Portrait of Peter Stuyvesant. Photo retrieved from the Wall Street Journal.
By Franklin Eck
Supervised Research Conducted with Dr. Paul Kelton
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.”[1] 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”.[2] 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
| 1621 | The Dutch West India Company, which was legally created by a charter of the Dutch Estates General, obtained a trade monopoly in New Netherland. |
| 1624 | The first colonists arrived in the vicinity of Fort Orange, now Albany, New York. |
| 1626 | The first colonists arrived at New Amsterdam, now Manhattan, and New Amsterdam was established. Peter Minuit was appointed the director-general of New Netherland. He ordered that Fort Amsterdam be built, which would become the base of operations for all future director-generals. Also, during that year, Minuit paid compensation for the Dutch acquisition of Manhattan Island to Manhattan’s Indigenous People. |
| 1629-1630 | The Charter of Freedoms and Exemptions not only laid the legal foundation for the patroon system, it also created the Rensselaerswyck colony, additional permanent colonization of the vicinity of Fort Orange commenced. |
| 1638 | After a succession of different director-generals, William Kieft became the next Director-General of New Netherland. |
| 1639 | The Dutch West India Company’s monopoly on the fur trade was revoked by the Estates General. This revocation had several consequences. It led to population growth in New Netherland, as well as the increase in the economy of New Netherland. However, it also resulted in the end of trading regulations between the colonists of New Netherland and the Mohawks, and undoubtedly other Indigenous Peoples as well. The colonists of New Netherland demanded that the Indigenous Peoples accept high premiums for firearms when selling beaver furs to them. |
| 1643-1645 | Director-General William Kieft’s policies regarding Indigenous Peoples led to Kieft’s War. |
| 1647 | Pieter Stuyvesant became the newest in a line of Director-Generals of New Netherland, serving until 1664 when he surrendered New Netherland to the English forces. New Netherland was renamed New York after King Charles II’s brother, James the Duke of York (future King James II of England and Ireland and VII of Scotland) |
| 1650-1651 | New Netherland colonists began the colonization of Leeds in Catskill. |
| 1652 | Fort Orange’s name was changed to Beverwyck after Pieter Stuyvesant legally authorized that Beverwyck was to become a free and independent village from the Rensselaerswyck colony.[3] |
Dutch Colonization and the Catalysts for the First Esopus War
The Indigenous People for whom the Esopus Wars were named were called the Esopus by the Dutch settlers who encountered them. The word ‘Esopus’ in Dutch has been translated as either “brook” or as “small river”.[4] The Esopus were a group of the Delaware or Lenni Lenape Nation.[5] The lands of the Esopus extended from the “fertile flats and lowlands of the Great Valley from Sussex County in northern New Jersey to Orange and Ulster counties in New York. The lower reaches of the Esopus and Rondout creeks and the Walkill River.”[6]
The earliest primary source for the first Dutch settlement in the vicinity of present-day Kingston, New York is the June 5, 1652 deed of Thomas Chambers, a carpenter from England. Two Esopus sachems, Kawachhikan, and Sowappekat, sold Thomas Chambers a “certain parcel of land in the Esopus abovenamed, extending Southwest and east, . . . with a path from the said land to the river.”[7] According to primary sources dated May 6, 1642, on that date, Chambers was listed as “[Tomas Cambers, an En]gllsh carpenter,” as he was employed to construct a house and reinforce it with clapboards.[8] Some historians and researchers have suggested that Chambers perhaps initiated the English technique of clapboarding houses in New Netherland.[9]
By September 1646, Chambers had also rented land in the Rensselaerswyck colony. Chambers most likely migrated to Esopus due to his discontentment regarding the limitations placed on the inhabitants of the Rensselaerswyck colony.[10] In 1920, the initial volume of Minutes of the Court of Fort Orange and Beverwyck was published; this volume provided several examples which show Dutch colonists had undertaken the colonization of Esopus by June 10, 1653. Additionally, this volume also contained evidence that very soon after the colonists at Esopus arrived, discontentment between the colonists and the Esopus commenced. Unfortunately, it is impossible to determine if the colonists of Esopus came in groups or came separately.[11]
Some additional important individuals during the Esopus Wars were Juriaen Westphaelen, who in 1654 patented “thirty-two and one-half morgens”.[12] Evert Pels and Jacob Jansen Stoll purchased an unspecified amount of land from the Indigenous People of Esopus before the fall of 1654.[13] Lastly, Cornelis Barentsen Slecht (or Sleght) was a cook at Chambers’ residence who also resided in Esopus.[14] It should be noted that when the words Dutch colonists are used, that does not mean all the colonists to Esopus were of Dutch ethnicity. Evert Pels was from Stettin, Pomerania in modern-day Germany.[15] The aforesaid Thomas Chambers was from England.
