USA > New York > History of the state of New York Vol I > Part 74
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84
In fact, Dermer appears to have been the first Englishman that ever visited Manhattan (ante, p. 94) ; and it would seem that Plantagenet manufactured his statement of Argall's visit out of Dermer's authentic accounts. The original authority, which other writers have followed, is thus very suspi- cious ; and the absence of official documentary evidence increases distrust to such a degree, that I can not help rejecting the whole story of Argall's proceedings at Manhattan as fabulous.
NOTE F, CHAPTER II., PAGE 55.
Heylin's Cosmography, book iv., part ii., is the authority upon which Moulton, 344, and O'Calla- ghan, i., 77, make this statement. Heylin, however, seems merely to have taken and embellished his account from the fabulous " Beauchamp Plantagenet," whose worth as an authority has been con- sidered in note E. Bancroft, ii., 272, is very cautious in his text, but is less guarded in his note, that " the records prove there was no fort at Albany till 1615." Father Isaac Jogues, who was at Man- hattan in 1643 (ante, p. 374), says, in his letter of the 3d of August, 1646, that " the fort was begun in the year 1615."-Doc. Hist. N. Y., iv., 23. It would seem, however, that there was no fort or re- doubt on Manhattan Island until after Deriner's visit in 1620, or, perhaps, until after Director Min- uit's arrival in 1626. If there had been, Dermer would no doubt have stated the fact, which he does not. Neither De Laet nor Wassenaar, who speak of a fort up the river, say any thing about a fort or redoubt on Manhattan until 1626 .- Doc. Ist. N. Y., iii., 27, 35, 42. There is no fort marked there upon the " Figurative Map" of 1614, which gives the dimensions of Fort Nassau on Castle Island ; nor upon the paper map of 1616 .- See notes G and I. Stuyvesant, in his letter to the government of Massachusetts, of the 20th of April, 1660 (Alb. Rec., xxiv., 167 ; ante, p. 673), while speaking of the building of the fort (Nassau) on Castle Island in 1614 (erroneously stated to have been in 1615), says nothing of any other fortification until after the West India Company took possession of New Neth- erland in 1623. In his letter to Colonel Nicolls, of the 2d of September, 1664 (Smith's New York, i., 22 ; ante, p. 740), he speaks only of "a little fort," which the Dutch built " up the North River, near Fort Orange."
On the other hand, in a memorial of the West India Company to the States General, on the 25th of October, 1634 (Hol. Doc., ii., 138), it is affirmed that, " before the year 1614, one or two sinall forts were built" on the North or Mauritius River. In another official report of the company, on the 15th of December, 1644 (IIol. Doc., ii., 368), it is stated that, before the 11th of October, 1614, "two small forts were thrown up there, on the South and North Rivers, against the roaming Indians." Both of these statements are careless, vague, and contradictory. The first does not mention that either of the " one or two" forts on the North River was at Manhattan ; the second refers the position of one of them to the South River. That river, however, was not explored by the Dutch until 1616; and there does not appear to have been any fort there until 1623.
NOTE G, CHAPTER II., PAGES 59, 60; CHAPTER III., PAGE 73.
A fac-simile of this parchment map, which I found in the archives at the Hague in 1841, is in the Secretary of State's office at Albany. It is the most ancient map extant of the State of New York,
756
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
and the neighboring territory to the north and east, and is probably the one to which De Laet (iii., cap. viii.) refers as the "chart of this quarter, made some years since." The sea-coasts between Sandy Hook and Penobscot are exhibited with great care and detail ; and the portion north and east of Cape Cod will compare very favorably, in point of accuracy, with Smith's Map of New England, first published in 1616. Plymouth harbor is described by Block as "Crane Bay," and Boston har- bor as "Fox Haven." Salem Bay, north of Marblehead, is laid down as "Count Hendrick's Bay." Westward of the " Vlacke Hoeck" or Cape Malebarre, the coast is delineated as explored by Block, and afterward described by De Laet. Nantucket is called "Vlieland," and Martha's Vineyard " Tex- el," between which and the main-land lies the "Zuyder Zee." South of the Texel is "Hendrick Christiaensen's Island," now called "No Man's Land." The western entrance to Narragansett Bay is marked as " Sloup Bay," and Point Judith as the " Wapanoos Point." To the southward are " Ad- riaen Block's Island" and the " Visscher's Hook," or Montauk Point, the eastern extremity of Long Island. The coasts and rivers of Connecticut are delineated with comparative accuracy. Manhat- tan is represented as an island without any fort ; but at the upper part of the "River of the Prince Maurice" Fort Nassau is described and marked as upon an island. According to the reports of the Maquaas or Mohawks, the French are represented as coming with shallops to the upper part of their country " to trade with them." With regard to the parts south of " Sand Point" or Sandy Hook, and the " Round Hills" or Highlands of Nevesinck, the map is very imperfect. The Delaware is repre- sented as a small river running due west into the land, at latitude 39º 30'; and neither Cape May nor Cape Hinlopen are named. That river was, in fact, first explored in 1616, by Cornelis Hendricksen, who seems to have presented to the States General, the same year, another map, which is considered in note I. At latitude 37°, " Cape Charles" and " Cape Henry" are laid down on the parchment map as defining "the Inlet of Chesapeake ;" and "New Netherland" is represented as extending from Vir- ginia to the Penobscot, east of which lies "a part of New France."
