Experience Seamless Full Ebook Downloads for Every Genre at textbookfull.

com

Beginning Functional JavaScript: Uncover the

Concepts of Functional Programming with EcmaScript
8 2nd Edition Srikanth Machiraju

https://textbookfull.com/product/beginning-functional-
javascript-uncover-the-concepts-of-functional-programming-
with-ecmascript-8-2nd-edition-srikanth-machiraju/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWNLOAD NOW

Explore and download more ebook at https://textbookfull.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

Beginning Functional JavaScript. Functional Programming

with JavaScript using EcmaScript 6 1st Edition Anto
Aravinth
https://textbookfull.com/product/beginning-functional-javascript-
functional-programming-with-javascript-using-ecmascript-6-1st-edition-
anto-aravinth/
textboxfull.com

Beginning Functional JavaScript: Functional Programming

with JavaScript Using EcmaScript 6 1st Edition Anto
Aravinth
https://textbookfull.com/product/beginning-functional-javascript-
functional-programming-with-javascript-using-ecmascript-6-1st-edition-
anto-aravinth-2/
textboxfull.com

Functional Programming in JavaScript How to improve your

JavaScript programs using functional techniques First
Edition Luis Atencio
https://textbookfull.com/product/functional-programming-in-javascript-
how-to-improve-your-javascript-programs-using-functional-techniques-
first-edition-luis-atencio/
textboxfull.com

Functional Programming in JavaScript How to improve your

JavaScript programs using functional techniques 1 edition
Edition Luis Atencio
https://textbookfull.com/product/functional-programming-in-javascript-
how-to-improve-your-javascript-programs-using-functional-
techniques-1-edition-edition-luis-atencio/
textboxfull.com
Functional and Concurrent Programming Core Concepts and
Features 1st Edition Charpentier

https://textbookfull.com/product/functional-and-concurrent-
programming-core-concepts-and-features-1st-edition-charpentier/

textboxfull.com

Mathematica Functional and procedural programming 2nd

Edition V. Aladjev

https://textbookfull.com/product/mathematica-functional-and-
procedural-programming-2nd-edition-v-aladjev/

textboxfull.com

Functional Python Programming Discover the power of

functional programming generator functions lazy evaluation
the built in itertools library and monads 2nd Edition
Steven F. Lott
https://textbookfull.com/product/functional-python-programming-
discover-the-power-of-functional-programming-generator-functions-lazy-
evaluation-the-built-in-itertools-library-and-monads-2nd-edition-
steven-f-lott/
textboxfull.com

Get Programming with JavaScript Next New features of

ECMAScript 2015 2016 and beyond 1st Edition Jd Isaacks

https://textbookfull.com/product/get-programming-with-javascript-next-
new-features-of-ecmascript-2015-2016-and-beyond-1st-edition-jd-
isaacks/
textboxfull.com

Web Applications with Elm: Functional Programming for the

Web 1st Edition Wolfgang Loder

https://textbookfull.com/product/web-applications-with-elm-functional-
programming-for-the-web-1st-edition-wolfgang-loder/

textboxfull.com
Contents
1. Cover
2. Front Matter
3. 1. Functional Programming in Simple Terms
4. 2. Fundamentals of JavaScript Functions
5. 3. Higher Order Functions
6. 4. Closures and Higher Order Functions
7. 5. Being Functional on Arrays
8. 6. Currying and Partial Application
9. 7. Composition and Pipelines
10. 8. Fun with Functors
11. 9. Monads in Depth
12. 10. Pause, Resume, and Async with Generators
13. 11. Building a React-Like Library
14. 12. Testing and Closing Thoughts
15. Back Matter

Landmarks
1. Cover
2. Table of Contents
3. Body Matter
Anto Aravinth and Srikanth Machiraju

Beginning Functional JavaScript

Uncover the Concepts of Functional
Programming with EcmaScript 8
2nd ed.
Anto Aravinth
Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Srikanth Machiraju
Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India

Any source code or other supplementary material

referenced by the author in this book is available
to readers on GitHub via the book’s product page,
located at www.apress.com/ . For more detailed
information, please visit
http://www.apress.com/source-code .
ISBN 978-1-4842-4086-1 e-ISBN 978-1-4842-4087-8
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-4087-8

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018964615

© Anto Aravinth, Srikanth Machiraju 2018

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the

Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned,
specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms
or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software,
or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter
developed.
Trademarked names, logos, and images may appear in this book.
Rather than use a trademark symbol with every occurrence of a
trademarked name, logo, or image we use the names, log os, and
images only in an editorial fashion and to the benefit of the
trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the
trademark. The use in this publication of trade names,
trademarks, service marks, and similar terms, even if they are not
identified as such, is not to be taken as an expression of opinion
as to whether or not they are subject to proprietary rights.

While the advice and information in this book are believed to be

true and accurate at the date of publication, neither the authors
nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal
responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. The
publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein.

Distributed to the book trade worldwide by Springer

Science+Business Media New York, 233 Spring Street, 6th Floor,
New York, NY 10013. Phone 1-800-SPRINGER, fax (201) 348-
4505, e-mail [email protected], or visit
www.springeronline.com. Apress Media, LLC is a California LLC
and the sole member (owner) is Springer Science + Business
Media Finance Inc (SSBM Finance Inc). SSBM Finance Inc is a
Delaware corporation.
Introduction

The second edition of a book is always special.

When I wrote the first edition, I had about two
years of IT experience. The book received positive
as well as negative responses. I always wanted to
work on the negative responses to make the
content better and make the book worth the price.
In the meantime, JavaScript evolved a great deal.
Many ground-breaking changes were added into
the language. The Web is full of JavaScript, and
imagine a world without the Web. Hard, right?

This second edition is a much improved

version that teaches the fundamentals of
functional programming in JavaScript. We have
added much new content in this second edition;
for example, we will be building a library for
building web applications using functional
concepts, and we have added sections on testing as
well. We have rewritten the book to match the
latest ES8 syntax with many samples of async,
await patterns, and a lot more!

We assure you that you will gain a lot of

knowledge from this book and at the same time
you will have fun while running the examples.
Start reading.
Acknowledgments

I remember the first code that I wrote for Juspay

Systems in my first job as an intern. Coding was
fun for me; at times it is challenging, too. Now with
six years of software experience, I want to make
sure I pass on all the knowledge I have to the
community. I love teaching people. I love to share
my thoughts with the community to get feedback.
That’s exactly the reason I’m writing a second
edition of this book.

I have to acknowledge few people who have

been standing right next to me in all phases of my
life: my late father Belgin Rayen, mother Susila,
Kishore (brother-in-law), Ramya (sibling), and
Joshuwa (my new little nephew). They have been
supportive and pushed me harder to achieve my
goals. I want to say thanks to Divya and the
technical reviewer of this book, as they did a
wonderful job. Luckily, I have a wonderful
coauthor in Srikanth, who did an amazing job as
well.

Finally, I want to give special thanks to Bianaca,

Deepak, Vishal, Arun, Vishwapriya, and Shabala,
who have added joy to my life.

Please reach out to me at

[email protected] with any
feedback.

—Anto Aravinth

I would like to thank Apress for providing me a

second opportunity to author. I would also like to
thank my family, especially my dear wife Sonia
Madan and my four-month-old son Reyansh for
supporting me throughout this stint. I’m always
reachable at
[email protected] for any
feedback or questions.

