Text of 1643 New Netherland Patent to John Throckmorton for Land at Vreelandt, Once Part of the Manor of Pelham

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Today's Historic Pelham Blog article includes an image of a patent to lands that later became part of the Manor of Pelham issued by Director General William Kieft and the Council of New Netherland on July 6, 1643 to John Throckmorton.  The patent encompassed lands that later became known as Throgmorton's Neck, today's Throggs Neck.

John Throckmorton emigrated from Norfolk, England to Massachusetts Bay Colony in the early 17th century.  Religious tensions with Puritan leaders of that colony, however, led him in 1638 to become one of the twelve original proprietors of the settlement of Providence Plantation, an area that became the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.  

In 1643, Throckmorton and his family removed to New Netherland and settled in an area known by the Dutch as Vreedlandt (various spellings), a Dutch term roughly translated by many as "Freedom Land."  Throckmorton, his family, and several dozen others settled in the region after Director General William Kieft and the Council of New Netherland granted Throckmorton a patent to the lands on July 6, 1643.  

Throckmorton could not have picked a worse time to settle in the region.  Relations between the Dutch and local Native Americans had been deteriorating for years with skirmishes and killings on both sides throughout the region.  Only months before Throckmorton arrived, Kieft launched an attack on camps of refugee Wichquaeskeck and Tappan Natives on February 23, 1643, one of the early skirmishes of what some have called "Kieft's War."  

Local Natives including Wiechquaeskecks (who later sold local lands that became the Manor of Pelham to Thomas Pell) clearly viewed the settlements of the families of John Throckmorton and Anne Hutchinson as threatening intrusions into their territory by the Dutch.  

In July, 1643, Native Americans approached the Hutchinson family settlement in the area of today's Coop City apartments in the Bronx.  They feigned friendship and convinced the family to tie up its fierce guard dogs.  They then massacred the entire settlement.  (The attackers spared only little Susanna Hutchinson whom they kidnapped and held for several years until traders ransomed the child and returned her to Dutch authorities.)

The Natives then proceeded to Throckmorton's nearby settlement and attacked.  Fate intervened.  As the attack began, the crew of a passing ship in Long Island Sound saw the pandemonium and pulled alongside the settlement to take on board a number of the settlers who were saved from murder.  

Though no patent for the lands settled by Anne Hutchinson and her family has ever been located, the patent for the lands settled by Throckmorton, his family, and followers continues to exist.  Below is an image of the page of the New Netherland deed book reflecting the patent, followed by two translations of the Dutch patent.

Image of Original Page from the Council of New Netherland

"Dutch Colonial Patents and Deeds, 1630-1664.  Series A1880.

Volume GG" Reflecting Patent to "John Trockmorton; part of

Vreland, being half a league along the East river, as by the map

and survey thereof may appear."  This, of Course, Became

Known as Throgmorton's Neck, Today's Throggs Neck, Once

Part of the Manor of Pelham and, Later, Westchester County.

Source:  New York State Archives Digital Collections:  New

Netherland Council Dutch Colonial Patents and Deeds, "Patent

of John Trockmorton for land along the East river" (visited

June 21, 2019).

*          *          *          *          *

Below are two translations of the pertinent portion of the page depicted above reflecting the patent issued to John Throckmorton by the Director General and Council of New Netherland on July 6, 1643.  Each is followed by a citation and link to its source.

"Patent to Jan Trockmorten . . .  

We, Willem Kieft, etc... have conceded and granted to Jan Trockmorton a parcel of land, (which is a part of Vrelant) extending along the East River of New Netherland for one half mile beginning at the point; and bounded on one side by a small river and on the other by a great kil, which river and kil run together at high water surrounding the aforesaid parcel of land, as is shown by the map thereof, made and deposited by the surveyor, under the express condition etc... 

Done at Fort Amsterdam, 6 July 1643."