The original parchment map, which is executed in a very beautiful style of art, was found in the archives at the Hague, annexed to a memorial to the States General by the " Directors of New Neth- erland," on the 18th of August, 1616. I think, however, that it was actually prepared two years be- fore, from the data furnished by Block immediately after his return to Holland, and that it was exhib- ited to their High Mightinesses for the first time on the 11th of October, 1614. The charter granted on that day to the directors of New Netherland expressly refers to a " Figurative map prepared (ge- transfigeert) by them," which described the sea-coasts between the fortieth and the forty-fifth degrees of latitude. This the parchment map clearly does. It, moreover, defines New Netherland as lying between New France and Virginia, according to the description in the charter. The map was prob- ably presented a second time on the 18th of August, 1616, when the directors of New Netherland ex- hibited their memorial for a further charter, to which it was found attached ; see note I.
NOTE H, CHAPTER III., PAGE 76; CHAPTER XX., PAGE 710.
According to Holland Document, xi., 86, the States General, on the 7th of February, 1665, declared that, " for more than fifty years," the Dutch had "had possession of Forts Orange and Esopus." From this it would seem that there was a Dutch fort at Esopus as early as 1614. Moulton, p. 347, re- marks that, about 1617, some Hollanders are said to have " settled among the Esopus Indians." De Vries, however, who sailed up the river in 1640, was at Esopus twice, but he does not speak of any Dutch settlers, or of any Dutch fort having been there, which he would scarcely have omitted to state if the fact had been so (ante, p. 302, 306). No fort or settlement is represented there in Visscher's map of 1655, or Van der Donck's of 1656. In fact, no Europeans seem to have been settled at " At- karkarton," or Esopus, until 1652 ; and it was not until 1658 that a village was palisaded and a bridge thrown over the Esopus Creek, at what is now Kingston (ante, p. 536, 649). The village was incor- porated and named " Wiltwyck" or Wildwyck in 1661 ; and soon afterward a "Ronduit" or Redoubt was built upon the bank of another creek a few miles off, near its confluence with the river (ante, p. 690, 710 ; Doc. Hist. N. Y., iv., 41, 45, 60, 74, 87). This creek, which is now known as the "Ron- dout," was originally called the "Esopus Kill." Upon Visscher's and Van der Donck's maps it is represented as the "Great Esopus River," communicating with the upper waters of the Delaware, and emptying into the North River by two mouths, the southernmost at Rondout, and the northern- most at Saugerties. This error would scarcely have occurred had that part of the country been then occupied by Dutch inhabitants. What is now called the "Esopus Creek" was formerly known as the " Sager's Kill" (ante, p. 714 ; Doc. Hist. N. Y., iv., 48, 77, 81). It runs southeasterly from near Pine Hill, on the border of Delaware county, toward Marbletown in Ulster county, where it bends to the north, and, flowing past Kingston (at which point it approaches the Rondout within about three miles) through a picturesque valley, empties into the river at Saugerties. One of the branches of the Ron-
757
APPENDIX.
dout (which, above where it receives the Wallkill, is sometimes called the Rosendale) rises near the border of Sullivan county, whence it runs northeasterly, through Ulster county, to the North River. The Bashes' Kill, one of the tributaries of the Nevesinck River, rises near the same point, and flows southwesterly toward Port Jervis. The ancient Indian trail from the Minnisincks followed the course of these two streanis ; and, in selecting the route of the Delaware and Hudson Canal, the white man's science but availed itself of the red man's sagacity.