In September 1655, as subsequent primary sources from the next several years indicate, certain Esopus warriors had at the very least been present when several other Indigenous Peoples attacked colonists around New Amsterdam in the Peach War. However, certain primary sources indicate that certain Esopus warriors might have taken part in the fighting, although the Esopus sachems later denied that any of their warriors had participated in the short-lived war. The most important consequence of the Peach War was that the colonists of Esopus evacuated their settlement for a short period of time; this of course did not help the tenuous relationships between the Indigenous People of Esopus and the Dutch colonists of Esopus.[16]
After the Dutch colonists of Esopus returned, the tensions between them and the Indigenous Peoples commenced once again. The Indigenous dwellings and fields for food cultivation were encroached upon by the colonists’ animals.[17]Violence also took place before the outbreak of the First Esopus War; in 1657 a group of drunken Esopus men blinded Jacob Adriaensen in one of his eyes and caused the death of his child.[18] Such actions led to outrage from the colonists of Esopus. Thomas Chambers was one such voice. In several primary sources such as his May 2, 1658 letter to Director-General Petrus Stuyvesant, he complained of Dutch colonists who were illegally selling alcohol to the Indigenous Peoples of Esopus, despite the fact Chambers was himself illegally selling alcohol to the Esopus.[19]
In the spring of 1658, Esopus warriors escalated their acts of violence against the colonists after obtaining alcohol. On May 1, 1658, warriors killed Harmen Jacobsen and burned the farm of Jacob Adriaensen. Next, Esopus warriors threatened to burn the properties of any colonists who refused to cultivate the Esopus’ fields.[20] A letter dated May 18, 1658 signed by Thomas Chambers, Jacob Jansen Stoll, and Cornelis Barentsen Slecht among others requested that the Council of New Netherland “let some of the honorable council come here quickly with the desired assistance.”[21] The aid they requested was “40 to 50 men.”[22] In Stuyvesant’s journal of his 1658 inspection of the Esopus settlement, he wrote that he, the required officials, and soldiers reached Esopus on May 29, 1658.
Upon his arrival, Stuyvesant dispatched Govert Loockermans Sr. to persuade several Indigenous People of Esopus who were by the shoreline to go onto Stuyvesant’s vessel. Additionally, several other Esopus People were sent to inform the colonists of his arrival. Thomas Chambers and Andries van der Sluys then arrived and held a meeting with Stuyvesant; they reiterated the violence carried out by the Indigenous People of Esopus, which had been previously reported to the Council of New Netherland.
Upon receiving a present from Stuyvesant, the Indigenous People of Esopus agreed to inform their sachems of his disembarkation and that he did not intend to carry out any retaliation against them for the recent violence carried out by Esopus warriors. Additionally, Stuyvesant wanted to hear the Esopus sachems’ version of events, and consequently the Esopus sachems were to negotiate with Stuyvesant in the next two days.[23] On June 30, Stuyvesant met with the Dutch colonists and explained to them that he believed that they should not start a war by taking revenge against the Indigenous People of Esopus. This was primarily due to the fear that a war would jeopardize the harvest that the colonists of Esopus would soon bring in, as well as Stuyvesant’s view that he could not protect the colonists if they remained on scattered farms. With Stuyvesant’s refusal to keep soldiers at Esopus, he told the colonists that they should build a defensive structure inside which houses could be built. Stuyvesant agreed to allow soldiers to help in the defensive structure’s construction. The colonists requested that they be allowed to consider Stuyvesant’s suggestion until the following day, and Stuyvesant agreed.[24] The colonists then made an agreement to:
immediately after signing this agreement and to move close to each other to the place indicated by the honorable general, to enclose the place with palisades of proper length with the assistance provided thereto by the honorable general, so that we may protect ourselves and our property by such means, to which the All-Good God may give His blessing, against a sudden attack of the Indians.[25]
