The Bevier House in Ulster County, New York. Photo retrieved from hudsonvalleyone.com.
By Franklin Eck
Supervised Research Conducted with Dr. Paul Kelton
This article is the second of a two part series. To read part one, click here.
Being a history major, whose primary field of interest is Early American History, and having spent my entire life in Ulster County, New York, for years I have been interested in the early history of Ulster County. The Esopus Wars known as the First Esopus War (1659-1660), and the Second Esopus War (1663-1664), were crucial both for the Dutch and European settlement of Ulster County, as well as the gradual population decline of the Indigenous People of Esopus. The Esopus Wars have been for the most part ignored, due in large part to the fact that the largest locality, Kingston, became the first state capital of New York, and the location where the original New York State Constitution was signed in 1777. Kingston was burned by a British army detachment during the Saratoga campaign on October 16, 1777, the day before British Army General John Burgoyne surrendered his Army at Saratoga. Additionally, Kingston was no longer the state capital after it was burned, and thus, Kingston’s prominence during the American Revolution, has overshadowed the earlier Esopus Wars. Furthermore, Kingston’s prominence in the American Revolution has been placed in the modern public’s eye through the reenactments of the Burning of Kingston, at the expense of the Esopus Wars. However, the Esopus Wars were just as important for the history of Ulster County as Kingston’s prominence during the American Revolution, in terms of European colonization of Ulster County which made possible Kingston’s role in the American Revolution. This paper will tell the story of the colonization of Ulster County, the Esopus Wars, and these events made possible Kingston’s role in the American Revolution.
The author would like to take a moment to explain the listing of dates relating to the Julian calendar, or Old Style, and the Gregorian calendar, or New Style, which were being used during this time period. All dates are taken from Marc B. Fried’s The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. and B. Fernow’s Documents Relating to the Colonial History of the State of New York. Vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers from 1630 to 1684, as well as translated documents from the digital collections of the New York State Archives. Consequently, all dates in this paper are listed as they appeared in Fried’s and Fernow’s books, and as they appeared on the translations from the digital collections of the New York State Archives, which were taken from the primary sources themselves and therefore are Old Style dates. Fried explained in his book that “except in case of direct quotation, the year of an event is always given in New Style form. The day and month are given in whichever form (Old Style, New Style, or dual) appears in the document that was used as a source.” Additionally, the copyright page of Fernow’s book explained that the dates were “Translated, Compiled and Edited from the Original Records in the Office of the Secretary of State, at Albany, and other sources, under direction of the Honbie JOSEPH B. CARR, Secretary of State”. Therefore, it is surmised that the dates in Fernow’s book were in Old Style as well.
The European colonization of present-day Ulster County was under the authority and protection of the Dutch West India Company, a monopolistic investment trading company which, in turn, was under the authority and protection of the Estates General, the core legislature of the government of the Dutch Republic, as well as the Dutch military.
Timeline of Events
| 1661-1663 | The tensions between the Dutch Colonists and the Indigenous Peoples of Esopus intensified due to the expansion of further settlements. |
| June 7, 1663 | The Esopus Massacre took place. |
| July 28, 1663 | Dutch forces attacked a large fortification probably located between present-day Wawarsing, and Kerhonkson, New York. |
| September 5, 1663 | Dutch forces attacked another Esopus fortification. |
| May 15, 1664 | The official peace treaty which ended the Second Esopus War was adopted. |
| October 7, 1665 | English Governor Richard Nicolls adopted the English treaty with the Esopus. |
The Catalysts for and the Second Esopus War
During the period between the signing of the peace treaty that ended the First Esopus War and the outbreak of the Second Esopus War, the Dutch colonists of Esopus expanded their settlement. This expansion included a redoubt, authorized by Stuyvesant, that was built along the strand at the Esopus Creek’s estuary.[1]
Ensign Smith died during the latter part of 1660 and Sergeant Christiaen Niessen took over command of the stockade. Niessen was not new to Esopus; he had been Ensign Smith’s subordinate at the stockade after his first documented exploration of Esopus in June 1658.[2] Several Dutch colonists petitioned Stuyvesant to authorize their acquisition of land. In turn, the Director-General allocated property to the petitioners using the territory that the Esopus had given to the Dutch in the peace treaty. He ordered that the petitioners’ new lands be sealed within the stockade, thus expanding the fortification. This expansion is believed to have extended the stockade to Green Street in Kingston. While in Esopus on May 16, Stuyvesant gave the Esopus colony legal autonomy from the Court at Fort Orange and Beverwyck and authorized the creation of a local court. A group of magistrates operated the court which included a scout and three schepens. The schepens’ duties were those of “commissioners” while the scout’s duties consisted of serving as a judge in civil cases and as a prosecutor in low-level criminal cases. The court also had the authority to arrest, incarcerate, and conduct investigations. Those convicted in low-level criminal and civil cases had the right to appeal verdicts to the Director-General as well as the council unless the fine was less than fifty Dutch guilders.