NOTE I, CHAPTER III., PAGES 73, 78, AND 80.
Besides the map on parchment, mentioned in note G, I found in the archives at the Hague a map on paper, a fac simile of which is also deposited in the office of the Secretary of State .. For various reasons, some of which are given in N. Y. H. S. Proceedings for 1845, 182-192, I think that this pa- per map was first presented to the States General when Captain Hendricksen appeared before them, on the 18th and 19th of August, 1616, to solicit a new grant of trading privileges for his employers, the " directors of New Netherland." The map is about three feet long and one foot wide. It eom- prehends the sea-coast from the southern point of the Delaware Bay (neither of the capes of which are named), at latitude thirty-eight degrees, to the coast of Long Island, in latitude 40° 35'. "Eyer Haven," or Egg Harbor, is distinctly marked, and " Sand Hoeck" is laid down as in 40° 30' ; its act- ual latitude being now ascertained to be 40° 28'. Within Sandy Hook the shores of New Jersey are represented as inhabited by the " Aquamachukes." North of these, about Newark Bay, are the " San- gicans," east of which, about Bergen Point and Jersey City, are the "Mechkentiwoom." Above the " Manhattes" (where there is no indication of a fort) are the " Wikagyl" tribe, opposite to which, on the west side, are the " Tappans." The country inland, to the northwest, is represented as "een ef- fen velt," or a level field. Then comes a " rack" or reach in the river, marked "Haverstro," or Oat Straw, north of which is the "Seyl-maker's Rack." The bend at Caldwell's is marked as the "Cock's Rack," and that at West Point as the "Hoogh Rack." Next above is the "Vosse Rack," which extends to " Klinkersberg," or Butter Hill, the northernmost of the Highlands, on the west side of the river, opposite Pollepel's Island. Then follows the " Visscher's Rack," and on the east side of the river, about Fishkill, is marked the tribe of " Pachami." Above what is now Hyde Park, an island is laid down in the middle of the river, answering to the present "Esopus Island." On the west side of the river, about the present counties of Ulster and Orange, is the tribe of " Waronawan- ka," and on the opposite shore of Dutchess, which is marked "Esopus," that of the " Woranecks." Beyond Upper Red Hook is the " Backer Rack," and near Catskill "Jan Plesier's Rack." The flats and shallows in the river are distinctly marked. About Hudson is the " Klaver Rack" or Clover Reach, north of which is the "Ooster Hook." Then follow the " Hinne Hook," the "Herten Rack," and " Kinder Hook," or Children's Hook. The river above appears full of small islands as far as the " Stcur Hook," or Sturgeon Hook, about Van Wies' Point. North of this is an island, marked " Nas- sou," meaning Fort Nassau, on Castle Island. The names of these reachcs and points on the river seem to have been given after the building of Fort Nassau in 1614, as none of them are marked upon the parchment map. On the east side of the river are the "Mahicans ;" inland on the west side, and on the banks of the Mohawk River, are the wigwams of the "Maquaas." South of the Maquaas are the " Canoomakers," represented as inhabiting the shores of a " Versch Water" or lake, from which a river appears to flow southerly, until it empties into the Delaware Bay, near its southern cape. Along the banks of this river are represented the several tribes of Senecas, Gachoos, Capitannasses, Jotte- cas, and Minquas. Upon the map is a memorandum to the following effect : "Of what Kleynties and his comrades have communicated to me respecting the locality of the rivers and the places of the tribes which they found in their expedition from the Maquaas into the interior, and along the New River downward to the Ogehage (to wit, the enemies of the aforesaid Northern tribes), I can not at present find any thing at hand, except two rough drafts of maps relating thereto, accurately drawn in parts. And in deliberating how I can best reconcile this one with the rough drafts of the inform- ations, I find that the places of the tribes of Senecas, Gachoos, Capitinasses, and Jottecas should be marked down considerably further west into the country." The Delaware River appears to have been explored as far north as the Schuylkill, which is represented as flowing in from the west. On the Jersey shore, above the mouth of the river, is the " Sauwanew" tribe ; above, and on both sides of the river, are the "Stankekans ;" and inland, north of the Schuylkill, are the " Minquas."