—Srikanth Machiraju
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1: Functional Programming in Simple Terms
What Is Functional Programming? Why Does It Matter?
Referential Transparency
Imperative, Declarative, Abstraction
Functional Programming Benefits
Pure Functions
Pure Functions Lead to Testable Code
Reasonable Code
Parallel Code
Cachable
Pipelines and Composable
A Pure Function Is a Mathematical Function
What We Are Going to Build
Is JavaScript a Functional Programming Language?
Summary
Chapter 2: Fundamentals of JavaScript Functions
ECMAScript: A Bit of History
Creating and Executing Functions
First Function
Strict Mode
Return Statement Is Optional
Multiple Statement Functions
Function Arguments
ES5 Functions Are Valid in ES6 and Above
 Setting Up Our Project
Initial Setup
Our First Functional Approach to the Loop Problem
Gist on Exports
Gist on Imports
Running the Code Using Babel-Node
Creating Script in Npm
Running the Source Code from Git
Summary
Chapter 3: Higher Order Functions
Understanding Data
Understanding JavaScript Data Types
Storing a Function
Passing a Function
Returning a Function
Abstraction and Higher Order Functions
Abstraction Definitions
Abstraction via Higher Order Functions
Higher Order Functions in the Real World
every Function
some Function
sort Function
Summary
Chapter 4: Closures and Higher Order Functions
Understanding Closures
What Are Closures?
 Remembering Where It Is Born
Revisiting sortBy Function
Higher Order Functions in the Real World (Continued)
tap Function
unary Function
once Function
memoize Function
assign function
Summary
Chapter 5: Being Functional on Arrays
Working Functionally on Arrays
map
filter
Chaining Operations
concatAll
Reducing Function
reduce Function
Zipping Arrays
zip Function
Summary
Chapter 6: Currying and Partial Application
A Few Notes on Terminology
Unary Function
Binary Function
Variadic Functions
Currying
 Currying Use Cases
A logger Function: Using Currying
Revisit Curry
Back to logger Function
Currying in Action
Finding a Number in Array Contents
Squaring an Array
Data Flow
Partial Application
Implementing partial Function
Currying vs. Partial Application
Summary
Chapter 7: Composition and Pipelines
Composition in General Terms
Unix Philosophy
Functional Composition
Revisiting map,filter
compose Function
Playing with the compose Function
curry and partial to the Rescue
compose Many Functions
Pipelines and Sequence
Implementing pipe
Odds on Composition
The Pipeline Operator
Debugging Using the tap Function
 Summary
Chapter 8: Fun with Functors
What Is a Functor?
Functor Is a Container
Implementing map
MayBe
Implementing MayBe
Simple Use Cases
Real-World Use Cases
Either Functor
Implementing Either
Reddit Example Either Version
Word of Caution: Pointed Functor
Summary
Chapter 9: Monads in Depth
Getting Reddit Comments for Our Search Query
The Problem
Implementation of the First Step
Merging Reddit Calls
Problem of Nested/Many maps
Solving the Problem via join
join Implementation
chain Implementation
Summary
Chapter 10: Pause, Resume, and Async with Generators
Async Code and Its Problem
 Callback Hell
Generators 101
Creating Generators
Caveats of Generators
yield Keyword
done Property of Generator
Passing Data to Generators
Using Generators to Handle Async Calls
Generators for Async: A Simple Case
Generators for Async: A Real-World Case
Async Functions in ECMAScript 2017
Promise
Await
Async
Chaining Callbacks
Error Handling in Async Calls
Async Functions Transpiled to Generators
Summary
Chapter 11: Building a React-Like Library
Immutability
Building a Simple Redux Library
Building a Framework Like HyperApp
Virtual DOM
JSX
JS Fiddle
CreateActions
 Render
Patch
Update
Merge
Remove
Summary
Chapter 12: Testing and Closing Thoughts
Introduction
Types of Testing
BDD and TDD
JavaScript Test Frameworks
Testing Using Mocha
Mocking Using Sinon
Testing with Jasmine
Code Coverage
Linting
Unit Testing Library Code
Closing Thoughts
Summary
Index
ABOUT THE AUTHORS AND ABOUT THE
TECHNICAL REVIEWER

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Anto Aravinth

has been in the software

industry for more than six
years. He has developed
many systems that are
written in the latest
technologies. Anto has
knowledge of the
fundamentals of JavaScript
and how it works and has
trained many people. Anto is also does OSS in his
free time and loves to play table tennis.

Srikanth Machiraju

has over ten years of experience as a developer,

architect, technical trainer, and community
speaker. He is currently working as Senior
Consultant with Microsoft Hyderabad, leading a
team of 100 developers and quality analysts
developing an advanced
cloud-based platform for a
tech giant in the oil
industry. With an aim to be
an enterprise architect who
can design hyperscale
modern applications with
intelligence, he constantly
learns and shares modern
application development
tactics using cutting-edge
platforms and
technologies. Prior to Microsoft, he worked with
BrainScale as Corporate Trainer and Senior
Technical Analyst on application design,
development, and migrations using Azure. He is a
tech-savvy developer who is passionate about
embracing new technologies and sharing his
learning via blog and community engagements. He
has also authored the “Learning Windows Server
Containers” and “Developing Bots with Microsoft
Bot Framework,” blogs at
https://vishwanathsrikanth.wordpress
.com . He runs his own YouTube channel called
“Tech Talk with Sriks” and is active on LinkedIn at
https://www.linkedin.com/in/vishsrik
/.
ABOUT THE TECHNICAL REVIEWER
Sakib Shaikh

has been working as a Tech

Lead with a large scientific
publisher, with more than
ten years of experience as a
full stack developer with
JavaScript technologies on
front-end and back-end
systems. He has been
reviewing technical books
and articles for the past
few years and contributes
to the developer community as a trainer, blogger,
and mentor.
© Anto Aravinth, Srikanth Machiraju 2018
Anto Aravinth and Srikanth Machiraju, Beginning Functional JavaScript
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-4087-8_1

1. Functional Programming in
Simple Terms
Anto Aravinth1 and Srikanth Machiraju2
(1) Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
(2) Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India

The first rule of functions is that they should

be small. The second rule of functions is that
they should be smaller than that.
—Robert C. Martin
Welcome to the functional programming world,
a world that has only functions, living happily
without any outside world dependencies, without
states, and without mutations—forever. Functional
programming is a buzzword these days. You might
have heard about this term within your team or in
a local group meeting. If you’re already aware of
what that means, great. For those who don’t know
the term, don’t worry. This chapter is designed to
introduce you to functional terms in simple
English.

We are going to begin this chapter by asking a

simple question: What is a function in
mathematics? Later, we are going to create a
function in JavaScript with a simple example using
our function definition. The chapter ends by
explaining the benefits that functional
programming provides to developers.

What Is Functional Programming? Why

Does It Matter?
Before we begin to explore what functional
programming means, we have to answer another
question: What is a function in mathematics? A
function in mathematics can be written like this:
f (X) = Y
The statement can be read as “A function f, which takes X as its
argument, and returns the output Y.” X and Y can be any number,
for instance. That’s a very simple definition. There are key
takeaways in the definition, though:
A function must always take an argument.

A function must always return a value.

A function should act only on its receiving arguments (i.e., X),

not the outside world.
 For a given X, there will be only one Y.
You might be wondering why we presented the
definition of function in mathematics rather than
in JavaScript. Did you? That’s a great question. The
answer is pretty simple: Functional programming
techniques are heavily based on mathematical
functions and their ideas. Hold your breath,
though; we are not going to teach you functional
programming in mathematics, but rather use
JavaScript. Throughout the book, however, we will
be seeing the ideas of mathematical functions and
how they are used to help understand functional
programming.
With that definition in place, we are going to see the examples
of functions in JavaScript. Imagine we have to write a function
that does tax calculations. How are you going to do this in
JavaScript? We can implement such a function as shown in Listing
1-1.

var percentValue = 5;
var calculateTax = (value) => { return
value/100 * (100 + percentValue) }

Listing 1-1 Calculate Tax Function

The calculateTax function does exactly

what we want to do. You can call this function with
the value, which will return the calculated tax
value in the console. It looks neat, doesn’t it? Let’s
pause for a moment and analyze this function with
respect to our mathematical definition. One of the
key points of our mathematical function term is
that the function logic shouldn’t depend on the
outside world. In our calculateTax function,
we have made the function depend on the global
variable percentValue. Thus this function we
have created can’t be called as a real function in a
mathematical sense. Let’s fix that.
The fix is very straightforward: We have to just move the
percentValue as our function argument, as shown in Listing 1-
2.

var calculateTax = (value, percentValue) => {

return value/100 * (100 + percentValue) }

Rewritten calculateTax
Listing 1-2

Function

Now our calculateTax function can be

called as a real function. What have we gained,
though? We have just eliminated global variable
access inside our calculateTax function.
Removing global variable access inside a function
makes it easy for testing. (We will talk about the
functional programming benefits later in this
chapter.)
Now we have shown the relationship between
the math function and our JavaScript function.
With this simple exercise, we can define functional
programming in simple technical terms.
Functional programming is a paradigm in which
we will be creating functions that are going to
work out their logic by depending only on their
input. This ensures that a function, when called
multiple times, is going to return the same result.
The function also won’t change any data in the
outside world, leading to a cachable and testable
code base.

FUNCTIONS VS. METHODS IN JAVASCRIPT

We have talked about the word function a lot in

this text. Before we move on, we want to make
sure you understand the difference between
functions and methods in JavaScript.

Simply put, a function is a piece of code that

can be called by its name. It can be used to pass
arguments that it can operate on and return
values optionally.

A method is a piece of code that must be

called by its name that is associated with an
object.

Listing 1-3 and Listing 1-4 provide quick examples of a

function and a method.
 var simple = (a) => {return a} // A simple
function
simple(5) //called by its name

Listing 1-3 A Simple Function

var obj = {simple : (a) => {return a} }
obj.simple(5) //called by its name along
with its associated object

Listing 1-4 A Simple Method

There are two more important characteristics of

functional programming that are missing in the
definition. We discuss them in detail in the
upcoming sections before we dive into the benefits
of functional programming.

Referential Transparency
With our definition of function, we have made a statement that all
the functions are going to return the same value for the same
input. This property of a function is called a referential
transparency . A simple example is shown in Listing 1-5.

var identity = (i) => { return i }

Referential Transparency
Listing 1-5

Example
In Listing 1-5, we have defined a simple function called
identity. This function is going to return whatever you’re
passing as its input; that is, if you’re passing 5, it’s going to return
the value 5 (i.e., the function just acts as a mirror or identity).
Note that our function operates only on the incoming argument i,
and there is no global reference inside our function (remember in
Listing 1-2, we removed percentValue from global access and
made it an incoming argument). This function satisfies the
conditions of a referential transparency. Now imagine this
function is used between other function calls like this:

sum(4,5) + identity(1)
With our referential transparency definition, we can convert
that statement into this:

sum(4,5) + 1

Now this process is called a substitution model

as you can directly substitute the result of the
function as is (mainly because the function doesn’t
depend on other global variables for its logic) with
its value. This leads to parallel code and caching.
Imagine that with this model, you can easily run
the given function with multiple threads without
even the need to synchronize. Why? The reason for
synchronizing comes from the fact that threads
shouldn’t act on global data when running parallel.
Functions that obey referential transparency are
going to depend only on inputs from their
argument; hence threads are free to run without
any locking mechanism.
Because the function is going to return the
same value for the given input, we can, in fact
cache it. For example, imagine there is a function
called factorial, which calculates the factorial
of the given number. Factorial takes the input
as its argument for which the factorial needs to be
calculated. We know the factorial of 5 is going to
be 120. What if the user calls the factorial of 5 a
second time? If the factorial function obeys
referential transparency, we know that the result
is going to be 120 as before (and it only depends
on the input argument). With this characteristic in
mind, we can cache the values of our factorial
function. Thus if factorial is called for a second
time with the input as 5, we can return the cached
value instead of calculating it once again.
Here you can see how a simple idea helps in
parallel code and cachable code. We will be writing
a function in our library for caching the function
results later in the chapter.

