Cartographic Representations: A Controversy in Mapping Lewis and Clark's Fort Clatsop

Abstract

Kenneth W.Karsmizki Cartographic Representations A Controversy in Mapping LewisandClark's FortClatsop Controversy is not what we typically expect when we consider cartographic documents. Maps convey an illusion of authority, Mark Monmonier reminds us, "their convinc ingly crisp lines and labels effectively concealing an argu ment's tenuous assumptions." Ranging from crude sketches to detailed professional drawings, maps are so easy to believe that they beg to be the final arbiter of geographic information. Yet, researchers need to look beyond this air of authority to "promote a healthy, informed skepticism about maps" and test the assumptions thatmaps so forcefully assert.1 As often as not, cartographic documents contain errors, including "careless or willful omissions, faultymeasurements, sloppy drafting, im precise labels, vanished landmarks, and inconsistent use of symbols." They can include information drawn from legend or local tradition, which must be the case with the 1844map by Eug?ne Duflot deMofras shown on page 583.As a result, some maps are what Monmonier calls "a ready source of misinformation, 'cartographic folklore' that, as they age, increases their 'alluring believability' " This allure, he explains, can catch anyone, giving maps "an authority that even scholars are reluctant to question."2 As in all historical research, maps have played a role in understanding the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Maps created byMeriwether Lewis and William Clark have been used to define their route across the continent, and other maps have helped identify expedition-related sites forpreserva tion purposes and archaeological investigation. Knowing the precise place where the explorers once stood helps people connect with the past. Perhaps more importantly, knowing where to look for archaeological evidence 568 OHQ vol. 105, no. 4 ? 2004 Oregon Historical Society Box 161, GA Series,Descriptions of Stations,E 128Scientific Records, PI 105, RG 23,National Archives,College Park, Md. 1 ou*p+?St??c?c*. sX; /.$?**&***/fa/ml ?L **U/*j, LEWIS ANO C??toD* WINTERED IN ?tOb?fr'Q ' *VM|l?8 rw0M HOUTH This map was found in a duplicate copy of a volume with descriptions ofmapping stations on theColumbia River prepared by the U.S. Coast Geodetic Survey in 1851-1852. related to the expedition could add to our knowledge and understanding. The distribution of their camphres, for example, which can be identified through radiocarbon dating, can tell us about how they arranged their camp. Did they observe military protocol even after theywere far into thewilderness? Microscopic evidence found in those fires can add to our knowledge of their diet and campfire activities. It can also conclusively prove where they camped, allowing for historic landmark designation and site preservation. Under current standards, approximating the location of a site is insuf ficient to allow it to be listed on theNational Register ofHistoric Places.3 Fort Clatsop National Memorial was established before these standards were put in place, however, and is listed on the National Register even though the exact location of the site isnot known. At the time of the cen tennial of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, theOregon Historical Society Karsmizki, Cartographic Representations 569 initiated an effort to recognize significant sites inOregon's history, includ ing Fort Clatsop. As the sesquicentennial of the expedition approached, Oregon's Senator Richard Neuberger was successful in having the site designated a National Memorial, and the National Park Service (NPS) took over interpretation of the Lewis and Clark Expedition's winter on the Pacific Ocean. That interpretation was focused on a replica built by the local Jaycees in 1955. The authenticity of the site remains in question because actual physi cal remains of the expedition have never been found there. Even so, the NPS accepted the current site location in part because "no other place along the river banks came close to being an alternate location."4 The danger of the current situation is that ongoing efforts to determine the precise location of the expedition's wintering site of Fort Clatsop may be threatened by expansion and developments spurred on by the growth of Fort Clatsop National Memorial as a result of the bicentennial com memoration. When itcomes down to pinpointing where to begin an archaeological excavation, which requires extensive manpower and painstaking scientific methodology, the cost is ultimately tied to...