Upon a comparison of this map with De Laet's description of the reaches of the North River, in chapter ix., there appears to be a remarkable harmony between them. De Laet's is a little more de- tailed respecting the upper part of the river ; but I think that-besides the parchment map-he must have had this or one taken from it before him when he wrote, as he follows its error in representing Esopus on the east side, among the Waoranacks. The portion inland from Fort Nassau is of course
758
HISTORY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
represented very inaccurately. Who was the author of the memorandum quoted above (which is written in the court hand of the time), and who "Kleynties and his comrades" were, there are no present means of ascertaining. Probably, however, the latter were the three traders of the company, who are stated, in Hol. Doc., i., 6I, to have left their employment among the Mohawks and Mahicans at Fort Nassau, and set out thence on an "expedition into the interior, and along the New River, downward to the Ogehage," or the Minquas, by whom they were taken prisoners. These three per- sons, Hendricksen states in his report, he ransomed from the Minquas, "giving for them kettles, beads, and merchandise."
It seems to me that this paper map was meant to illustrate Hendricksen's exploration of the South or "New River," from its mouth up to the Minquas' country, where he ransomed the three captive servants of the company, of whom he speaks. When found in the archives at the Hague, the map had upon it no mark by which its date could be ascertained. A part of the upper corner was torn off. Appended to the memorial, which Hendricksen presented on the 18th of August, 1616, was found the parchment map, which, as explained in note G, was probably first presented by Block and his employ- ers on the 1Ith of October, 1614. That map exhibited the extent of the Dutch discoveries up to that time, and represented New Netherland as extending from the fortieth to the forty-fifth degree of latitude. After having served its purpose in explaining the original bounds of New Netherland, and in aiding the passage of the grant of the 1Ith of October, it was probably taken back to Amsterdam by the as sociated merchants who had caused it to be prepared. When Hendricksen arrived, in the summer of I616, with intelligence of his new discoveries on the South River, his employers probably annexed this parchment map to their memorial of the 18th of August, so as to exhibit the extent of New Neth- erland at that time. It thus became a record of the States General. The company, however, wished to obtain another grant for the "lands, bay, and three rivers," which Hendricksen had just explored, "situated at the latitude of from thirty-eight to forty degrees ;" and the paper map seems to exhibit these additional discoveries.
NOTE K, CHAPTER V., PAGES 150, 152, AND 153.
Much embarrassment has been caused by confounding the Timmer Kill, or Timber Creek, with the Cooper's Creek, in the translation of De Vries, in i., N. Y. H. S. Coll., i., 253. I am indebted to Mr. Edward Armstrong, the secretary of the Pennsylvania Historical Society, for the communication of some recent investigations made on the spot, the result of which appears to leave little room to doubt that Fort Nassau was built upon the point of land at the junction of the Big and Little Timber Creeks, in Gloucester county, New Jersey. As Mr. Armstrong will probably favor the public with a paper on the subject, I abstain from any further remark.
The statement of Wassenaar, on page 152 of the text, respecting Fort Wilhelmus, "upon the Prince's Island, formerly called the Murderer's Island," is certainly very obscure. Not having been able to find any other mention of Prince's Island, or Murderer's Island, in the North River, I thought it might, perhaps, be what is now called Esopus Island, about three miles above Hyde Park landing. In the autumn of 1851, I accordingly visited that island with some friends, to see if we could find any indications of a fort, said to have been " garrisoned by sixteen men for the defense of the river be- low." We spent some very pleasant hours among its solitary rocks, but found no satisfactory evi- dence that a fort had ever been there, although we all agreed that it would be an admirable position for a work to command both channels of the river. It has since occurred to me, that what is now called Pollepel's Island, just above the Highlands, might have been the spot. I do not know that it was ever called "the Murderer's Island ;" but as the " Murderer's Creek" empties into the river at Cornwall, in Orange county, nearly opposite, it may be that that name was also applied to Pollepel's Island.
NOTE L, CHAPTER VIII., PAGE 263.
In this and in preceding chapters, I have traced thus minutely the circumstances of the early set- tlement of Connecticut by the English, because it is due to historical truth that the question of orig- inal Dutch title should be fairly stated. It has so happened that most of the histories which refer to this subject have been written by New England people, who seem to have been too much influenced by their Eastern prejudices. Perhaps one of the most remarkable examples occurs in the Reverend Doctor Trumbull's History of Connecticut, in which that venerable author asserts that "the Dutch were always mere intruders." A candid reviewer, in the year 1818, has so ably considered this point, that I make no apology for quoting a few sentences. "The conflicting claims of the two colonies were the occasion of a bitter controversy between them for the space of thirty years, and until New
759
APPENDIX.