In addition to establishing legal autonomy, Stuyvesant also renamed the Esopus colony Wiltwyck. The name Wiltwyck was derived from the Dutch words for wild or savage, most likely a reference to the Indigenous People of Esopus. The Dutch word wyck had several different meanings, which included district and parish.[3] On April 6, 1662, some residents of Beverwyck who were unhappy with land-owning restrictions sent a petition to Stuyvesant requesting his permission to create a new settlement near Wiltwyck. Stuyvesant agreed and the new settlement was constructed about 2.5 miles southwest of Wiltwyck. The new settlement was called Nieuwe Dorp or New Village, which was located in modern-day Hurley, New York.[4] This new settlement would be one of the catalysts for the Second Esopus War, as the Esopus did not accept its legitimacy because the land on which Nieuwe Dorp was located had not been given to the Dutch.[5]
On January 24, 1663, the Wiltwyck magistrates wrote to Stuyvesant sounding the alarm about the risks of the continued sale of alcoholic beverages to the Esopus. Their warning included examples of some of the Esopus launching “each other into the fire” while drunk and said that the magistrates had “inquired and found at the house of Loweys Dubo, a Walloon living in the new village, half an anker of distilled water, which had not been reported at this place and had been made by his father, Mathew Blanchart. For the reasons given before the court confiscated it, because some mischief might result from it.”[6] The magistrates asked Stuyvesant if the Court at Wiltwyck had the power to fine anyone caught selling alcoholic beverages to the Esopus, or if violators had to be transported to New Amsterdam.[7]
The Esopus feared that the Dutch-allied Mohawks would attack them. On January 22, 1661, there was a conference with the Mohawk sachems at Fort Orange. The sachems told the Dutch that “the Esopus savages had said, that when the Maquas would go to the Southriver and would pass there, they would kill them: they mean to show hereby, that they do not fear the Esopus savages.”[8] The Mohawk sachems also told the Dutch at that conference that “they will not call upon the Esopus savages in passing there, because the latter have said, the Maquas were the cause, why they had lost so many men in the war against the Dutch.”[9] On January 29, 1661, the magistrates of Fort Orange warned Stuyvesant that “the Esopus savages are in danger of being attacked by the Maquas, if they do not keep their tongues in check.”[10]
Accusations that the Esopus had not received compensation for the captives sent to Curaçao is recorded in several primary sources. On July 25, 1660, during a conference with Seneca sachems at Fort Orange, the sachems requested that Stuyvesant “return the captured Esopus savages” for unknown reasons.[11] Then, on June 16, 1661, Claes Jansen Ruyter delivered his report on the behavior of the Indigenous People of Esopus. His report included that the Indigenous People of Esopus “wanted their captured friends back, to see whether the heart of the Dutch was good.”[12]
The Esopus’ claimed that the land on which Nieuwe Dorp was built hadn’t been included in the territory given to Stuyvesant in the 1660 peace treaty. On April 7, 1663, the leading inhabitants of Nieuwe Dorp petitioned Stuyvesant to bribe the Esopus after they made it clear that:
they are willing to allow the erection of buildings, but that no fortification must be made, which, if it should be done, would show that we had evil intentions; these barbarians say also, that the second large piece of land was not included in the treaty of peace made with them in the year 1660 and they will therefore not allow, that we should plough and sow it nor that our cattle and horses shall pasture upon it, before they are not paid for it.[13]
Historian Marc B. Fried concluded that the disputed Nieuwe Dorp territory was likely included in the land given to Stuyvesant in the 1660 peace treaty. However, he stressed that it is impossible to know with a high level of certainty. This is largely due to the fact that no primary sources indicate that land surveys were conducted and consequently no boundaries of the land were determined.[14]
Lastly, the Esopus were angry that Stuyvesant had not yet held a conference with them to distribute gifts and renew the peace treaty. On June 5, 1663, the Esopus were informed that Stuyvesant would hold a conference with them soon, during which these activities were to take place. In fact, the Esopus were told to be prepared to go to the conference on short notice. Therefore, it is strange that the Esopus carried out what has come to be known as the Esopus Massacre.[15]
The Second Esopus War Begins
Between 11 a.m. and 12 p.m. on June 7, 1663, a time when Esopus knew that the Dutchmen were engaged in food cultivation, the Esopus entered Wiltwyck from multiple directions claiming a desire to trade. After approximately fifteen minutes, several message riders arrived and raised the hue and cry that other Esopus warriors had attacked and burned Nieuwe Dorp. When the attack was over, three men had been killed and a single man, along with thirty-four women and children, were taken captive.