On May 31, 1658, Stuyvesant held a conference with Esopus sachems, as he wrote in his account of his 1658 inspection of Esopus. At first between twelve and fifteen Indigenous People of Esopus including only two sachems were at the conference. The two sachems informed Stuyvesant that certain sachems and other Indigenous People of Esopus would be unable to meet with Stuyvesant until the following day. Additionally, Stuyvesant was informed that large numbers of sachems and Indigenous People of Esopus were fearful to meet with Stuyvesant, due to the presence of Stuyvesant’s soldiers and rumors which stated that additional soldiers were coming to Esopus. Stuyvesant then reiterated that he just wanted to have a conference with the Esopus. The sachems agreed to attempt to convince the fearful Esopus to meet with Stuyvesant. Later that day, Stuyvesant wrote that an additional 50 Indigenous People of Esopus came to the conference location at Jacob Jansen’s residence.[26] Stuyvesant asked the Esopus through his translator Jacob Jansen Stoll to explain why they had carried out “murders, arson, killed hogs and did other injuries and continually threatened the inhabitants of the Esopus.”[27] Then:
one of the sachems stood up and said in reply that the Dutch sold the bisson, that is brandy, to the Indians and were consequently the cause that the Indians then became cacheus, that is crazy, mad or drunk and then committed outrages; that they, the chiefs, could not control the young men, who then were spoiling for fight; that the murder had not been committed by one of their tribe, but by a Neuwesinck Indian, who was now living at Haverstroo or thereabouts; that the Indian, who set fire to the houses, had run away and would henceforth not be permitted to cultivate his land. As far as they were concerned, they had done no evil, they were not angry nor did they desire or intend to fight, but they had no control over the young men.[28]
Stuyvesant then responded:
that if any of the young men present had a great desire to fight, they might come forward now, I would match man with man, or twenty against thirty, yes even forty, that it was now the proper time for it, but it was not well done to plague, threaten and injure the farmers, their women and children, who could not fight. If they did not cease doing so in future, then we might find ourselves compelled in return to lay hands upon old and young, women and children, and try to recover the damages, which we had suffered, without regard to person. We could partly and easily do that now by killing them, capturing their wives and children, and destroying their corn and beans.[29]
Stuyvesant, possibly in an attempt to calm the situation, informed the Indigenous People of Esopus that he expected them to “reimburse the owner of the burned houses, arrest and surrender the murderer, if he came again to them and do no more evil in future.”[30] Before the conference ended Stuyvesant informed the assembled Indigenous People of Esopus that he intended to have the Dutch colonists relocate to a location in Esopus which could be fortified. He also indicated a desire to prevent additional brandy from being provided to the Indigenous People of Esopus during transactions. He then suggested:
that it would be the best, if they were to sell me the whole country of the Esopus and move inland or to some other place; that it was not good that they lived so near to the Swannekens, that is white men or Dutch, so that the cattle and hogs of the latter could not run anymore into the cornfields of the Indians and be killed by them and similar reasonings after the customs of the Indians to the same purpose, namely, that they ought to sell me all the land in that vicinity, as they had previously offered and asked us to do.[31]
On June 4, 1658 the Indigenous People of Esopus sold Stuyvesant the land for what would become the original stockade.[32] Stuyvesant then ordered carpenters to come to Esopus to help with the stockade’s construction, which was built in June 1658. The stockade most likely included the modern-day City of Kingston as well as the streets Clinton Avenue, John Street, and North Front Street.