REFERENTIAL TRANSPARENCY IS A
PHILOSOPHY

Referential transparency is a term that came

from analytic philosophy (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anal
ytical_philosophy ). This branch of
philosophy deals with natural language
semantics and its meanings. Here the word
referential or referent means the thing to which
the expression refers. A context in a sentence is
referentially transparent if replacing a term in
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
Josephs, where he had much influence over the Indians. In the
Huron revolt (1748), his bravery was especially commended.
During the French and Indian War he led his Indian allies on
various raids—one to Carolina in 1756, where he received a slight
wound; and again in New York against the German Flats (1757).
Bellestre was present at Niagara about the time it was attacked;
but Pouchot detailed him to retire with the detachments from
forts Presqu’ Isle and Machault to Detroit, and he was
commanding at this post when summoned to surrender to Major
Rogers. After the capitulation of Detroit, he returned to Canada,
and became a partisan of the British power, captured St. John,
and defended Chambly against the Americans in 1775-76. He was
made a member of the first legislative council of the province.—
Ed.
[75] The encampment for the night of November 15 seems to
have been made between two small creeks that flow into the lake
near together, in Dover Township, Cuyahoga County.—Ed.
[76] Vermillion Creek or River retains its name. The river where
the expedition encamped (“Notowacy Thepy”) was probably that
now known as the Huron River, in Erie County, Ohio. Rogers’s
Journal mentions these rivers without giving names.—Ed.
[77] Rogers names the lake here mentioned, as Sandusky. It is
difficult to tell from this description whether or not the flotilla
entered the inner Sandusky Bay. Probably the encampment for
the nineteenth was on the site of the present city of Sandusky, at
Mill or Pipe Creek.—Ed.
[78] Médard Gamelin was the son of a French surgeon, and
nephew of that Sieur de la Jémerais who accompanied La
Vérendrye on his Western explorations, and died (1735) in the
wilderness west of Lake Superior. Gamelin was born two years
before this event. Emigrating to Detroit, he employed himself in
raising and training a militia company composed of the habitants,
which he led to the relief of Niagara (1759). There he was
captured and kept a prisoner until released by the orders of
General Amherst in order to accompany Rogers’s expedition, and
pacify the settlers at Detroit. He took the oath of allegiance and
remained in that city after its capitulation to the British, dying
there about 1778.—Ed.
[79] The present Cranberry Creek is east of Sandusky. The
creek which Croghan mentions was some small tributary of
Portage River (the Carrying-place), or directly beyond it. Rogers
says they went “to the mouth of a river in breadth 300 feet,”
which is evidently Portage River.—Ed.
[80] Rogers’s Journal (p. 191), gives his own speech. He
indicates in his account that the Indians were preparing to resist
the English advance; but Croghan does not mention any such
suspicions.
General Jeffrey Amherst was an English soldier of much
distinction, who after serving a campaign in Flanders and
Germany, was commissioned by Pitt to take charge of the military
operations in America (1758). His first success was the capture of
Louisburg, followed by the campaign of 1759, when he reduced
Ticonderoga and Crown Point, and moved upon Montreal, which
capitulated the following year. He was immediately made
governor-general of the British in North America, received the
thanks of Parliament, and was presented with the order of the
Bath. It was in obedience to his orders that Rogers undertook this
westward expedition. Amherst’s later career was a succession of
honors, emoluments, and high appointments in the British army.
He opposed the cause of the colonies during the American
Revolution. Late in life he was field-marshal of the British army,
dying (1797) at his estate in Kent, as Baron Amherst of Montreal.
—Ed.
[81] Cedar Point is at the southeastern entrance of Maumee
Bay. Rogers’s Journal for November 23 says that an Ottawa
sachem came into their camp; possibly this was Pontiac.—Ed.
[82] From the distances given in Rogers’s Journal it would
appear that the expedition encamped the twenty-fifth and
twenty-sixth in the entrance of Swan Creek, Monroe County,
Michigan, a short distance north of Stony Point.—Ed.
[83] Pierre François Rigault, Chevalier de Cavagnal, Marquis de
Vaudreuil, was Canadian born, and entered the military service at
an early age. In 1728 he was in the present Wisconsin on an
expedition against the Fox Indians; some years later, he was
governor at Trois Rivières, and in 1743 was sent to command in
Louisiana, where he remained nine years, until appointed
governor of New France, just before the outbreak of the French
and Indian War. As the last French governor of Canada, his term
of service was embittered by quarrels with the French generals,
and disasters to French arms. After his capitulation at Montreal,
he went to France, only to be arrested, thrown into the Bastile,
and tried for malfeasance in office. He succeeded in securing an
acquittal (1763); but, broken by disappointments and enmities,
died the following year.—Ed.
[84] The Potawotami Indians are an Algonquian tribe, being
first encountered by French explorers on the borders of Green
Bay; but later, they had villages at Detroit, St. Josephs River
(southeast Michigan), and Milwaukee. They were devoted to the
French interests, and easily attracted to the vicinity of the French
posts. For the Wyandots (Hurons) and Ottawas, see ante.—Ed.
[85] The French fort of St. Josephs was established early in the
eighteenth century, on the right bank of the river of that name,
about a mile from the present city of Niles, Michigan. Its
commandant was the “farmer” of the post—that is, he was
entitled to what profits he could win from the Indian trade, and
paid his own expenses. After the British took possession of this
fort, it was garrisoned by a small detachment of the Royal
Americans. When Pontiac’s War broke out, but fourteen soldiers
were at the place, with Ensign Schlosser in command. The fort
was captured and eleven of the garrison killed, the rest being
carried prisoners to Detroit. During the Revolution, Fort St.
Josephs was three times taken from the British—twice by parties
from the Illinois led by French traders (in 1777, and again in
1778); and in 1781, a Spanish expedition set out from St. Louis to
capture the stronghold, and take possession of this region for
Spain. See Mason, Chapters from Illinois History (Chicago, 1901).
The United States failed to garrison St. Josephs when the British
forts were surrendered in 1796, and built instead (1804) Fort
Dearborn at Chicago.
Ouiatonon (Waweoughtannes) was situated at the head of
navigation on the Wabash River, not far from the present city of
Lafayette, Indiana. The French founded this post about 1719,
among a tribe of the same name (called Weas by the English);
and kept an officer stationed there until its surrender to the
English party sent out by Rogers (1761). The small garrison under
command of Lieutenant Jenkins was captured at the outbreak of
Pontiac’s conspiracy; but through the intervention of French
traders their lives were spared, while the fort was destroyed by
burning, and never rebuilt. See Craig, “Ouiatonon,” Indiana
Historical Society Collections (Indianapolis, 1886), v, ii. See also
Croghan’s description when he passed here five years later, post.
—Ed.
 [86] The speculation and corruption of the French officers at
the Western posts, was notorious. Bellestre was not free from
suspicions of taking advantage of his official position to exploit
the Indian trade. See Farmer, History of Detroit and Michigan
(Detroit, 1884), p. 766.—Ed.
[87] The French fort among the Miamis (English, Twigtwees)
was situated on the Maumee River, near the present site of Fort
Wayne. The date of its founding is in doubt; but the elder
Vincennes was there in 1704, and soon after this frequent
mention is made of its commandants. During the revolt of the
French Indians (1748), the fort was partially burned. When
Céloron passed, the succeeding year, he described it as in a bad
condition, and located on an unhealthful site. About this time, the
Miamis removed to the Great Miami River, and permitted the
English to build a fortified trading house at Pickawillany. But an
expedition sent out from Detroit chastised these recalcitrants, and
brought them back to their former abode, about Fort Miami—
which latter is described (1757) as protected with palisades, on
the right bank of the river. The garrison of the Rangers sent out
by Rogers from Detroit to secure this post, was later replaced by
a small detachment of the Royal Americans, under command of
Lieutenant Robert Holmes, who notified Gladwin of Pontiac’s
conspiracy, but nevertheless himself fell a victim thereto. See
Morris’s Journal, post. The fort destroyed at this time was not
rebuilt. Croghan (1765) speaks of it as ruinous. In the Indian
wars of the Northwest, Wayne, perceiving its strategic
importance, built at this site the fort named in his honor (1794),
