ROYCE. ] HISTORICAL ATLAS—INDIAN BOUNDARIES. 253 
3d. A chronologic list of treaties with the various Indian tribes, ex- 
hibiting the names of tribes, the date, place where, and person by whom 
negotiated. 
4th. An alphabetic list of all rivers, lakes, mountains, villages, and 
other objects or places mentioned in such treaties, together with their 
location and the names by which they are at present known. 
5th. An alphabetic list of the principal rivers, lakes, mountains, and 
other topographic features in the United States, showing not only their 
present names but also the various names by which they have from time 
to time been known since the discovery of America, giving in each case 
the date and the authority therefor. 
INDIAN BOUNDARIES. 
The most difficult and laborious feature of the work is that involved un- 
der the first of these five subdivisions. The ordinary reader in following 
the treaty provisions, in which the boundaries of the various cessions 
are so specifically and minutely laid down, would anticipate but little 
difficulty in tracing those boundaries upon the modernmap. In this he 
would find himself sadly at fault. In nearly all of the treaties concluded 
half a century or more ago, wherein cessions of land were made, occur 
the names of boundary points which are not to be found on any modern 
map, and which have never been known to people of the present genera- 
tion living in the vicinity. 
In many of the older treaties this is the case with a large proportion 
of the boundary points mentioned. The identification and exact loca- 
tion of these points thus becomes at once a source of much laborious 
research. Not unfrequently weeks and even months of time have been 
consumed, thousands of old maps and many volumes of books exam- 
ined, and a voluminous correspondence conducted with local historical 
societies or old settlers, in the effort to ascertain the location of a single 
boundary point. 
To illustrate this difficulty, the case of ‘“ Hawkins’ line” may be cited, 
a boundary line mentioned in the cession by the Cherokees by treaty of 
October 2, 1798. An examination of more than four thousand old and 
modern maps and the scanning of more than fifty volumes failed to 
show its location or to give even the slightest clue to it. A somewhat 
extended correspondence with numerous persons in Tennessee, includ- 
ing the veteran annalist, Ramsey, also failed to secure the desired infor- 
mation. It was not until months of time had been consumed and prob- 
able sources of information had been almost completely exhausted that, 
through the persevering inquiries of Hon. John M. Lea, of Nashville, 
Tenn., in conjunction with the present writer’s own investigations, the 
line was satisfactorily identified as being the boundary line mentioned in 