Under Stuyvesant’s supervision a moat was excavated and a guardhouse was constructed at the northeastern side.[33] When Stuyvesant met with the Indigenous People of Esopus on June 1, 1658, the Esopus sachems told him that “they were most ashamed as well because of what had happened, but still more because I had challenged their young men and they had not dared to fight and that therefore they requested that nothing be said about this to others.”[34] Stuyvesant agreed to abandon any ill feelings he had for the Esopus, but he demanded that the warrior who had carried out a murder be handed over to the Dutch and that compensation be given to those whose property had been burned. The sachems responded that the murderer “was a strange Indian, who did not live among them, but was roving about the country.”[35]Then with regards to the giving of compensation to those whose property had been burned the sachems suggested:
that it should not be asked from the tribe in general, but from the party who had done it and was now a deserter and dared not return. As he had a house and land on the bank of the kil and had planted there some Indian corn, they thought that, if he did not return, this property ought to be attached; however, they said finally that satisfaction would be made for it.[36]
When Stuyvesant left Esopus he left behind twenty-four soldiers and tensions remained high.[37] This was due to several contentious episodes which included the killing of Jacob Jansen Stoll’s female horse. Additionally, there still existed anger amongst some of the Esopus warriors who had been away beaver hunting at the time when Stuyvesant laid down the gauntlet for any of the Esopus warriors who wanted to fight the Dutch. These Esopus warriors, now returned home, wanted to fight the Dutch, despite the fact that their sachems had made peace with Stuyvesant.[38] Some of the Indigenous People of Esopus had killed hogs owned by Stoll, and two horses owned by Johanna de Laet, a widow.[39]After the incidents were communicated to Stuyvesant, he was induced to conduct another inspection of Esopus in August 1658. During his subsequent inspection, Stuyvesant was not convinced that the Indigenous People of Esopus would not carry out violent actions against the Dutch colonists of Esopus. He therefore expanded the number of soldiers posted to the stockade to fifty.[40] The orders to the commanding officer at Esopus, Ensign Dirck Smith, contained the following:
until further resolution and orders, there shall be initiated no offensive hostilities against the Indians unless they do so first, and they inflict some pain on the Christians, whether it be on their persons or possessions; upon which occasion he shall be allowed defensively to attack, apprehend, resist and pursue the Indians with the advice of the aforesaid Stoll and Chambers as well as with the assistance of the inhabitants, as circumstances require, remaining always vigilant and alert, and also keeping the place garrisoned with soldiers.[41]
Additionally, Smith’s orders included the proviso that:
plowing and sowing shall proceed and progress as much as possible, and this foremost with the approval of the inhabitants themselves, whether each on his own land, or with one another, when they shall be given a proper guard of 20 to 25 men in order to protect them against any hostility; also, the inhabitants are to take appropriate weapons with them in order to be able to face the Indians better in case of attack.[42]
Then on October 15, 1658, when he returned to Esopus once again, Stuyvesant met the Esopus sachems Preuwamackan, Nachchamatt, and Pappequahon at Thomas Chambers’s house. Stuyvesant had reiterated the recent violations of the peace agreement made between the Esopus sachems and Stuyvesant; he demanded that compensation had to be made. The biggest consequence of this conference was Stuyvesant’s demand for “the land from the Esopus so far as I have viewed it, is demanded for the expenses and troubles incurred by the director general in coming here and establishing this fort, also because the farmers have had to pull down their houses.”[43]
Stuyvesant also ordered that the Esopus sachems pay 190 “fathoms of” wampum between Stoll and Johanna de Laet.[44] After being given time to consider Stuyvesant’s demands, on October 16, 1658 the Esopus sachems claimed that they had no wampum and would therefore sell the land Stuyvesant had demanded. However, Stuyvesant informed the Esopus sachems that the land sale would only pacify him and by extension the Dutch West India Company, not the individual Dutch colonists of Esopus. The Esopus sachems then changed their minds regarding the land sale; their answer was that the Esopus sachem Poenap who was the most prominent landholder had traveled to Fort Orange and no final decision was able to be made until he returned. The Esopus sachems requested that they wait until the next day when he was expected to return to reach a determination. The consequence of Stuyvesant’s acquiescence to this request was that:
As the Indians did not come on the 18th according, to their promise, I asked Jacob Jansz Hap and Marten Metselaer whether they would not go to the houses of the Indians to reconnoitre whether they were there still and then to ask what conclusion they had come to; whether they would give satisfaction or not. They returned about noon and brought as answer that the said chiefs had played them for fools and had plainly said that they had no intention of giving satisfaction, as they considered what they had done of no consequence. Therefore I judged it best for the present to depart as soon as possible and to leave there until further resolutions and order the ensign Dirck Smith with 50 men and the following instructions.[45]
Before the commencement of the First Esopus War, the relationship between the Dutch colonists of Esopus and the Indigenous People of Esopus was tense, further incidents included the theft of corn and beaver from the Indigenous People of Esopus during the winter months, and the pulling of a knife on an Indigenous Person of Esopus by a Dutch colonist. The Indigenous People of Esopus then attempted to negotiate a long-lasting peace agreement as opposed to a peace treaty, due to the fact that Stuyvesant did not authorize the Dutch colonists of Esopus to negotiate with the Esopus.[46]
The Commencement of the First Esopus War
The First Esopus War began during the nighttime hours of September 20, 1659. On that night four Esopus warriors were drinking alcohol around a fire, the location of which historians have not been able to identify with a high level of certainty. Those four Esopus warriors had obtained the alcohol from Thomas Chambers as payment for husking his corn. During their drinking session they were approached by six Dutch colonists of Esopus, six Dutch soldiers, as well as Jacob Jansen Stoll a member of the Esopus elite, and Sergeant Aiidries Lourensen. For unknown reasons, Jacob Jansen Stoll and others with him attacked the four Esopus warriors. One of the warriors suffered a headshot. Another warrior suffered a head wound from a sword but was able to flee, a third was able to escape when he was not being closely guarded, and one of the warriors was captured.