whence arose the present city.—Ed.
[88] The expedition of Major Rogers to relieve the French at
Mackinac, failed because of the lateness of the season, and the
consequent ice in Lake Huron. Rogers returned to Detroit
December 21, and two days later left for Pittsburg, where he
arrived January 23, 1761, after a land march of just one month.
The fort at Mackinac was delivered over to an English detachment
under command of Captain Balfour of the Royal Americans,
September 28, 1761.—Ed.
[89] The place here mentioned was a Wyandot town shown on
Hutchins’s map (1778). Probably this was the village of the chief
Nicholas, founded in 1747 during his revolt from the French. See
Weiser’s Journal, ante.—Ed.
 [90] Croghan returned to Pittsburg by the “great trail,” a
famous Indian thoroughfare leading from the Forks of the Ohio to
Detroit. For a description of this route, see Hulbert, Indian
Thoroughfares (Cleveland, 1902), p. 107; and in more detail his
article in Ohio Archæological and Historical Society Publications
(Columbus, 1899), viii, p. 276.
Mohican John’s village was on White Woman’s Creek, near the
site of Reedsburg, Ohio. Beaver’s Town was at the junction of the
Tuscarawas and the Big Sandy, the antecedent of the present
Bolivar; for the town at the mouth of Big Beaver Creek, see
Weiser’s Journal, ante.—Ed.
[91] The manuscript of the journal that we here reprint came
into the possession of George William Featherstonhaugh, a noted
English geologist who came to the United States in the early
nineteenth century and edited a geological magazine in
Philadelphia. He first published the document therein (The
Monthly Journal of American Geology), in the number for
December, 1831. It appeared again in a pamphlet, published at
Burlington, N. J. (no date); and Mann Butler thought it of
sufficient consequence to be introduced into the appendix to his
History of Kentucky (Cincinnati and Louisville, 2nd ed., 1836).
Another version of this journey (which we may call the official
version), also written by Croghan, was sent by Sir William
Johnson to the lords of trade, and is published in New York
Colonial Documents, vii, pp. 779-788. Hildreth published a variant
of the second (official) version “from an original MS. among
Colonel Morgan’s papers,” in his Pioneer History of the Ohio Valley
(Cincinnati, 1848). The two versions supplement each other. The
first was evidently written for some persons interested in lands in
the Western country—their fertility, products, and general
aspects; therefore Croghan herein confines himself to general
topographical description, and omits his journey towards the
Illinois, his meeting with Pontiac, and all Indian negotiations. The
official report, on the other hand, abbreviates greatly the account
of the journey and the appearance of the country, and concerns
itself with Indian affairs and historical events. We have in the
present publication combined the two journals, indicating in
footnotes the important variations; but the bulk of the narrative is
a reprint of the Featherstonhaugh-Butler version.
With regard to the circumstances under which the official
journal was transcribed, Johnson makes the following explanation
in his letter to the board of trade (New York Colonial Documents,
vii, p. 775): “I have selected the principal parts [of this journal]
which I now inclose to your Lordships, the whole of his Journal is
long and not yet collected because after he was made Prisoner, &
lost his Baggage &ca. he was necessitated to write it on Scraps of
Paper procured with difficulty at Post Vincent, and that in a
disguised Character to prevent its being understood by the French
in case through any disaster he might be again plundered.”
The importance of this journal for the study of Western history
has frequently been noted. Parkman used it extensively in his
Conspiracy of Pontiac. Winsor in his Critical and Narrative History
of America, v, p. 704, note, first pointed out in some detail the
differences between the two versions. He errs, however, in
confusing the letters Croghan wrote from Vincennes and
Ouiatonon. Many secondary authorities also wrongly aver that
Croghan on this journey went as far as Fort Chartres.—Ed.
[92] Croghan arrived at Fort Pitt, February 28, 1765, and from
then until his departure was constantly occupied with Indian
transactions in preparation for his journey. See Pennsylvania
Colonial Records, ix, pp. 250-264; also Withers’s Early History of
Western Pennsylvania, app., pp. 166-179.—Ed.
[93] Little Beaver Creek (near the western border of
Pennsylvania) and Yellow Creek (in Ohio) were much frequented
by Indians. On the former, Half King had a hunting cabin. Logan,
the noted Mingo chief, lived at the mouth of the latter. Opposite,
upon the Virginia shore, occurred the massacre of Logan’s family
(April 30, 1774), which was one of the opening events of Lord
Dunmore’s War. See Withers’s Chronicles of Border Warfare
(Thwaites’s ed., Cincinnati, 1895), p. 150, notes.—Ed.
[94] The village here described was Mingo Town on Mingo
bottom, situated at the present Mingo Junction, Ohio. It is not to
be confused with the Mingo bottom opposite the mouth of Yellow
Creek. The former town was prominent as a rendezvous for
border war-parties in the Revolutionary period. From this point,
started the rabble that massacred the Moravian Indians in 1782.
Colonel Crawford set out from here, in May of the same year, on
his ill-fated expedition against the Sandusky Indians. See
Withers’s Chronicles, chap. 13.
Possibly the chief who joined Croghan at this point was Logan,
since the former had known him in his earlier home on the
Susquehanna, near Sunbury.—Ed.
 [95] Buffalo Creek is in Brooke County, West Virginia, with the
town of Wellsburg located at its mouth. The first settlers arrived
about 1769. Fat Meat Creek is not identified; from the distances
given, it might be Big Grave Creek, in Marshall County, West
Virginia, or Pipe Creek, nearly opposite, in Belmont County, Ohio.
—Ed.
[96] The “Long Reach” lies between Fishing Creek and the
Muskingum, sixteen and a half miles in a nearly straight line to
the southwest.—Ed.
[97] The French called the Muskingum Yanangué-kouan—the
river of the Tobacco (Petun-Huron) Indians. Céloron (1749) left at
the mouth of this river, one of his plates, which was found in
1798, and is now in possession of the American Antiquarian
Society, at Worcester, Massachusetts. Croghan had frequently
been on the Muskingum, where as early as 1750, he had a
trading house. The inhabitants at that time appear to have been
Wyandots; but after the French and Indian War the Delawares
retreated thither, and built their towns on the upper Muskingum.
Later, the Moravian missionaries removed their converts thither,
and erected upon the banks of this river their towns, Salem,
Schönbrunn, and Gnadenhütten. In 1785, Fort Harmar was
placed at its mouth; and thither, three years later, came the
famous colony of New England Revolutionary soldiers, under the
leadership of Rufus Putnam, which founded Marietta.—Ed.
[98] The Little Kanawha was the terminus of the exploring
expedition of George Rogers Clark and Jones in 1772. They
reported unfavorably in regard to the lands; but settlers soon
began to occupy them, and they were a part of the grant given to
Trent, Croghan, and others at the treaty of Fort Stanwix (1768) as
a reparation for their losses in the previous wars. About the time
of Croghan’s visit, Captain Bull, a well-known Delaware Indian of
New York, removed to the Little Kanawha, and in 1772 his village,
Bulltown, was the scene of a revolting massacre of friendly
Indians by brutal white borderers.—Ed.
[99] Hockhocking is the local Indian name for a bottle-shaped
gourd, to which they likened the course of this river. Its chief
historical event is connected with Lord Dunmore’s War. Nine years
after this voyage of Croghan, Dunmore descended the Ohio with
his flotilla, and disembarking at the river with his army of regulars
and frontiersmen—Clark, Cresap, Kenton, and Girty among the
number—marched overland to the Scioto, leaving Fort Gower
here to guard his rear. Signs of the earthwork of this fortification
are still visible. At this place, on the return journey, the Virginia
officers of the army drew up resolutions of sympathy with the
Continental Congress then in session at Philadelphia.—Ed.
[100] The “Big Bend” of the river is that now known as
Pomeroy’s Bend, from the Ohio town at its upper point. Alum Hill
was probably West Columbia, Mason County, West Virginia. See
Lewis, History of West Virginia (Philadelphia, 1889), p. 109.—Ed.
[101] The Kanawha takes its name from a tribe of Indians who
formerly lived in its valley, but they were destroyed by the
Iroquois in the early eighteenth century. Céloron called it the
Chinondaista, and at its mouth buried a plate which is now in the
museum of the Virginia Historical Society, at Richmond. Gist
surveyed here for the Ohio Company in 1752; later, Washington
owned ten thousand acres in the vicinity, and visited the spot in
1774. That same year, the battle of Point Pleasant was fought at
the mouth of the Kanawha by Colonel Andrew Lewis’s division of
Lord Dunmore’s army; and the succeeding year, Fort Randolph
was built to protect the frontiers. Daniel Boone retired hither from