Upon the message riders’ arrival, the Esopus in Wiltwyck burned the stockade’s southern section and entered buildings looking for individuals to kill or take captive. Whether they had planned to wait until the news of the attack on Nieuwe Dorp reached Wiltwyck or if they spontaneously decided they had no choice but to attack is unknown. The Esopus shot at the Dutch colonists with firearms and attacked them with tomahawks and axes. Those who escaped the attack ran to alert others working at outlying locations. Thomas Chambers, although wounded while running back from fieldwork, assumed his role as a captain in the militia. He ordered that the gates be guarded and that the cannons be ready to fire on the Esopus who, according to local lore, retreated when the cannons were pointed towards them. As additional colonists returned to the stockade, burnt sections were quickly replaced and guards were stationed at important locations. Nine Dutch colonists, three soldiers, four women, and two children were killed. Additionally, eight men were wounded, ten women and children were taken captive, and twelve dwellings were burned.[16] On June 14, Stuyvesant inspected Wiltwyck and declared that until orders arrived from higher authorities, military decisions fell within the purview of the commander of the professional soldiers and stockade Sergeant Christiaen Niessen, militia Captain Chambers, militia Lieutenant Hendrick Jochemsen, and the schepens and scout of Wiltwyck.[17]
On June 16, Sergeant Niessen and a group of soldiers fought a group of Esopus warriors. The Dutch suffered one casualty and had six wounded while the Esopus casualties are unknown. The next important event in the Second Esopus War was Captain Martin Cregier’s June 30th appointment to Captain-Lieutenant of the Dutch West India Company’s armed forces of New Netherland. Stuyvesant was still the supreme commander of military forces in New Netherland as well as the Director-General and Captain-General. Captain Cregier was sent to Wiltwyck to command and supervise military actions against the Esopus.[18] With him went Captain Cregier’s junior officers Lieutenant Nicolas Stillewel and Lieutenant Pieter Wolphertsen as well as a detachment of volunteers and Indigenous warriors. A military council comprised of Captain Cregier, Lieutenant Stillewel, Lieutenant Wolphertsen, and Sergeant Niessen were now given the power to decide what defensive and offensive military actions were to be taken against the Indigenous People of Esopus with the conciliation of Wiltwyck’s scout and schepens.[19] Captain Cregier and his force reached Wiltwyck on July 4 and during the night of July 9 a detachment of Dutch soldiers marched out of the stockade to attack a lightly occupied Esopus village in modern-day Tivoli, New York in Dutchess County.
The Dutch soldiers killed five warriors and a single Esopus female. They also captured a female Esopus sachem as well as three Esopus children. One Dutch soldier was killed and another suffered a rattlesnake bite.[20] The apprehended female Esopus sachem provided military intelligence regarding the fortification that the Esopus and at least forty Minisink Indigenous People were sheltering in. Rachel La Montagne, the ransomed wife of Gysbert van Imborgh from the Esopus Massacre of June 7, had been held captive at the fortification in question during her detention and on July 4 she was interviewed by the Dutch regarding its layout. She remembered that the fortification was eight hours southward by foot from Wiltwyck. She added that a road that was large enough for a wagon existed, which she calculated reduced the travel time from Wiltwyck by at most two hours. “the fort is fortified with palisades on the creek side and all around; the palisades could easily be pulled out; the creek is not deep near the fort and at 3 or 4 places there are rocks in it, so that it is easy to get across; the creek is as wide.”[21] She also added that “there is a good view of the surrounding country from the fort.” She then went on to describe the fort as “large, a little larger than the fort at Fort Orange.” Her interview concluded after she described the interior of the fortification.[22]
The location of the fortification was most likely between modern-day Wawarsing, New York and Kerhonkson, New York.[23] On July 24, a peace-negotiating delegation returned to Wiltwyck after attempting to negotiate with the Esopus at their fortification. The Esopus threatened the Mohawk negotiators only agreed to repatriate the captives once an official peace treaty was concluded. Additionally, they told the Dutch that they were to return to their fortification in ten days with gifts to conclude an official peace treaty, at which time they would repatriate the captives. Lastly, they would institute an armistice during those ten days.[24] At this point Captain Cregier decided to attack the fortification and free the captives. On July 26, Captain Cregier took more than 200 men which included forty-one Indigenous warriors. The soldiers used a former captive of the fortification to guide them.