After this violent incident, the Dutch went to the stockade for safety.[47] A letter from Cornelis Barentsen Slecht signed by Slecht and eleven other Dutch colonists of Esopus, three of whom had witnessed the violent incident, contended “that it was brought about by nobody else, but by Jacob Jansen and the Sergeant.”[48] It should be noted that Jacob Jansen Stoll and Sergeant Aiidries Lourensen did write to Stuyvesant and blamed the four Esopus warriors for initiating the violent incident.[49]
Some of the primary sources list different dates for the incident which was the spark that ignited the First Esopus War. However, Marc Fried concluded that the date was September 20. The next day, Chambers and Jansen Stoll were escorted to the strand by Dutch soldiers and Dutch colonists of Esopus so a watercraft could take news of the incident to Stuyvesant. Esopus warriors ambushed them on their return trip from the strand. A Dutchman was killed and thirteen were taken captive by the Esopus warriors, at least seven of whom were killed by the Esopus after a ransom had been paid.[50]Then, four to six hundred Esopus warriors laid siege to the stockade and prevented watercraft from entering the strand.[51]
During the siege, the Esopus killed farm animals that had not been taken into the stockade. On the siege’s final night, the Esopus carried out their fiercest attacks. The siege ended with the retreat of the Esopus warriors, most likely because they learned Stuyvesant was due to arrive with between 180-190 soldiers. Among this force included around twenty-five Indigenous warriors from Long Island. The colonists in this force were non-experienced in army service, as they were impressed into this force under orders from Stuyvesant. The siege caused the death of seven male colonists, the number of Indigenous Esopus killed and wounded was not documented. Stuyvesant and his force reached Esopus on October 10.[52]
After the Esopus fled to settlements deep into Esopus territory, Stuyvesant took his force back to New Amsterdam for the winter.[53] On November 1, 1659, Ensign Smith wrote to Stuyvesant regarding negotiating peace with the Esopus, and the subsequent peace negotiations took place that day. Two Mahicans, called “Mahikanders” in the primary source, who were allies of the Dutch had brought to Ensign Smith “2 small strings of wampum from the Maquaas, one string from the Mahikanders, also from the Katskils 5 fathoms of wampum.“[54] They also took to the Esopus an olive branch to persuade them to end hostilities against the Dutch colonists of Esopus. On November 1, 1659, two men taken captive were returned. Several Esopus sachems came to meet with Ensign Smith and others after the “Maquaas, Mahikanders and Katskils” persuaded the Esopus sachems to meet with them. The Esopus sachems, after having requested a suspension of hostilities, were informed by the Dutch officials that they would accept their request so long as Stuyvesant approved it. The Esopus sachems then promised the Dutch colonists of Esopus that they would be allowed to carry out farm cultivation without fear of violence.