Kentucky, and lived in this neighborhood four years (1791-95),
before migrating to Missouri.—Ed.
[102] The word Scioto probably signified “deer,” although it is
said by David Jones to mean “hairy” river, from the multitude of
deer’s hairs which floated down the stream. The valley of the
Scioto is famous in Western annals. During the second half of the
eighteenth century it was the chief seat of the Shawnees whose
lower, or “Shannoah,” town has been frequently mentioned in the
Indian transactions which we have printed. The Shawnees, on
their withdrawal up the valley, built the Chillicothe towns, where
Pontiac’s conspiracy was largely fomented. These were the
starting point of many raids against the Kentucky and West
Virginia settlements. From these villages Mrs. Ingles and Mrs.
Dennis made their celebrated escapes in 1755 and 1763
respectively. During all the long series of wars closing with
Wayne’s victory in 1794, the intractable Shawnees were among
the most dreaded of the Indian enemy.—Ed.
[103] The result of this message in regard to the French
traders, is thus given in the official version of the journal:
“26th. Several of the Shawanese came there & brought with
them 7 French Traders which they delivered to me, those being
all that resided in their Villages, & told me there was just six more
living with the Delawares, that on their return to their Towns they
would go to the Delawares & get them to send those French
Traders home, & told me they were determined to do everything
in their power to convince me of their sincerity & good disposition
to preserve a peace.”—Ed.
[104] Big Bone Lick, in Boone County, Kentucky, was visited by
the French in the early eighteenth century. It was a landmark for
early Kentucky hunters, who describe it in terms similar to those
used by Croghan. At the beginning of the nineteenth century,
scientists took much interest in the remains of the mammoth (or
mastodon)—the “elephant’s bones” described by Croghan.
Thomas Jefferson and several members of the American
Philosophical Society, at Philadelphia, attempted to secure a
complete skeleton of this extinct giant; and a number of fossils
from the lick were also sent to Europe. Dr. Goforth of Cincinnati
undertook an exploration to the lick at his own expense (1803),
but was later robbed of the result. The store of huge bones is not
yet entirely exhausted, specimens being yet occasionally
excavated—the present writer having examined some there in
1894.—Ed.
[105] It is a curious mistake on Croghan’s part to designate the
Kentucky as the Holston River. The latter is a branch of the
Tennessee, flowing through the mountains of Tennessee, North
Carolina, and Virginia. Its valley was early settled by Croghan’s
friends, Scotch-Irish from Pennsylvania. It is probable that, as the
Kentucky’s waters come from that direction, he had a confused
idea of the topography.—Ed.
[106] One of the earliest descriptions of the Falls of the Ohio.
Gist was ordered to explore as far as there in 1750, but did not
reach the goal. Findlay was there in 1753. Gordon gives an
account similar to Croghan’s in 1766. Ensign Butricke made more
of an adventure in passing these falls—see Historical Magazine,
viii, p. 259. An attempt at a settlement was made by John
Connolly (1773); but the beginnings of the present city of
Louisville are due to the pioneers who accompanied George
Rogers Clark thither in 1778, and made their first home on Corn
Island. For the early history of Louisville, see Durrett, Centenary
of Louisville, Filson Club Publications, No. 8 (Louisville, 1893).—
Ed.
[107] Colonel Reuben T. Durrett, of Louisville, thinks Croghan
“must have meant Salt River when he spoke of passing Pigeon
River during his first day’s journey after leaving the Falls of the
Ohio.” The Owl River he identifies with Highland Creek in
Kentucky, between the mouths of the Green and Wabash rivers.
The Wabash River was early considered by the French as one
of the most important highways between Canada and Louisiana.
Marquette designates it on his map as the Ouabouskiguo, which
later Frenchmen corrupted into Ouabache. The name was also
applied to that portion of the Ohio below the mouth of the
Wabash; but James Logan in 1718 noted the distinction. See
Winsor, Mississippi Basin, p. 17. Croghan was probably the first
Englishman who had penetrated thus far into the former French
territory, except Fraser, who had preceded him to the Illinois.—Ed.
[108] The Shawnees had formerly dwelt west and south of
their habitations on the Scioto. The Cumberland River was known
on early maps as the “Shawana River;” and in 1718, they were
located in the direction of Carolina. Their migration east and
north took place about 1730. The present Illinois town at this
site, is still called Shawneetown.—Ed.
[109] Being able to speak French, Lieutenant Alexander Fraser
of the 78th infantry had been detailed to accompany Croghan. He
went in advance of the latter, and reached the Illinois, where he
found himself in such danger that he escaped to Mobile in
disguise. See Parkman, Conspiracy of Pontiac, ii, pp. 276, 284-
286.
Captain Louis St. Ange de Bellerive, was the son of a French
officer who came to Louisiana early in the eighteenth century,
and commanded in the Illinois country in 1722 and again in 1733.
St. Ange had himself seen much pioneer service, having been
placed in charge of a fort on the Missouri (1736), and having
succeeded Vincennes at the post bearing the latter’s name. St.
Ange remained at Vincennes until summoned by De Villiers,
commandant at Fort Chartres, to supersede him there, and spare
him the mortification of a surrender to the English. After yielding
Fort Chartres to Captain Sterling (October, 1765), St. Ange retired
to St. Louis, where he acted as commandant (after 1766, in the
Spanish service) until his death in 1774.—Ed.
[110] This man was in reality captured. See Parkman,
Conspiracy of Pontiac, ii, p. 289, note.—Ed.
[111] The Kickapoos and Mascoutins were allied Algonquian
tribes who were first encountered in Wisconsin; but being of
roving habits they ranged all the prairie lands between the
Wisconsin and Wabash rivers. In 1712, they were about the
Maumee and at Detroit. Charlevoix describes them (1721) as
living near Chicago. Being concerned in the Fox wars, they fled
across the Mississippi; and again, about the middle of the
eighteenth century, were with the Miamis on the Wabash, where
they had a town near Fort Ouiatonon. They were always
somewhat intractable and difficult to restrain. The remnant of
these tribes live on reservations in Kansas and Oklahoma.—Ed.
[112] This branch of the Wabash is now called the Little
Wabash River. The party must have taken a very circuitous route,
else Croghan greatly overestimates the distances. Vincennes is
about seventy-five miles from the point where they were made
prisoners.—Ed.
[113] The date of the founding of Vincennes (Post or Port
Vincent) has been varyingly assigned from 1702 to 1735; but
Dunn, in his Indiana (Boston and New York, 1888), p. 54, shows
quite conclusively that François Margane, Sieur de Vincennes,
went thither at the request of Governor Périer of Louisiana in
1727, and founded a fort to counteract the designs of the English
against the French trade. The French colony was not begun until
1735, and the next year the commandant Vincennes was
captured and burnt by the Chickasaws, while engaged in an
expedition against their country. Louis St. Ange succeeded to the
position of commandant at Vincennes, which he continued to hold
until 1764, when summoned to the Illinois. He left two soldiers in
charge at Vincennes, of whom and their companions Croghan
gives this unfavorable account. No English officer appeared to
take command at Vincennes until 1777; meanwhile General Gage
had endeavored to expel the French inhabitants therefrom (1772-
73). It is not surprising, therefore, that they received the
Americans under George Rogers Clark (1778), with cordiality; or
that after Hamilton’s re-capture of the place, they were unwilling
to aid the English in maintaining the post against Clark’s surprise
(February, 1779), which resulted in the capture of Hamilton and
all the British garrison. After this event, Vincennes became part of
the Illinois government, until the organization of a Northwest
Territory in 1787.—Ed.
[114] A johannies was a Portuguese coin current in America
about this time, worth nearly nine dollars. The Indians, therefore,
paid over forty dollars for their pound of vermillion.—Ed.
 [115] The Piankeshaws were a tribe of the Miamis, who had
been settled near Vincennes as long as they had been known to
the whites.—Ed.
[116] The entries from July 1 to 18, inclusive, are here inserted
from the second (or official) version in the New York Colonial
Documents, vii, pp. 781, 782; hiatuses therein, are supplied from
the Hildreth version. See note 91, ante, p. 126.—Ed.
[117] François Rivard dit Maisonville was a member of one of
the first families to settle Detroit. He entered the British service at
Fort Pitt as an interpreter, accompanying Lieutenant Fraser to the
Illinois in that capacity. In 1774, Maisonville was Indian agent on
the Wabash with a salary of £100 a year. When George Rogers
Clark invaded the Illinois country (1778), Maisonville carried the
first intelligence of this incursion to Detroit. The next year General