The force reached the Esopus fortification during the nighttime hours of July 27. The fortification had been abandoned except for a female sachem hiding in a cornfield who was taken prisoner. On July 28, after they had been unsuccessful in locating the Indigenous Peoples and the captives that had been in and around the fortification, the Dutch forces destroyed any food and supplies that were discovered.[25] On July 29 a group of Indigenous warriors emerged on a hill close to the fortification and yelled that they would attack the Dutch the next day, however the assault never came. At sunrise on July 31, after waiting 24 hours, the Dutch burned the fortification and returned to Wiltwyck.[26]
A sachem from the Wappingers informed Captain Cregier on August 30 that the Esopus were constructing a new fortification next to a village where they were keeping their captives. Captain Cregier decided to attack this new fortification and on September 3, after being forced to wait three days while food and supplies were gathered with difficulty due to heavy rainfall, he departed with a force of fifty-five men, a male Wappinger captive to serve as a guide, and translator Christoffel Davits. It should be clarified that the male Wappinger captive was not the Wappinger sachem who informed the Dutch of the construction of the new Esopus fortification.[27] The general location of the second Esopus fortification has not been determined.[28]
Around 2 p.m. on September 5, Captain Cregier and his group reached the village. The Dutch forces attempted to sneak up on the fort but were discovered. The Esopus warriors, also caught unaware, attempted to reach their weapons but were only able to grip a small number of them before running into the nearby body of water. Once they were on the other side the warriors shot at the Dutch, however a group of Dutchmen were dispatched to stop them and the warriors fled. When the fighting had ended, 15 Esopus warriors were dead including the sachem Papequanaehen, four females and three children. The Dutch forces suffered three casualties and six wounded, recovered 23 Dutch Women and children whom they found, and took 13 Esopus captives. The Dutch then took animal skins, “elk hides,” firearms, gunpowder, “wampum,” and anything else of value that was discovered and set out for Wiltwyck.[29] It is possible that the fortification was burned however it is not mentioned in the primary source and secondary sources consulted. Captain Cregier described the new Esopus fortification as follows:
The fort was a perfect square with one row of palisades set all round being about fifteen feet above, and three feet underground. They had already completed two angles of stout palisades, all of them almost as thick as a man’s body, having two rows of portholes, one above the other; and they were busy at the third angle. These angles were constructed so solid and strong as not to be excelled by Christians. The fort was not so large as the one we had already burnt.[30]
On the way back to Wiltwyck, two of the prisoners died, an Esopus elder and a Esopus female child. The Dutch force returned to Wiltwyck on September 7 and by December 28, 1663, all but five Dutch captives held by the Esopus had been repatriated.[31]
During a peace conference on December 28-29 in New Amsterdam, Stuyvesant and other high-ranking Dutch officials met with a delegation from the Hackensack, Wappinger, and Staten Island Indigenous Peoples who represented the Esopus sachem Seweckenamo. Seweckenamo had requested that this delegation represent him at a peace conference with Stuyvesant to inform the Director-General that he wanted an official peace treaty and that he would do all in his power to repatriate the remaining five Dutch captives. The delegation told Stuyvesant that at that time the Esopus who were guarding the captives were away hunting because they had no food. The delegation was then instructed to request a two-month armistice, by the end of which the remaining captives would be repatriated, and Stuyvesant agreed.[32]
By March 25, 1664, two of the captives, both children, were repatriated to the Dutch at New Netherland. Stuyvesant, desirous to obtain the remaining three Dutch captives, ordered Sergeant Niessen to give the military officer whom he sent to Wiltwyck two Esopus children whom the Dutch held at Wiltwyck.[33] All the captives held by the Esopus and the Dutch were returned and repatriated around May 15, as this was the date on which the official peace treaty ending the Second Esopus War was signed at Fort Amsterdam.[34]
Aftermath of The Esopus Wars
The treaty included the following nine terms which had to be adhered to. First, both the Dutch and the Esopus agreed to end the war and forgive and forget any grievances. Second, the Esopus had to accept the permanent Dutch control of the land, which Esopus sachems had given to Stuyvesant in the treaty that had ended the First Esopus War. During the Second Esopus War, the Esopus had retaken control of that land, prompting the Dutch to forcefully retake the land. The Dutch wanted the Esopus sachems to once again formally acknowledge Dutch control of that land, which included Nieuwe Dorp. Additionally, the Esopus would no longer be permitted to carry out any food cultivation on this land. In addition to not being permitted to enter the outlying Dutch settlements, even if the Esopus came weaponless, they would henceforth only be permitted to come to Wiltwyck, New Amsterdam, and Fort Orange.