Although the Dutch colonists of Esopus accepted the suspension of hostilities, they did not trust the Indigenous Esopus.[55] In a letter to Stuyvesant dated November 13, 1659, Ensign Smith complained to Stuyvesant that the Indigenous People of Esopus were “rascals” and that they had not returned an unnamed male child and had killed the other captives. Additionally, Ensign Smith informed Stuyvesant that “none of the principal Sachems have been present” at the negotiations when the two captives were returned.[56] On December 11, 1659, Stuyvesant told Ensign Smith in a follow up letter that he was to prevent the Esopus from obtaining intelligence regarding the stockade. Therefore, no Indigenous Peoples were to be allowed to enter the stockade beyond the residence of Thomas Chambers. Additionally, Ensign Smith was to restrict as much as possible the interactions between the Esopus and the Dutch colonists of Esopus. As this letter was written during the winter, Stuyvesant included an interesting proviso which was that if any Indigenous Peoples stayed “in Thomas Chambers’ house on account of bad weather, in such a case you must remain there yourself and place there some other competent person, who understands the language of the savages, so that no conversation can be held between the savages and our people without your knowledge.”[57]
Lastly, Stuyvesant told Ensign Smith that he was to wait until the end of the winter before attempting to take twelve to twenty Indigenous People of Esopus hostage to ensure that the Esopus would not carry out violent acts. Afterwards Ensign Smith was to order the closest Esopus village assaulted.[58] On December 17, 1659, Ensign Smith wrote Stuyvesant that on December 12 and 14, he and others had held a conference with the Esopus; each side promised to refrain from violence, and the Esopus agreed to deliver to the stockade corn in return for cloth, however the Esopus did not return to the stockade with the corn.[59] On March 15, 1660, Coetheos, who was the principal warrior of the Wappings, came to the stockade and informed the soldiers and colonists that the Esopus sachems wanted to negotiate peace terms. However, Coetheos betrayed the Esopus sachems as evidenced by the following excerpt from the minutes of this conference: “We had learned, the Esopns Indians had said, that they would make only a mock-peace with us and when the Dutch on the Esopus least expected it, they would surprise and kill them.”[60] Coetheos “said, that he too had heard this of the Esopus Indians, but only the harcbacks say it, who are opposed to make peace, but that the chiefs especially Kaelcop and Pemmyrawcch are very willing to make a peace with the Dutch, that they would also persuade and induce the barebacks, low or bad savages.”[61]
Coetheos was not able to provide assurances that the Dutch were to make peace. Furthermore, Coetheos was informed that the Esopus sachems would be required to have a peace conference with the Dutch themselves, but Coetheos answered that the Esopus sachems were scared to meet with the Dutch. The Dutch then told Coetheos to relay that Stuyvesant would go to the Esopus sachems and then they could negotiate with Stuyvesant.[62] Undoubtedly due to the conference with Coetheos and his warning of “a mock-peace” in their minds, on March 17, 1660, Ensign Smith took forty men and attacked approximately sixty Indigenous People of Esopus a few miles away. The Dutch soldiers killed three to four Indigenous People of Esopus who were attempting to escape the attack and captured around fourteen to fifteen. The Dutch soldiers then burned the single wigwam, as well as copious amounts of Indian corn, “bearmeat, bearskins.”[63] Twelve of those captured were sent to New Amsterdam and subsequently to Curasao to carry out labor alongside its slaves.[64]
On April 4, 1660, Esopus warriors and Dutch soldiers engaged in negotiations, however after nightfall the negotiations ended with the Esopus warriors making threats. The Esopus warriors agreed to continue the negotiations the next morning. During the night, however, Ensign Smith distributed forty-five soldiers in order to ambush the Esopus warriors. The next morning the Esopus warriors were attacked and the Dutch soldiers pursued those that fled for an hour. After the attack and pursuit three warriors were killed, two warriors were wounded, and a single warrior was captured. The Dutch soldiers only lost three horses.[65]
Around May 29, 1660 before sunrise, Ensign Smith took seventy-five men to find and attack the Esopus. Most likely where the Rondout Creek flows into the Wallkill River, the Dutch soldiers found some Indigenous People of Esopus engaged in food cultivation, while others were fishing on the opposite shore. However, the creek was not able to be traversed so the Dutch soldiers returned to the stockade. After their return to the stockade on May 29, Ensign Smith was told by Juriaen Westphaelen’s wife that she was aware of a crossing point an additional three hours north of the place he had retreated from. Ensign Smith and his men retraced their steps and, most likely that night or the following morning, the Dutch soldiers were able to cross the body of water.