Hamilton employed him on his advance against Vincennes; but on
Clark’s approach he was captured, while on a scouting party, and
cruelly treated by some of the American partisans. He made one
of the party sent to Virginia as captives, and the following year
committed suicide in prison.—Ed.
[118] General Thomas Gage was at this time British
commander-in-chief in America, with headquarters at New York.
Having come to America with Braddock, he served on this
continent for twenty years, in numerous important offices. After
the surrender of Montreal he was made governor of that city and
province, until in 1763 he superseded Amherst as commander-in-
chief, in which capacity he served until the outbreak of the
Revolution. His part in the initial battles of that conflict about
Boston, where he commanded, is a matter of general history.
After his recall to England his subsequent career was uneventful.
He died as Viscount Gage in 1787.—Ed.
[119] Major William Murray of the 42nd infantry succeeded
Colonel Henry Bouquet as commandant at Fort Pitt, in the spring
of 1765.
Major Robert Farmer was sent to receive the surrender of
Mobile in 1763. For a description by Aubry, the retiring French
governor of Louisiana, of Farmer’s character and manner, see
Claiborne, History of Mississippi (Jackson, 1880), p. 104. Late in
this year that Croghan wrote (1765), Farmer ascended the
Mississippi with a detachment of the 34th infantry, and took over
the command of the Illinois from Major Sterling, being in turn
relieved (1767) by Colonel Edward Cole. Farmer died or retired
from the army in 1768.—Ed.
[120] La Guthrie was the interpreter sent with Lieutenant
Fraser. Sinnott was a deputy-agent sent out by Stuart, agent for
the Southern department to attempt conciliation in the Illinois.
His stores had been plundered, and he himself having escaped
with difficulty from Fort Chartres, sought refuge at New Orleans.
See New York Colonial Documents, vii, pp. 765, 776.—Ed.
[121] We here again resume the first (Featherstonhaugh-
Butler) version of the journal, which continues through August 17.
—Ed.
[122] This is the Auglaize River. On the site called the Forks,
Wayne built Fort Defiance during his campaign against the
Indians (1794).—Ed.
[123] The rapids of the Maumee were famous in the later
Indian wars. There, in 1794, the British built Fort Miami, almost
within the reach of whose guns Wayne fought the battle of Fallen
Timbers. Fort Meigs was the American stockade built here during
the War of 1812-15; and this vicinity was the scene of operations
during all the Western campaigns ending with Perry’s victory on
Lake Erie, and the re-taking of Detroit.—Ed.
[124] All that follows, until the conclusion of the Indian
speeches, is inserted from the second (official) version of the
journals, found in the New York Colonial Documents, vii, pp. 781-
787.—Ed.
[125] Although English born, Colonel John Bradstreet lived all
his mature life in America, and distinguished himself for his
military services in the later French wars. He was in the campaign
against Louisburg (1745), and was promoted for gallantry, and
given the governorship of St. John’s, Newfoundland. The outbreak
of the French and Indian War found him at Oswego, where with
great bravery he drove the French back from an attack on a
convoy (1756). On the organization of the Royal Americans,
Bradstreet became lieutenant-colonel, and served with
Abercrombie at Ticonderoga (1758). His most renowned exploit
was the capture, the same year, of Fort Frontenac, which severed
the connection between Canada and its Western dependencies.
After the close of the war, Bradstreet received a colonelcy. When
the news of Pontiac’s uprising reached the East, he was detailed
to make an expedition into the Indian territory by way of Lake
Erie. His confidence in Indian promises proved too great; he
made peace with the very tribes who went murdering and
scalping along the frontiers as soon as his army had passed.
Bradstreet was made a major-general in 1772; but two years
later, died in the city of New York. The Indians whom Croghan
found at Detroit were small bands from the north and west, who
had not received Bradstreet’s message, in time to attend before
that officer’s departure from Detroit.—Ed.
[126] In the Hildreth version these names are spelled
“Duquanee” and “Waobecomica.” The former was a Detroit
habitant Dequindre, who had brought messages from the Illinois
to Pontiac during the siege of Detroit. Waobecomica was a
Missassaga chief, well-affected toward the English, whom
Johnson had sent in the spring of 1765 with messages to Pontiac.
See New York Colonial Documents, vii, p. 747.—Ed.
[127] This was Lieutenant-colonel Alexander Campbell,
formerly commander of the 95th regiment, who succeeded Major
Gladwin in command of Detroit (1764). He is not to be confused
with Captain Donald Campbell, the earlier commandant, who was
killed by the Indians during Pontiac’s conspiracy.—Ed.
[128] There were present at this treaty about thirty chiefs and
five hundred warriors. A list of the tribes is given, and the names
of the chiefs. This was the last public transaction in which Pondiac
was engaged with the English. The year following, in a council
with the Indians on the Illinois, this noted chief was stabbed to
the heart, by an Indian who had long followed him for that
purpose.—Hildreth.
Comment by Ed.—Hildreth is mistaken in calling this the last
public transaction of Pontiac. He was at Oswego and treated with
Johnson in the spring of 1766. See New York Colonial Documents,
vii, pp. 854-867.
[129] The Saginaw Indians were a notoriously turbulent band
of Chippewas, who had a village on Saginaw Bay. They had
assisted in the siege of Detroit; and going to Mackinac to secure
recruits to continue their resistance, they attempted to kill the
trader Alexander Henry. See Bain (ed.), Henry’s Travels and
Adventures (Boston, 1901), pp. 148-152, an admirably-edited
work, containing much valuable information.—Ed.
[130] According to Parkman, Le Grand Sauteur was Pontiac’s
chief coadjutor among the northern Indians in his attack on the
English. His Indian name was Minavavana, and he was considered
the author of the plot against Mackinac. This has been since
attributed to Match-e-ke-wis, a younger Indian; but Le Grand
Sauteur remained an inveterate enemy of the English, and was at
length stabbed by an English trader. See Henry, Travels, pp. 42-
47.—Ed.
[131] Sir Thomas Stirling, Bart., obtained his company in July,
1757, in the 42d, or Royal Highland, regiment, which
accompanied Abercromby in 1758, and Amherst in 1759 in their
respective expeditions on Lakes George and Champlain; was
afterwards detailed to assist at the siege of Niagara, and
accompanied Amherst from Oswego to Montreal in 1760. Knox.
Captain Stirling was appointed a Major in 1770, and Lieutenant-
colonel of the 42d in September, 1771. He was in command of his
regiment in the engagement on Staten Island, and in the battle of
Brooklyn Heights, in 1776; was afterwards at the storming of Fort
Washington and accompanied the expedition against Philadelphia.
He became Colonel in the army in 1779, and was Brigadier, under
Sir Henry Clinton, in the expedition against Charleston, S. C., in
1780. Beatson. He succeeded Lieutenant-general Frazer as
Colonel of the 71st Highlanders, in February, 1782, and in
November following, became Major-general. He went on the
retired list in 1783, when his regiment was disbanded. In 1796 he
was appointed Lieutenant-general; was created a Baronet some
time after, and became a General in the army on the first of
January, 1801. He died in 1808. Army Lists.—E. B. O’Callaghan.
[132] The entry for September 26, and the list of tribes
following, are taken from the Featherstonhaugh-Butler edition of
the journal.—Ed.
[133] This letter is reprinted from New York Colonial
Documents, vii, pp. 787, 788. It was evidently written after
Croghan’s return from the West, and accompanied the official
version of his journal, which Johnson sent to England November
16, 1765. See New York Colonial Documents, vii, p. 775.—Ed.
[134] Fort Chartres was originally built as a stockade post in
1720; but in 1756 was rebuilt in stone, and became the most
important French fortification in the West. It was an irregular
quadrangle, with houses, magazines, barracks, etc., defended
with cannon.—See Pittman, Settlements on the Mississippi
(London, 1770), pp. 45, 46. After its surrender by the French, the
English garrisoned the stronghold until 1772, when the river’s
erosion made it untenable. For the present state of the ruins, see
Mason, Chapters from Illinois History, pp. 241-249.
The French trading post sixty miles above Fort Chartres, on the
western bank of the river, was the beginning of the present city of
St. Louis, which was founded in April, 1764, by Pierre Laclède.
Upon the surrender of the Illinois to the English, St. Ange, with
the garrison and many French families, removed to this new post,
in the expectation of living under French authority. To their
chagrin the place was surrendered to the Spanish the following
year.—Ed.
 III
Two Journals of Western Tours, by Charles
Frederick Post: one, to the neighborhood of Fort
Duquesne (July-September, 1758); the other to the
Ohio (October, 1758-January 1759)