Third, the Dutch authorized the Esopus to carry out food cultivation near the first and second Esopus fortifications attacked in 1663, but only for that year. Fourth, in order to avoid a third war between the Esopus and the Dutch, no Esopus would carry out any hostile actions against the Dutch, and the Dutch agreed to do the same. Most likely in an attempt to entice the Esopus to maintain non-hostile relations, the Dutch allowed the Esopus to trade at the Rondout, the main waterway into Esopus, however only two or three Esopus would be allowed to trade there at one time, and they had to give Wiltwyck advanced notice of their coming to trade. A building was to be constructed for the Esopus to use when they came to trade, most likely in order to keep them away from the Dutch.
Fifth, in the event that a Dutch colonist killed an Indigenous Person of Esopus, or if an Indigenous Person of Esopus killed a Dutch colonist, a third war was not to commence. Instead, a conference was to be organized between the Dutch and the Esopus sachems, where the killer would be executed. Sixth, if an Indigenous Person of Esopus killed any animals owned by a Dutch colonist, the Esopus sachems would have to pay compensation. If the Esopus sachems resisted to pay compensation, one of the Esopus sachems would be held in Dutch custody until compensation was paid.
Stuyvesant used his authority as Director-General to promise the Esopus sachems that the Dutch would leave their people in peace. Seventh, the sachem of the Marsepingh and his People were included within the terms of the peace treaty. Eighth, the Esopus sachems at the peace conference had to convince the other Esopus sachems to accept the terms of the treaty, and all of the Esopus sachems had to meet with the Dutch in a month’s time to accept the terms. Ninth, Esopus sachems had to meet with the Dutch each year to renew the peace treaty.[35]
The Esopus never engaged in a war with the Dutch colonists again. Instead, they were forced to sell more and more of their land further away from Wiltwyck and Nieuwe Dorp.[36] After the peace treaty, Stuyvesant ordered the officials at Fort Orange to assist the Dutch colonists of Nieuwe Dorp in rebuilding the settlement and constructing a stockade for the colony, with Captain Cregier supervising the construction.[37]
Esopus Life in English New York
On September 8, 1664, English Colonel Richard Nicolls succeeded in his military expedition to capture New Netherland.[38] New Netherland was renamed New York after the English dukedom of James, the brother of King Charles II of England, Scotland, and Ireland. Wiltwyck became Kingston and Nieuwe Dorp became Hurley. Fort Orange and Beverwyck together became Albany, named after James’s Scottish dukedom, and he was made the proprietor of New York. On November 14, 1664, Colonel Nicolls, who was appointed the first royal governor of New York, changed the terms of the Second Esopus War Peace Treaty. The Esopus were now allowed to enter the town during business hours to trade.[39]
On October 7, 1665, Governor Nicolls signed an English peace treaty with the Indigenous People of Esopus which included the following provisos. First, no violent acts were to be carried out upon either the English or the Dutch, and neither were to destroy any property of the other. If an Indigenous Person of Esopus destroyed any property that belonged to an English subject, the Esopus had to pay compensation. If an English subject destroyed any property that belonged to an Indigenous Person of Esopus, the English would also pay compensation. Second, if an Indigenous Person of Esopus killed an English colonist, the killer would be executed and the Esopus sachems promised to hand over any of their transgressors of the peace treaty. Third, a building was to be erected for the Esopus’ use when they came to Kingston to trade. When the Esopus came to trade, they had to reside in this building and leave any weapons in the building before they entered Kingston to trade. Fourth, if an Indigenous Person of Esopus killed an English colonist and the Esopus sachems refused to hand over the killer, the Esopus sachems had to give the English a hostage until the killer was provided. Fifth, the Esopus sachems gave Governor Nicolls a large tract of land near modern-day Kerhonkson, New York.