The dogs of the Esopus at that location sounded the alarm and most of the Esopus there fled. The refusal of the Esopus warriors to fight, and the Dutch soldiers inability to pursue, forced the Dutch soldiers to re-cross the body of water with only one Indigenous canoe they had located.[66] When the Dutch soldiers found the single canoe, its owner, the Esopus sachem Premaeker, refused to relinquish it and threatened the Dutch soldiers, as he could not have been taken captive he was given “a whack with his own hatchet.”[67] During the trek back to the stockade some Esopus warriors emerged from the woods. After one Dutch soldier was wounded the Esopus warriors ran back into the woods, and once again Ensign Smith was not able to pursue them so they went on marching back to the stockade.[68] The oldest and most well-known Esopus sachem, Premaeker’s death would be the catalyst for the official peace treaty that ended the First Esopus War.[69]
A Temporary Peace
On June 3, 1660 at Fort Amsterdam, Stuyvesant held a conference with the Hacliinkesack sachem Oratamy, the Haverstroo sachem Curruppin, and several other Indigenous Peoples. Oratamy and Curruppin were negotiating on behalf of the Esopus who were scared to meet with Stuyvesant. Oratamy informed Stuyvesant that he had spoken with the Esopus sachem Seuwackenamo who informed him that:
the fighting savages, who camp by themselves and had asked them, what they desired; they had answered: We do not want to fight any more; then he had spoken with the women about what they thought best; they had answered, that we may peacefully plant the land and live in peace: then he had gone to the inexperienced young men, who camp alone upon another place, to ask them, what they thought and they had said, to make peace with the Dutch and that they would not kill a pig nor a chicken.[70]
Stuyvesant responded that if Oratamy took the Dutch translator Claes de Ruyter to negotiate with the Esopus sachems themselves, and they agreed to peace with the translator, Stuyvesant would conclude an official peace treaty.[71]
In Claes de Ruyter’s instructions, he was to first determine if the Esopus sachems actually wanted to conclude a formal peace treaty. If so, they had to comply with the following conditions: first, all of the Esopus who had been taken captive were to remain in Dutch custody, which included the dead whose bodies the Dutch possessed. However, Ruyter was authorized to inform the Esopus sachems that if they followed the peace terms, the Dutch might return some or all of the captured Esopus. Second, the Esopus sachems had to pay the Dutch for, “the muskets, wampum, duffels and other goods” as compensation for the ransom which had been paid for the return of Dutch captives who had been killed. Third, the Indigenous Peoples had to either migrate from Esopus or they had to relocate to a place that was far enough away from the Dutch colonists to reduce the risk for future incidents that would threaten the peace. Additionally, if any Esopus carried out “any harm” against the Dutch colonists, the Esopus sachems were to “repair it immediately” to ensure that the war between the Dutch and the Esopus would not commence again. If the Esopus sachems were willing to agree to these terms, Claes de Ruyter had the authorization to order the Dutch soldiers at Esopus to refrain from carrying out military actions pending new orders.[72]
On June 12, 1660, Ensign Smith wrote Stuyvesant that the Esopus had agreed to his terms but requested that “a small piece of land might be granted to them for their habitations and plantations and that at a great distance.”[73] Also, the Esopus wanted Stuyvesant to conclude the official peace treaty with them. As an enticement for Stuyvesant to come to Esopus they promised that “all the neighboring Sachems shall appear together at this place, to make the peace so much faster and surer.”[74] On July 15, 1660, Stuyvesant was in Esopus concluding an official peace treaty with the Esopus sachems. One Dutch official who had accompanied Stuyvesant to Esopus was Captain Martin Cregier, who would be an important individual during the Second Esopus War and whose journal would provide one of the longest and most detailed primary sources of the Second Esopus War.
There were ten terms that had to be adhered to in the official peace treaty for the First Esopus War. First, both the Dutch and the Esopus agreed to end the war and forgive and forget any grievances. Second, the Esopus pledged to provide Stuyvesant with compensation by ceding to him their remaining land in Esopus and pledging to migrate far enough away, so as to prevent future incidents between themselves and the Dutch colonists of Esopus. The Indigenous Peoples pledged never to return to Esopus. Third, the Esopus pledged to pay Stuyvesant “500 schepels” of corn on a payment schedule as compensation for the ransom that had been paid for returning the remains of the Dutch who had been captured. Fourth, the Esopus pledged not to kill any animals which belonged to the Dutch colonists of Esopus. If animals were killed, the Esopus sachems had to provide compensation or else one of the Esopus sachems would be held in Dutch custody until payment was provided.