Source: Proud’s History of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1798), ii,

appendix.
 INTRODUCTORY NOTE
Christian Frederick Post, author of the following journals, was a
simple, uneducated missionary of the Moravian Church. His chief
qualifications for the perilous journeys herein detailed, were his
intimate acquaintance with Indian life and character, the belief of the
tribesmen in his truthfulness and honesty, and his own steadfast
courage and trust in the protection of a higher power. Born in Polish
Prussia in 1710, Post early came under the influence of the
Moravians, whose remarkable missionary movement was just
beginning to germinate.
The first attempt of this church to christianize the American
Indians in Georgia having failed because of Spanish hostility, the
Moravian disciples removed to Pennsylvania (1739), and were
granted land on which to establish their colony at Bethlehem.
Thither in 1742 came Post, eager to join in evangelizing the Indians;
for which purpose he was sent the following year to assist Henry
Rauch in his mission to the Mohegans and Wampanoags. This
mission had been established about 1740, Count Zinzendorf, the
great Moravian bishop, having visited its site at Shekomeko (Pine
Plains, Dutchess County, New York) and baptized three Indians as its
first fruits. The work spread to the neighboring Indian villages of
Connecticut, and Post was assigned to a circuit in Sharon Township,
Litchfield County, consisting of the villages of Pachgatgoch and
Wechquadnach. Here, in his zeal for the service, he married a
converted Indian woman (1743), and endeared himself to all the
tribe.
But persecutions began to assail the humble brethren and their
converts; they were accused of being papists, arrested and haled
before local magistrates, by whom they were no sooner released
than a mob of those whose gain in pampering to Indian vices was
endangered by Moravian success, set upon them and rendered their
lives and those of their new converts intolerable. Post, who had been
on a journey to the Iroquois country (1745), was arrested at Albany
and sent to New York, where he was imprisoned for seven weeks on
a trumped-up charge of abetting Indian raids.
The situation made retreat necessary; therefore, in 1746, the
Shekomeko and Connecticut settlements were broken up, and the
Christian Indians with their missionaries moved in detachments to
Pennsylvania, where, after kindly entertainment at Bethlehem, a
town called Gnadenhütten (huts of Grace), was built for them, at
Weisport, Carbon County. It was during their stay at Bethlehem that
Rachel, Post’s Indian wife, died (1747), and there two years later he
married a Delaware convert, Agnes, who lived only until 1751.
Meanwhile, Post was employed as missionary assistant, going to
Shamokin in 1747 to aid the missionary blacksmith established
there, to clear and plant more ground. Again in 1749, he revisited
the scene of his early labors, and helped David Bruce to re-establish
a mission among the remnant left at Pachgatgoch. Two years later
he was summoned to a more distant field on the dismal shores of
Labrador, where a company of four Moravian brethren were sent to
begin a mission to the Eskimos. An untoward accident rendered this
project futile; the major part of the crew of the vessel which had
transported them having been lost, the captain impressed the
missionaries to carry his ship back to England.
Thereupon Post again sought his home in Pennsylvania, dwelling
principally at Bethlehem, until called upon by the Pennsylvania
authorities to assist in public affairs. There is no certain information
of his introduction to the managers of Indian matters in
Pennsylvania; but several Christian Indians from his flock had been
utilized as interpreters, and the Friendly Association of Quakers,
which was assuming so large a rôle in treating with the natives, was
well-inclined toward the Moravian brothers.
The first mention of Post in the public records is in connection with
a message which he was employed to carry (June, 1758) in
conjunction with Charles Thomson to Teedyuscung at Wyoming.[1]
On his return to the settlements, he was immediately commissioned
to go back to Wyoming with a message from the Cherokee
auxiliaries, who had come to join the army of Forbes, and whose
presence caused consternation among Pennsylvania’s savage allies.
With but five days’ respite, Post again started on a journey beset
with perils on every side, through the wilderness of Northern
Pennsylvania.[2] At Teedyuscung’s cabin he met two Indians from
the Ohio, who declared that their tribes were sorry they had gone to
war against the English; they had often wished that messengers
from the government would come to them, for then they should long
before have abandoned war.
On the receipt of this important information, the council at
Philadelphia debated to what use it might be put in furthering the
plans for Forbes’s advance. “Post was desired to accompany the
Indians, and he readily consented to go.”[3]
Antiquarians and historians have alike admired the sublime
courage of the man, and the heroic patriotism which made him
capable of advancing into the heart of a hostile territory, into the
very hands of a cruel and treacherous foe. But aside from Post’s
supreme religious faith, he had a shrewd knowledge of Indian
customs, and knew that in the character of an ambassador
requested by the Western tribes, his mission would be a source of
protection. Therefore, even under the very walls of Fort Duquesne,
he trusted not in vain to Indian good faith.
The results of this embassy were most gratifying. The report of his
mission coming during the important negotiations at Easton, aided in
securing the Indian neutrality which made the advance of Forbes so
much less hazardous than that of Braddock.
But the work was only begun; and to complete it Post’s renewed
co-operation was necessary. This time he was not to venture alone.
Two militia officers, Captain John Bull and Lieutenant William Hays,
volunteered for the service,[4] and having joined Post at Reading, all
proceeded with Indian companions in their van, to overtake the
army and reach the Ohio in advance of the column.
 Their mission was not in time to save the Indian ferocity at Grant’s
defeat; but it contributed to assure the French that aid from the
neighboring Indians was dubious, and that in retreat lay their only
safety. Through the simple narrative of Indian speeches and replies,
one feels the intensity of the strain: the French captain “looked as
pale as death;” “we hanged out the English flag, in spite of the
French, on which our prisoners folded their hands, in hopes that
their redemption was nigh.” Then the news came “which gave us the
pleasure to hear, that the English had the field, and that the French
had demolished and burnt the place entirely and went off.”
Of Post’s later life and its vicissitudes, we get but scattered
glimpses. For the two years succeeding these adventurous journeys,
he served the Pennsylvania authorities as messenger and interpreter,
at the same time begging to be allowed to go and preach to the
newly-appeased Indians on the Ohio. The last official act of
Governor Denny was the affixing of his signature to a passport for
Post, of whose loyalty, integrity and prudence he testifies to have
had good experience.[5]
This desire to begin a mission to the Western Indians was
consummated in 1761, when Post proceeded alone to the
Muskingum and built the first white man’s house within the present
limits of Ohio. The following spring, he applied to the Moravian
brethren for an assistant; whereupon John Heckewelder was
assigned to this service, and in his Narrative describes their
courteous reception by Bouquet at Fort Pitt, the restless conditions
among the Delawares and Shawnees, and the warnings against the
storm of fire and blood which was so soon to break over the frontier.
Heckewelder retreated in due season; Post barely saved himself by a
sudden flight.
In 1764, the ecclesiastical authorities saw fit to send this intrepid
missionary to the Mosquito Coast, where he stayed two years,
making a second visit in 1767. Toward the close of his life he retired
from the Moravian sect, and entered the Protestant Episcopal
Church. His death occurred at Germantown in 1785.
 The journal of the first tour to the Ohio Indians (July 15-
September 22, 1758), was printed in the appendix to An Enquiry into
the Causes of the Alienation of the Delaware and Shawanese Indians
from the British Interest (London, 1759; reprinted Philadelphia,
1867). This book was published anonymously, but was known to be
the work of Charles Thomson, a prominent Philadelphia Quaker, later
secretary of the Continental Congress. Thomson gives a brief preface
to Post’s journal, and the matter in the notes thereof is evidently by
his hand; it is probable that the notes to the second journal are also
by him. The first journal was reprinted by Proud, History of
Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1798), ii, appendix, pp. 65-95, from
which edition our reprint has been made. Craig also published this in
The Olden Time, i, pp. 99-125, following almost verbatim the edition
of Thomson and Proud. Rupp, Early History of Western Pennsylvania
(Pittsburg and Harrisburg, 1846), appendix, pp. 75-98, gives the
same journal. The Pennsylvania Archives, iii, pp. 520-544, also
contains this journal, evidently taken from the same manuscript,
with but slight variations in the spelling of proper names.
Heckewelder, Narrative of the Mission of the United Brethren
(Philadelphia, 1820), pp. 55, 56, says: “To enumerate all the
hardships, difficulties and dangers, Frederick Post had been
subjected to on these journies, especially on the first, in the summer
of the year 1758, is at this time both impossible and needless.
Suffice it to say, that what he intended the public should know, was
published in the year after, in England, under the title of ‘Christian
Frederick Post’s Journal from Philadelphia to the Ohio,’ &c. His
original manuscript journal, however, which had for some time been
placed in the hands of the writer of this narrative, was far more
interesting, and evinced that few men would be found able to
undergo the fatigues of a journey, bearing so hard on the
constitution, or a mind to sustain such trials of adversity—at least
not with that calmness with which Mr. Post endured it.”
The diary of the second journey of Christian Frederick Post to the
Ohio, October 25, 1758—January 8, 1759, was first printed in
London, 1759, for J. Wilkie; see Field, An Essay towards an Indian
Bibliography (New York, 1873), p. 315. Proud, History of
Pennsylvania, ii, appendix, pp. 96-132, also reprints Post’s second
journal, and from this our reprint is made. It appears also in The
Olden Time, i, pp. 144-177; and in Rupp, Early History of Western
Pennsylvania, appendix, pp. 99-126. The extract from a journal in
the Pennsylvania Archives, iii, pp. 560-563, entitled “Journal of
Frederick Post from Pittsburg, 1758,” is in reality that of Croghan’s—
see ante, p. 100. For an example of the form and spelling of the
original manuscripts of these journals before they were rigorously
edited, see letter of Post’s in Pennsylvania Archives, iii, pp. 742-744.
The following is a sample extract therefrom:

