When most people hear “rendezvous,” they often picture the rugged mountain men of the American West—bearded, buckskin-clad trappers gathering in a festive wilderness carnival. These Rocky Mountain Rendezvous, held annually from 1825 to 1840, indeed form a dramatic chapter in American frontier history. But they represent only a fraction of the North American fur trade’s long and complex story.

In contrast, the Voyageur Rendezvous—centered in the Great Lakes and Canadian Shield—spanned nearly two centuries. French traders, Indigenous nations, and later British and Métis participants engaged in an extensive fur trading network that was both more enduring and more deeply interwoven with Native life than its Western Rocky Mountains counterpart. These gatherings were held regularly between the 1730s and early 1800s, with some activity dating back as far as the mid-1600s.

Origins and End of the French Fur Trade & Voyageur Rendezvous

The rendezvous evolved from informal gatherings in the 1650s to structured events around forts like Michilimackinac. They ended by 1763 after the French defeat in the Seven Years’ War.

• 1650s: French traders and Indigenous allies establish Great Lakes trade routes, creating a need for centralized meetings.
• 1670s: Trading posts like Fort Michilimackinac support seasonal rendezvous.
• 1681: Formal licensing of coureurs des bois helps organize rendezvous culture.
• 1730s–1760: Annual gatherings in places like Grand Portage become vital hubs.
• 1763: Treaty of Paris ends French political control; British take over fur trade operations.
• Post-1763: British shift rendezvous north to Fort William after U.S. independence.

French Fur Trade Era: Indigenous Displacement, Conflict, and Trade Goods

• Huron-Wendat, Ottawa, and Algonquin tribes allied with French for early trade.^[2]
• Comanche and Sioux combined horses and guns for dominance.^[11]
• Iroquois pushed out rivals in the Beaver Wars.^[12]
• Ojibwe expelled the Dakota from northern Minnesota.^[13]
• Shoshone avoided armed Sioux despite having horses.^[7]
• The Métis emerged from fur-trade intermarriage.^[14]

For an overall and much more detailed review of the impact of the entire fur trade era (French voyageur era, Rocky Mountain rendezvous era, and Southwest fur trade) be sure to read the closing paragraphs of this article: Epilogue: What the Fur Trade Left Behind.

Two Traditions, One Shared Legacy

While the Voyageur and Mountain Man rendezvous traditions were separated by centuries and geography, they shared one key feature: the centrality of Indigenous nations. From the Algonquin and Ojibwe in the east to the Shoshone and Crow in the west, Native peoples were never passive actors. They were guides, trappers, traders, diplomats—and sometimes rivals—who shaped the terms of exchange, war, and survival on the frontier.

Both traditions are worthy of recognition. And with renewed attention to source accuracy, tribal impacts, and intercultural cooperation, we can better honor the complexity of these gatherings—not just as colorful reenactments, but as living histories.

The Mountain Men and their Short-Lived Rendezvous Era (1825-1840)

Buckskinner / Mountain Man Rendezvous

Rendezvous held in the western part of what is now the United States included a more diverse range of activities than their northern Voyageur Rendezvous counterparts. Such a rendezvous might include several fur trading companies, and array of fur traders, mountain men and Native Americans. A substantial amount of deal-making and trading occurred at these rendezvous. These were often a temporary “town” of sorts with businesses which offered the fur trade workers and participants ways to spend their money on supplies and revelry. The North American fur trade in the west is identified with these large annual Mountain Man rendezvous that were held in various Rocky mountain locations from 1825 until 1840. One of the largest of these was the Rendezvous of 1832. Much of the attendance of these consisted of mountain men who were fur trade participants who were experienced at living in the mountain back country.

