Discovery is a fascinating word because it is a combination of two human faculties: intelligence and emotion. The act of discovering frequently occurs in tiny steps; most times it is imperceptible, particularly in the field of historical research when sifting through a mountain of clues over a period of years. Eventually an element of truth emerges and the process of fact building begins, brick by brick, which slowly and deliberately can obliterate a longstanding debate or theory. In the past fifty years, when writing about one controversial historical figure, Meriwether Lewis, the element of truth has become quite elastic, which makes verification extremely difficult because the documentation may be missing or it was never there to begin with. But at some point, historians have a duty to the subject matter to cite the proof or to abandon the story altogether. In Lewis's case, that decision-making process has been broken for a long time, which has resulted in his almost complete deconstruction as a historical figure.

Bernard DeVoto, a venerable historian, stated in the 1950s that speculation is a requisite and, when “properly controlled, inference and conjecture are valuable tools of history; in fact, history cannot be practiced without them.”1 That rationale now imperils Meriwether Lewis scholarship because inference and conjecture have not been properly controlled, and the dearth of historical material, or at least the material repeatedly used by researchers, has led to speculation rather than informed historical writing. This alteration has created a two-fold problem. First, any new claim about Meriwether Lewis, no matter how ridiculous, is published because of the intense and continuing interest in his life, but particularly the fanatical fascination with his dramatic death. And second, reputable historians are not objecting to these unsubstantiated claims, demanding that some reasonable and authentic documentation be produced to prove them. Put simply, the Lewis landscape is littered with the carcasses of fictional animals, which have covered up and buried the life of Meriwether Lewis. Historians must turn away from preconceived assumptions and metaphysical speculations and turn toward life—the actual life of Meriwether Lewis—and learn from that.

Arriving at this conclusion was not done hastily, because in this book several new and authenticated discoveries that have revealed a completely new aspect of Lewis are discussed—including his actual thoughts and feelings about specific incidents. For the first time in two hundred years, we learn that the young Lewis was not intoxicated, as claimed, when he first joined the regular army at Fort Greenville, and that he did not challenge any superior officer to a duel. These two events of his early life have been used by some historians to support some of the faulty reasoning behind his death, a death that some speculate was caused by alcoholic consumption, depression, and serious lethargy.

Then there's the crazy notion that Gen. James Wilkinson orchestrated Lewis's death, which has been completely misinterpreted from a well-known historical document referred to as the “Gilbert Russell Statement.” The author, origin, and meaning of this mysterious document are finally proven in this book with the inclusion of handwriting samples. There are also chapters on how Lewis and Clark acquired the Missouri River map that they relied upon for the first fifteen hundred miles of their 1804–1806 expedition, and background on the physician who attended to Lewis in the immediate postexpedition years in Saint Louis, confirming that Lewis was sick with malaria—a familiar and chronic physiological illness.

My recent Meriwether Lewis biography was backed by twelve years of research, although there was so much information that not all of it fit neatly within the pages of a standard biography. Some of the chapters in this book expand upon that research. For example, William Simmons, the accountant of the War Department, a frighteningly “by the book” public servant in Washington from 1795 through 1814, ruined the lives of many military officers by his frequent quibbling, delay of reimbursements, and utter refusal to settle accounts in a timely manner. One chapter demonstrates how Simmons created Lewis's fiscal problems in 1809, although in the past historians have blamed Lewis for the mismanagement of his territorial and financial affairs.

One chapter explores Lewis's introduction into the topsy-turvy world of greed and thirst for prime land in Spanish Louisiana, and how land speculators duped Lewis prior to his expedition in 1804 into believing that the Spanish officers and inhabitants were the greedy ones. When Lewis returned as governor, these same individuals, whom he had previously helped, were actively undermining him.

Another topic that has received much attention focuses on Lewis's four hundred missing journal entries and the fact that Lewis's failure to keep a regular journal during the 1804–1806 expedition has been branded by historians as being irresponsible and negligent. A chapter of this book analyzes the historical evidence to present a balanced view of Lewis's contributions to the expedition. Historians have also criticized Lewis for his failure, while territorial governor of Louisiana, to carry on a proper and regular correspondence with his superiors. Lewis informs us in an important letter that some of his mail had been lost, but it is apparent that someone was working behind the scenes to delay it. We also discover Lewis's aptitude on an esoteric topic referred to as “on-land navigation.”

A very recent point of historical controversy examined here is the role of Maj. James Neelly, the Chickasaw Indian agent who cared for Lewis in his final days, which has gained much prominence through a television broadcast on the History Channel. The recent discovery of court documents mentioning Neelly by name suggests that Neelly was not present at Grinder's Inn on the morning of October 11, as he said he was, and was instead in a courtroom in Williamson County, Tennessee. If this claim is correct, then much of the established orthodoxy about Lewis's death and burial, based on Neelly's testimony, may be untrue. This is another iteration of the deconstruction process, another pet theory allowed to parade as authoritative research because little documentation has been uncovered or published about Neelly. Yet as we discover from new research presented in this book, Neelly was indeed Lewis's companion in the final days of the explorer's life.

Within this book is a wealth of information drawn from newly discovered primary source materials, which are faithfully reproduced verbatim and without correction, making this volume an important collection of hitherto unpublished documents by and about Meriwether Lewis. Among these are documents relating to Lewis's court-martial, his real estate transactions, his long sought-after account book entries, transcriptions of letters he sent to various persons, and letters about him and his death. Finally, Lewis's controversial death is revisited, with key aspects that contributed to his demise given more focus and depth.

This is an exciting time for Meriwether Lewis, and because of an extraordinary twist of fate or luck, two hundred years later, this new documentation restores the reputation of a man who successfully governed the Louisiana Territory and who led the iconic expedition of 1804–1806.