On the Dutch side, Stuyvesant pledged to outlaw the Dutch colonists of Esopus from carrying out “any harm” against the Indigenous People of Esopus. Fifth, if a member of the Esopus warrior killed a Dutch colonist or soldier, or if a Dutch colonist or soldier killed a member of the Esopus, military action was not to be taken by either side. Instead the killers were to be given up for punishment. Sixth, the Esopus were under no circumstances to come with weapons to trade with the Dutch colonists of Esopus. Seventh, the Esopus were under no circumstances allowed to consume alcoholic beverages in close proximity to the Dutch colonists of Esopus. Eighth, Stuyvesant declared that he was making a military alliance with “all others, who are in friendship with the Director-General.” Ninth, the Esopus sachems were forced to be the guarantors of their people’s behavior, and if any Esopus violated the peace treaty the Esopus sachems had to pledge to provide assistance to the Dutch in restraining any peace treaty violators. Tenth, the treaty conference ended with Stuyvesant giving the translators and all of the Esopus sachems a fragment of cloth and the return of three Esopus captives whom the Dutch had in their custody.[75] The treaty conference took place in the presence of not only the Esopus sachems, but sachems from the Mohawks, the Mahicans, the Catskills, the Susquehannocks, the Wappingers, the Hackensacks, and Warrhan from Staten Island.[76]
End of Part One, Part Two Coming Spring 2021
Endnotes
[1] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), xviii.
[2] 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), copyright page. 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).
[3] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975. xxii-xxiv.
[4] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975, 7.
[5] Tom Arne, Midtrød. The Memory of All Ancient Customs: Native American Diplomacy in the Colonial Hudson Valley. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2012. 1.
[6] Robert S. Grumet, and Daniel K. Richter, The Munsee Indians: A History. (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2009), 308.
[7] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975, 14-15.
[8] Arnold, J. F. Van Laer. trans., and Kenneth, Scott. and Kenn, Stryker-Rodda, eds. New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch, vol. 2. Register of the Provincial Secretary, 1642–1647. (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Society, Co., 1974), 33.
[9] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975, 16-17.
[10] Ibid., 17.
[11] Ibid., 22-25.
[12] Ibid., 18.
[13]Ibid.
[14] Ibid., 20.
[15] Andrew Brink. Invading Paradise: Esopus Settlers at War with Natives, 1659-1663. (North Bloomington: Xlibris, 2003), 132.
[16] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 26-27. and Robert S. Grumet, and Daniel K. Richter, The Munsee Indians: A History. (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2009), 71.
[17] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 27.
[18] Ibid., 28.
[19] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 76, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45272
and Andrew Brink. Invading Paradise: Esopus Settlers at War with Natives, 1659-1663. (Bloomington: Xlibris, 2003), 40.
[20] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 28.
[21] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 79, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 9, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45275
[22] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 79, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 9, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45275
[23] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 79, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 9, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45275
[24] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 85, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45285
[25] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 81a, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45278
[26] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 85, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45285
[27] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 85, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45285
[28] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 85, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45285
[29] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 85, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45285
[30] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 85, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45285
[31] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 85, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45285
[32] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 30.
[33] Ibid 30.
[34] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 85, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45285
[35] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 85, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45285
[36] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 85, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 2, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45285
[37] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 31.
[38] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 86, side 1. Accessed July 12, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45286 and Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 31.
[39] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 91, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 12, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45292 and Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 20, 31, 32.
[40] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 31.
[41] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 93, side 1. Accessed July 12, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45294
[42] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 93, side 1. Accessed July 12, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45294
[43] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 91, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 12, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45292
[44] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 91, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 12, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45292
[45] New York State Archives. Digital Collections: New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial administrative correspondence, 1646-1664. Series A1810-78. Volume 12, document 91, page 1, side 1. Accessed July 12, 2019 http://digitalcollections.archives.nysed.gov/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/45292
[46]Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 32.
[47] Ibid., 33.
[48] 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), 118. and Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 168.
[49]Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 168.
[50] Ibid., 33-34, 168.
[51]Ibid., 34.
[52]Ibid., 34-35.
[53] Ibid., 35.
[54] 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), 126.
[55] Ibid, 126-127.
[56] Ibid., 127.
[57] Ibid., 128.
[58]Ibid.
[59] Ibid., 129.
[60] Ibid., 150-151.
[61] Ibid.
[62] Ibid., 151.
[63] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 36. 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), 151.
[64] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 36-37.
[65] Ibid.
[66] Ibid., 38-39.
[67] 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), 171.
[68] Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 39.
[69]Marc B. Fried. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. (Marbletown: Ulster County Historical Society, 1975), 39 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), 171-172.
[70] 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), 171-172.
[71] Ibid., 172.
[72] Ibid., 173.
[73] Ibid., 174.
[74] Ibid.
[75] Ibid., 179-181.
[76] Ibid.