Between Rendezvous
After their rendezvous, these mountain men headed off to their fall trapping grounds. Contrary to the common image of the lonely trapper (the free trapper), the mountain men usually traveled in brigades of 40 to 60, including camp tenders and meat hunters (think of the movie, “The Revenent”). From these brigade base camps, they would trap in parties of two or three. It was then that the trappers were most vulnerable to Indian attack. Indians were a constant threat to the trappers, and confrontation was common. The Blackfeet were by far the most feared, but the Arikaras and Comaches were also to be avoided. The Shoshone, Crows and Mandans were usually friendly, however, trust between trapper and native was always tenuous. Once the beaver were trapped, they were skinned immediately, allowed to dry, and then folded in half, fur to the inside. Beaver pelts, unlike buffalo robes, were compact, light and very portable. This was essential, as the pelts had to be hauled later to rendezvous for trade. It is estimated that 1,000 trappers roamed the American West in this manner from 1820 to 1830, the heyday of the Rocky Mountain fur trade and Mountain Man / Buckskinner Rendezvous.

In November when the streams froze, the fur trapper, like the grizzly bear, went into hibernation. Trapping continued only if the fall had been remarkably poor, or if they were in need of food. Life in the winter camp could be easy or difficult, depending on the weather and availability of food. The greatest enemy was quite often boredom. The men would engage in many of the same rendezvous activities to fill the time, such as physical contests, card playing, checkers and dominos, tell stories, sing songs and read.

Mountain Man Rendezvous Camp Locations (1825-1840)
NOTE: Links reflect current Rendezvous in these same locations each year. The “1838 Mountain Man Rendezvous” at the Wind River Heritage Center in Riverton, Wyoming is the only reenactment on the actual untouched, historic site where the rendezvous took place. Other rendezvous with link take place within a few miles of the original sites.

Epilogue: What the Fur Trade Left Behind

Timeline: Major Events in the Fur Trade (1530s–1850s)

• 1534: Jacques Cartier explores the Gulf of St. Lawrence; beginning of French claims.^[1]
• 1608: Samuel de Champlain founds Quebec; alliance with Algonquin, Huron-Wendat, and Montagnais tribes.^[2]
• 1670: Hudson’s Bay Company (British charter) challenges French dominance.^[3]
• 1713: Treaty of Utrecht gives Britain major territory.^[4]
• 1754–1763: French and Indian War.^[5]
• 1783: Treaty of Paris (American Revolution).^[6]
• 1804–1806: Lewis and Clark document Indigenous trade tensions.^[7]
• 1821: HBC merges with North West Company.^[8]
• 1840: Last Rocky Mountain Rendezvous.^[9]
• 1850s: Reservation policy impacts begin.^[10]

American Fur Trade Impact on Indigenous Peoples: Migration, Conflict, and Change

From start to finish, the fur trade profoundly affected Indigenous peoples of North America – economically, territorially, and politically. Demand for furs tied many Native nations into global markets: some groups grew powerful middlemen or suppliers, while others were displaced or destroyed.

Economic Dependency: Many nations became dependent on European trade goods. The Five Nations Iroquois, for example, grew reliant on firearms and metal tools obtained via trade, which in turn pushed them to hunt more and fight neighbors to control hunting territories. Across the continent, traditional crafts and subsistence patterns changed – why knap stone arrowheads when steel knife blades were available? Why maintain large crop fields when European sugar and bread could be traded for with furs? Over time, this dependency could undermine self-sufficiency and make Indigenous groups vulnerable if trade was disrupted.

Territorial Shifts: The fur trade triggered major migrations and realignments of tribal territories. In the Great Lakes region, the Iroquois wars of the 17th century pushed tribes like the Huron-Wendat, Ottawa, and Potawatomi westward. Sioux (Dakota) bands, once forest dwellers in Minnesota, moved onto the open Plains by the eighteenth century, partly due to pressure from the Ojibwe (who had guns from the French) and the allure of buffalo and horses. The Cheyenne similarly migrated from the Great Lakes to the Plains, transforming from agricultural villagers into nomadic buffalo hunters by the early 1800s – and eager trading partners at posts like Bent’s Fort. The Shoshone and Ute in the Rockies were displaced from some areas by the better-armed Blackfeet and Crow who traded for guns. In the Southwest, Apache and Navajo raids on Spanish settlements were intensified by competition over livestock (itself a side effect of Spanish ranching economy, which was partly sustained by trade in hides/tallow). We also see new multi-ethnic communities emerging: the Métis on the northern plains, as well as “villages” around trading posts where members of different tribes and mixed families settled (e.g., at Fort Union or Fort Vancouver, employees and native wives formed little communities).