To his honnour da Governor of Pansylvanea:

Broder, I cam to Machochlaung, wa mane Indeans luve, I
cald dam all togader, and I told dam wat we bous had agread
on wan we sa one anoder last, and wat you ar sorre for and
have so mouts at hart, and dasayrt me to mack it avere war
noun avere war, and dasayrd dam to be strong and sea dat
your flasch and blod may be rastord to you; now br’r, you
know dat it is aur agreamand, dat as soun as I hoar any ting,
I geave yu daracktly notys of, and as I am as jat closs bay
you, so I sand daes prasonars to you which da daleverat to
me, and I geave dam to Papunnahanck to dalever dam to
you; br. I do not sand daes poepel daun, da have had damself
a long dasayr to go daun to sea dar br. da Englesch, so I tot it
proper to sand dam along; I hop you will rajoys to sea dam
and be kaynd to dam, and allso to dam poepel dat bryng dam
daun; wan I am farder from you and I schall meat wit som, I
schall bryng dam maysalf daun wan I com along; br. you
know aur worck is grat, and will tack a long taym befor we
coan com back, I salud all da schandel pepel, and dasayr you
to be strong.
Ye 20 Day of May, 1760, rot at Machochloschung.
 Ordinarily, the modern historical student very properly deprecates
any tampering with original manuscripts; but an examination of the
foregoing inclines one not only to forgive but to thank the early
editors for having translated Post’s jargon into understandable
English.
R. G. T.
 THE JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN FREDERICK
POST, FROM PHILADELPHIA TO THE OHIO, ON
A MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF
PENNSYLVANIA TO THE DELAWARE,
SHAWNESE, AND MINGO INDIANS, SETTLED
THERE.
July the 15th, 1758.—This day I received orders from his honour,
the Governor, to set out on my intended journey, and proceeded as
far as German Town, where I found all the Indians drunk.[6]
Willamegicken returned to Philadelphia, for a horse, that was
promised him.[7]
16th.—This day I waited for the said Willamegicken till near noon,
and when he came, being very drunk, he could proceed no further,
so that I left him, and went to Bethlehem.[8]
17th.—I arrived at Bethlehem, and prepared for my journey.
18th.—I read over both the last treaties, that at Easton, and that
at Philadelphia, and made myself acquainted with the particulars of
each.[9]
19th.—With much difficulty I persuaded the Indians to leave
Bethlehem, and travelled this day no further than Hayes’s having a
hard shower of rain.
20th.—Arrived at fort Allen.[10]
21st.—I called my company together, to know if we should
proceed. They complained they were sick, and must rest that day.
This day, I think, Teedyuscung[11] laid many obstacles in my way,
and was very much against my proceeding: he said, he was afraid I
should never return; and that the Indians would kill me. About
dinner time two Indians arrived from Wyoming,[12] with an account
that Teedyuscung’s son, Hans Jacob, was returned, and brought
news from the French and Allegheny Indians. Teedyuscung then
called a Council, and proposed that I should only go to Wyoming,
and return, with the message his son had brought, to Philadelphia. I
made answer, that it was too late, that he should have proposed that
in Philadelphia; for that the writings containing my orders were so
drawn, as obliged me to go, though I should lose my life.
22d.—I desired my companions to prepare to set out, upon which
Teedyuscung called them all together in the fort, and protested
against my going. His reasons were, that he was afraid the Indians
would kill me, or the French get me; and if that should be the case
he should be very sorry, and did not know what he should do. I gave
for answer, “that I did not know what to think of their conduct. It is
plain, said I, that the French have a public road[13] to your towns,
yet you will not let your own flesh and blood, the English, come near
them; which is very hard: and if that be the case, the French must
be your masters.” I added, that, if I died in the undertaking, it would
be as much for the Indians as the English, and that I hoped my
journey would be of this advantage, that it would be the means of
saving the lives of many hundreds of the Indians: therefore, I was
resolved to go forward, taking my life in my hand, as one ready to
part with it for their good. Immediately after I had spoken thus,
three rose up and offered to go with me the nearest way; and we
concluded to go through the inhabitants, under the Blue mountains
to fort Augusta, on Susquahanna; where we arrived the 25th.[14]
It gave me great pain to observe many plantations deserted and
laid waste; and I could not but reflect on the distress, the poor
owners must be drove to, who once lived in plenty; and I prayed the
Lord to restore peace and prosperity to the distressed.
At fort Augusta we were entertained very kindly, had our horses
shod, and one being lame, we exchanged for another. Here we
received, by Indians from Diahogo,[15] the disagreeable news that
our army was, as they said, entirely cut off at Ticonderoga,[16] which
discouraged one of my companions, Lappopetung’s son, so much,
that he would proceed no further. Shamokin Daniel here asked me, if
I thought he should be satisfied for his trouble in going with me. I
told him every body, that did any service for the province, I thought,
would be paid.
27th.—They furnished us here with every necessary for our
journey, and we set out with good courage. After we rode about ten
miles, we were caught in a hard gust of rain.
28th.—We came to Wekeeponall, where the road turns off for
Wyoming, and slept this night at Queenashawakee.[17]
29th.—We crossed the Susquahanna over the Big Island. My
companions were now very fearful, and this night went a great way
out of the road, to sleep without fire, but could not sleep for the
musquetoes and vermin.
30th & 31st.—We were glad it was day, that we might set out. We
got upon the mountains, and had heavy rains all night. The heavens
alone were our covering, and we accepted of all that was poured
down from thence.
August 1st.—We saw three hoops[18] on a bush; to one of them
there remained some long white hair. Our horses left us, I suppose,
not being fond of the dry food on the mountains: with a good deal
of trouble we found them again. We slept this night on the same
mountain.
2d.—We came across several places where two poles, painted red,
were stuck in the ground by the Indians, to which they tye the
prisoners, when they stop at night, in their return from their
incursions. We arrived this night at Shinglimuhee,[19] where was
another of the same posts. It is a disagreeable and melancholy
sight, to see the means they make use of, according to their savage
way, to distress others.
3d.—We came to a part of a river called Tobeco, over the
mountains, a very bad road.
 4th.—We lost one of our horses, and with much difficulty found
him, but were detained a whole day on that account.
I had much conversation with Pisquetumen;[20] of which I think to
inform myself further when I get to my journey’s end.
5th.—We set out early this day, and made a good long stretch,
crossing the big river Tobeco, and lodged between two mountains. I
had the misfortune to lose my pocket book with three pounds five
shillings,[21] and sundry other things. What writings it contained
were illegible to any body but myself.
6th.—We passed all the mountains, and the big river,
Weshawaucks, and crossed a fine meadow two miles in length,
where we slept that night, having nothing to eat.[22]
7th.—We came in sight of fort Venango, belonging to the French,
situate between two mountains, in a fork of the Ohio river. I prayed
the Lord to blind them, as he did the enemies of Lot and Elisha, that
I might pass unknown. When we arrived, the fort being on the other
side of the river, we hallooed, and desired them to fetch us over;
which they were afraid to do; but shewed us a place where we
might ford. We slept that night within half gun shot of the fort.
8th.—This morning I hunted for my horse, round the fort, within
ten yards of it. The Lord heard my prayer, and I passed unknown till
we had mounted our horses to go off, when two Frenchmen came to
take leave of the Indians, and were much surprised at seeing me,
but said nothing.
By what I could learn of Pisquetumen, and the Indians, who went
into the fort, the garrison consisted of only six men, and an officer
blind of one eye.[23] They enquired much of the Indians concerning
the English, whether they knew of any party coming to attack them,
of which they were apprehensive.
9th.—Heavy rains all night and day: we slept on swampy ground.
 10th.—We imagined we were near Kushkushkee; and having
travelled three miles, we met three Frenchmen, who appeared very
shy of us, but said nothing more than to enquire, whether we knew
of any English coming against fort Venango.
After we travelled two miles farther, we met with an Indian, and
one that I took to be a runagade English Indian trader; he spoke
good English, was very curious in examining every thing, particularly
the silver medal about Pisquitumen’s neck. He appeared by his
countenance to be guilty. We enquired of them where we were, and
found we were lost, and within twenty miles of fort Duquesne. We
struck out of the road to the right, and slept between two
mountains; and being destitute of food, two went to hunt, and
others to seek a road, but to no purpose.
11th.—We went to the place where they had killed two deers, and
Pisquetumen and I roasted the meat. Two went to hunt for the road,
to know which way we should go: one came back, and found a road;
the other lost himself.
12th.—The rest of us hunted for him, but in vain; so, as we could
not find him, we concluded to set off, leaving such marks, that, if he
returned, he might know which way to follow us; and we left him
some meat. We came to the river Conaquonashon [Conequenessing
Creek], where was an old Indian town. We were then fifteen miles
from Kushkushkee.
There we stopt, and sent forward Pisquetumen with four strings of
wampum to apprize the town of our coming,[24] with this message:
“Brother,[25] thy brethren are come a great way, and want to see
thee, at thy fire, to smoak that good tobacco,[26] which our good
grandfathers used to smoak. Turn thy eyes once more upon that
road, by which I came.[27] I bring thee words of great consequence
from the Governor, and people of Pennsylvania, and from the king of
England. Now I desire thee to call all the kings and captains from all
the towns, that none may be missing. I do not desire that my words
may be hid, or spoken under cover. I want to speak loud, that all the
Indians may hear me. I hope thou wilt bring me on the road, and
lead me into the town. I blind the French, that they may not see me,
and stop their ears, that they may not hear the great news I bring
you.”
About noon we met some Shawanese, that used to live at
Wyoming. They knew me, and received me very kindly. I saluted
them, and assured them the government of Pennsylvania wished
them well, and wished to live in peace and friendship with them.
Before we came to the town, two men came to meet us and lead us
in. King Beaver shewed us a large house to lodge in.[28] The people
soon came and shook hands with us. The number was about sixty
young able men. Soon after king Beaver came and told his people,
“Boys, hearken, we sat here without ever expecting again to see our
brethren the English; but now one of them is brought before you,
that you may see your brethren, the English, with your own eyes;
and I wish you may take it into consideration.” Afterwards he turned
to me and said,
“Brother, I am very glad to see you, I never thought we should
have had the opportunity to see one another more; but now I am
very glad, and thank God, who has brought you to us. It is a great
satisfaction to me.” I said, “Brother, I rejoice in my heart, I thank
God, who has brought me to you. I bring you joyful news from the
Governor and people of Pennsylvania, and from your children, the
Friends:[29] and, as I have words of great consequence I will lay
them before you, when all the kings and captains are called together
from the other towns. I wish there may not be a man of them
missing, but that they may be all here to hear.”
In the evening king Beaver came again, and told me, they had
held a council, and sent out to all their towns, but it would take five
days before they could all come together. I thanked him for his care.
Ten captains came and saluted me. One said to the others; “We
never expected to see our brethren the English again, but now God
has granted us once more to shake hands with them, which we will
not forget.” They sat by my fire till midnight.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com