Sixth, the Esopus sachems promised to renew the treaty every year and to bring with them several Esopus children each year to observe the treaty renewal. Seventh, if the Esopus or the English had previous grievances with each other, they were to be forgiven. Eighth, the Esopus sachem Wingeerinoe was given permission to carry out food cultivation for three years on a piece of land by the Cloughkawakanoe Creek. Governor Nicolls or his successors did retain the right to order him off the land during those three years, though if they did he was to be given a blanket and relocate without protest to the opposite bank of the Cloughkawakanoe Creek. Ninth, in order to entice the Esopus to adhere to the treaty, Governor Nicolls gave the Esopus sachems forty blankets, twenty pounds of gunpowder, twenty knives, six cooking kettles, and twelve lead bars.[40] As a sign of the Esopus sachems’ acceptance of this treaty they gave Governor Nicolls several sticks who in return gave the Esopus sachems three red-laced coats.
Esopus sachems were still renewing the 1665 Treaty in 1741, at which time the Esopus sachems seem to have presented the Esopus’ copy of the 1665 treaty to the English.[41] The Esopus eventually joined the Munsee tribe and the vast majority of this tribe had to leave the Hudson Valley after the American Revolution, during which the Munsee had sided with the British army. Despite this relocation, Ulster County lore states that the final Indigenous Person of Esopus died in approximately 1830 near Kingston.[42]
Conclusion
Although the First and Second Esopus Wars have been overshadowed by Kingston and Ulster County’s involvement in the American Revolution, the Esopus Wars nevertheless were a crucial part of the region’s history. European colonization of Ulster County and the Esopus Wars led to a gradual decline in the power, land ownership, and population growth of the Indigenous People of Esopus. Over the course of 111 years, the colonists of Ulster County firmly established their control of the area, securing the county leading up to and during the American Revolution.
Endnotes
[1] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 43.
[2] Ibid., 44.
[3] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 44-45. and Andrew Brink. Invading Paradise: Esopus Settlers at War with Natives, 1659-1663. (North Bloomington: Xlibris, 2003), 19.
[4] B, Fernow., trans. and ed. Documents Relating to the Colonial History of the State of New York. Vol. XIII. Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers (with the Exception of Albany), From 1630 to 1684. And also Illustrating the Relations of the Settlers with the Indians. (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881), 219-220. Hereafter cited as vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers . . . from 1630 to 1684, trans. and ed. B. Fernow (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881). and Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 52.
[5] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 52, 53, 57.
[6] Ibid., 237-238.
[7] Ibid., 238.
[8] Ibid., 191
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid., 192.
[11] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 184.
[12] vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers . . . from 1630 to 1684, trans. and ed. B. Fernow (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881), 202.
[13] Ibid., 242.
[14] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 57.
[15] Ibid., 59-60.
[16] Ibid., 61-62.
[17] Ibid., 63.
[18] Ibid., 64.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Ibid., 65.
[21] vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers . . . from 1630 to 1684, trans. and ed. B. Fernow (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881), 271-272. and Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 66-67.
[22] Ibid.
[23] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 66.
[24] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 70-71. and vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers . . . from 1630 to 1684, trans. and ed. B. Fernow (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881), 327-328.
[25]Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 72.
[26] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 73. and vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers . . . from 1630 to 1684, trans. and ed. B. Fernow (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881), 330.
[27] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 87-88.
[28] Ibid., 99-102.
[29] vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers . . . from 1630 to 1684, trans. and ed. B. Fernow (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881), 339.
[30] Ibid.
[31] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 90-91. and vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers . . . from 1630 to 1684, trans. and ed. B. Fernow (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881), 338-340.
[32] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 105. and vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers . . . from 1630 to 1684, trans. and ed. B. Fernow (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881), 320-322.
[33] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 106. and vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers . . . from 1630 to 1684, trans. and ed. B. Fernow (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881), 365-366.
[34] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 106-107.
[35] vol. XIII, Documents Relating to the History and Settlements of the Towns along the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers . . . from 1630 to 1684, trans. and ed. B. Fernow (Albany: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881), 376-377.
[36] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 109.
[37] Ibid., 110.
[38] Ibid., 115-116.
[39] Ibid., 116.
[40] Peter, R. Christoph. ed., Administrative Papers of Governors Richard Nicolls and Francis Lovelace. (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1980), 3-4.
[41] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 118.
[42] Tom Arne, Midtrød. The Memory of All Ancient Customs: Native American Diplomacy in the Colonial Hudson Valley. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2012. 5, 200, 204.