Intertribal Relations: The influx of guns and horses via trade revolutionized intertribal warfare. Some groups gained deadly advantages – e.g., the Cree and Assiniboine, armed by the French and English, expanded west and north, displacing weaker neighbors. The Comanche, after acquiring Spanish horses in the 1700s, became dominant raiders and traders in the Southern Plains, controlling the flow of goods (including captives and mustangs) to New Mexico. On the other hand, tribes that lost access to firearms (due to being enemies of trading nations) often suffered: the Blackfeet initially had firearms from British traders and held off the Shoshone; when Americans (initially allied with Shoshone) didn’t trade guns to the Blackfeet, conflict erupted. Complex alliances formed and shifted based on trade access – Huron and Algonquins allied with French vs. Iroquois with English; Crow allied with Americans vs. Blackfeet with British; Pueblo Indians allied with Spanish vs. Navajo/Comanche raiders; and later, Plains tribes allied or opposed to the U.S. based on whether forts supplied them.

Cultural Changes: Many Indigenous communities adapted creatively. Métis culture blossomed – with unique music, dress (the Métis sash), and economic specialization (like the Red River cart brigades). Some tribes like the Ojibwe shifted their seasonal rounds to prioritize winter trapping for fur, altering gender roles (men trapping, women processing pelts and adapting crafts like beadwork using imported beads – which all glass beads were). Missionaries often followed traders, leading to religious changes (e.g., some Cree and Métis adopted Christianity through missionary influence at trade posts). However, not all changes were voluntary – disease was an uninvited consequence of trade contact. The smallpox epidemics of 1770s, 1837, and the cholera of 1849 killed tens of thousands of Indigenous people from the Missouri Valley to the Rockies, causing societal collapse in some cases (the 1837 smallpox outbreak at Fort Union nearly annihilated the Mandan and badly hit the Blackfeet, Arikara, etc., weakening their hold in the trade).

Conflict and Resistance: As the fur trade era waned and was replaced by outright colonial expansion, many tribes resisted the new order. Tecumseh’s War (1811) and Red Cloud’s War (1866–68), though separated by decades, both had roots in defending lands opened by earlier trade then threatened by settlers. The end of the fur trade often meant the beginning of open conquest. For instance, the Sioux, Cheyenne, Arapaho – once trading partners at Fort Laramie and Bent’s Fort – would in the 1860s fight against U.S. forts being built on their lands (leading to conflicts like the Sand Creek Massacre and Battle of Little Bighorn in the 1860s-70s, beyond the fur trade period being discussed). In Canada, Métis resistance flared in the Red River Rebellion (1869) and Northwest Rebellion (1885) as the HBC era gave way to Canadian Confederation.

In summary, Indigenous peoples were not passive in the fur trade – they were primary actors whose decisions shaped the course of history. Some groups prospered for a time by leveraging trade (e.g. Iroquois in 1600s, Comanche in 1700s, Métis in early 1800s), but most paid a steep price, whether through resource depletion, disease, or loss of independence. The fur trade changed native North America forever – by 1850s, the map of tribal territories was drastically different from that of 1500, and many cultural practices had evolved due to 300 years of exchange.

Tags: Difference in a Mountain Man Rendezvous and Voyageur Rendezvous, Mountain Man Rendezvous, Voyageur Rendezvous

View Past Voyageur Rendezvous or Encampment Events (reference only)

View Past Buckskinner & Mountain Man Rendezvous Events (reference only)

Map: Fur Trade Routes & Indigenous Movements

References and Resources