered, and did not doubt but it was by the vigilance of a tory named Regnal, who lived exactly where the house now stands which was built by the noted Bowers, at the foot of Otsego, on the east side.”

Ibid. 16.

¹⁷ Stanislaus Murray Hamilton, editor, Letters to Washington and Accompanying Papers, Vol I 1752-1756, (New York, printed by, Houghton, Mifflin and Company, [1898]), 99. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=UoN6tkdByacC&pg=PA99&dq=%22The+Indians+discover+our+Parties+by+the+Track%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OogbT57pIqLz0gG5k-WmCw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22The%20Indians%20discover%20our%20Parties%20by%20the%20Track%22&f=false (accessed April 11, 2011)

¹⁸ James Hall, Sketches of History, Life, and Manners, in the West, Vol. II, (Philadelphia, printed by Harrison Hall, [1835]), 241-246. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=2ykVAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA246&dq=%22could+make+no+other+discovery+than+two+mockisson%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DIkbT4qTI8PW0QHu9v2ZCw&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22could%20make%20no%20other%20discovery%20than%20two%20mockisson%22&f=false  (accessed May 5, 2011)

¹⁹ Josiah Priest, Stories of the Revolution, (Albany: printed by Hoffman and White [1836]), 16. Reprinted in http://books.google.com/books?id=8LMCsxk_0vcC&pg=PA16&dq=%22we+discovered+the+track+of+a+white+man%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8TAaT4nhBqLw0gHwqZDeCw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22we%20discovered%20the%20track%20of%20a%20white%20man%22&f=false (accessed July 8, 2010)