Nethicriand was reduced to subjection to the British crown. Each party asserted its rights with ob- stinacy ; and both sufferedl severely from the quarrel. It is not easy to discover on what ground the Dutch were regarded by the first settlers of Connecticut, or by their historian [Trumbull] at this day, as ' mere intruders.' They had made the first discovery of Hudson's River, and had established them- selves upon its banks. They had obtained a patent from their government, who had as good a right to grant lands discovered by their subjects as any other state. This patent included the lands on Connecticut River, and this river was discovered by them before it was known by the English to ex- ist, and before the grant of the New England patent. After trading with the Indians for several ycars, they purchased of them a tract of land, and built upon it a fort and trading-house before the country had been taken possession of by the English ; and the people from the Plymouth and Massa- chusetts colonies, when they attempted to drive them from it, came without a shadow of title from the Plymouth Company, under whom they professed to claim."-North American Review, vol. viii., page 85.
NOTE M, CHAPTER IX., PAGE 275.
That the predecessors of Kicft had official minutes of their proceedings is evident from the allu- sions in Albany Records, ii., 50, and iii., 291, to "the records kept in Director Van Twiller's time." With the exception, however, of one volume of land patents, the earliest entry in which is dated 12th July, 1630, these records have disappeared. The colonial and provincial records from the time of Kieft, in 1638, were originally kept at New Amsterdam, or New York, whence they were removed to the office of the Secretary of State at Albany. Most of those which relate to the Dutch period- down to 1664-were translated in 1818, and compose a series of twenty-four volumes, quoted as the "Albany Records." A great number of Dutch and English records, however, extending from 1630 to the Revolution, remained, until a ycar or two ago, without having been catalogued or assorted for consultation, and almost inaccessible, in one of the store-rooms of the State Hall. These are now arranged and bound, and they form more than one hundred large volumes.
On the 2d of May, 1839, at the suggestion of the New York Historical Society, the Legislature passed an act for the appointment of an Agent to procure, in England, Holland, and France, the orig- inals or copies " of all such documents and papers in the archives and offices of those governments, relating to, or in any way affecting the colonial or other history of this state, as he may deem im- portant to illustrate that history." Having resided some time in Holland, I was unexpectedly hon- ored with a commission as Agent under that aet. To avoid, as far as possible, the inconvenience of obtaining duplicates, I then spent several weeks in as thorough and careful a re-examination as there was opportunity to make, of the principal Dutch and English records in the Secretary's office. Three years were subsequently occupied at the Hague, Amsterdam, London, and Paris, in searching their voluminous records ; and early in 1845, eighty manuscript volumes, containing nearly five thousand separate documents, and comprising the official correspondence of our colonial governors and offi- cers, were added to the archives of the state at Albany. Of these volumes there are three series. Sixtcen, obtaincd in Holland, which relate to events between 1603 and 1678, are called " Holland Documents ;" forty-seven, procured in England, beginning with 1614 and ending with 1782, are called "London Documents ;" and seventeen, copicd at Paris, referring to occurrences between 1631 and 1763, are called "Paris Documents." Catalogues of all these documents were appended to the Final Report of the Agent, and printed as Senate Document, Number 47, on the 26th of February, 1845. Among the Documents of the Agency are many of acknowledged importance, which were never be- fore known to the historian. As the law, however, required the Agent to procure all papers in his judgment "relating to, or in any way affecting the colonial or other history of this state," several were obtained, which, at first sight, some might pronounce to be superfluous. The chief object of the agency-to render the archives of the state as complete and comprehensive as possible-was al- ways kept in view ; what was deemed to be a sound and wise discretion was exercised ; and in many cases where doubts arose whether similar papers might not already exist at Albany, either in whole or in part, it was thought best to secure copies, even at the risk of apparent redundancy. Under an act passcd on the 30th of March, 1849, all the documents procured in Europe are now in progress of publication, and will form ten quarto volumes, entitled "New York Colonial Manu- scripts." Several of these documents have also been included in the miscellany called " Document- ary History of New York," four volumes of which have been compiled and issued under the direction of the Secretary of State. It is greatly to be regretted that, in these volumes, proper references have not been made to the book and page, or to the particular place where the original of each document may be found, and that a chronological order, so desirable in the arrangement of materials for his- tory, has not been observed.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.