Source:  New York State Archives Digital Collections:  New Netherland Council Dutch Colonial Patents and Deeds, "Translation Patent to Jan Trockmorten Series:  A1880  Scanned Document:  NYSA_A1880-78_VGG_0078" (visited June 21, 2019) (Citing Translation: Gehring, C. trans./ed., New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch, Vols. GG, HH & II, Land Papers, 1630-1664 (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc.: 1980)).

"PATENT TO JOHN THROCKMORTON FOR LAND AT VRELAND (THROCKMORTON'S NECK, WESTCHESTER CO.)

We, William Kieft, Director General and the Council of New-Netherland etc. etc., 

Testify and declare herewith, that this day, date as below, we have conceded and granted to Jan Trockmorton a parcel of land, (which is a part of Vreland) stretching along the East river of New-Netherland for one half of a league beginning at the Point and bounded on one side by a small river and on the other by a great Kil, which river and kil run together at high-water surrounding the aforesaid parcel of land, as is shown by the map thereof, made and deposited by the surveyor, under the express condition and stipulation, that he, Jan Trockmorton or his successors, shall acknowledge as his Masters and Patroons the Noble Lords-Directors of the Privileged West-India Company under the sovereignty of Their High : Might : the States-General and obey their Director and Council, as is the duty of a good inhabitant, provided also, that the said Jan Trockmorton and his company submit to all burdens and taxes, which have been or may hereafter be imposed by the Lords-Directors.  It is further expressly stipulated, that the said Jan Trockmorton shall according to his promise settle as many families upon the said land as may conveniently be done, And we constitute the said Jan Trockmorton and his company etc. etc.

Done at Fort Amsterdam, July 6, 1643."

Source:  "PATENT TO JOHN THROCKMORTON FOR LAND AT VRELAND (THROCKMORTON'S NECK, WESTCHESTER CO.)" in Fernow, B., ed., 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, pp. 15-16 (Albany, NY:  Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881).

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

A 17th Century Book Reference to "Siwanois" Natives in the Region of Today's Pelham

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Research has revealed an early 17th century book that refers to "Siwanois" as natives that "dwell along the coast for eight leagues, to the neighborhood of Hellegat."  The area referenced in the book includes the region that later became today's Pelham and Pelham Bay Park.  

This fascinating reference may be added to the various editions of a number of 17th century maps that also included references to "Siwanoys" and "Siwanois" in various areas including the area north of today's Stamford, Connecticut and the area of northeast Massachusetts.  See Mon., Aug. 13, 2018:  There Seems To Be Another Early 17th Century Map that References Siwanoys.  Today's Historic Pelham Blog article describes and quotes the 17th century resource and addresses whether this reference disproves the conclusions that the local Natives who sold land to Thomas Pell were Wiechquaeskecks and that there were no Natives who should properly be known as "Siwanoys."

In 1625 a large folio volume in Dutch written by Ioannes de Laet (also, Johannes De Laet) was published by the "Printing House" of Isaack Elzevier in Leyden.  (Today's Leyden is in the Province of South Holland, Netherlands).  De Laet's work was entitled "Nieuvve Wereldt, Ofte, Beschrijvinghe van West-Indien Wt veelderhande schriften ende aen-teeckeninghen van verscheyden natien by een versamelt door Ioannes de Laet; ende met noodighe kaerten ende tafels voorsien."  Roughly translated, the book was entitled "New world, or, Description of West-India collected out of various writings and notes from various nations by Johannes de Laet, and provided with needful maps and tables."  

 

Title Page of "Nieuvve Wereldt, Ofte, Beschrijvinghe van West-Indien

Wt veelderhande schriften ende aen-teeckeninghen van verscheyden

natien by een versamelt door Ioannes de Laet" Published in 1625.

NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

Johannes De Laet, born in 1582, was a director in the Amsterdam Chamber of the Dutch West India Company from the first organization of the firm until his death on December 15, 1649.  De Laet was passionately interested in geography and "was one of the chief workers for the [Leyden Printing House] of Elzevier in the composition of their popular series of manuals sometimes called Respublicae Elzevirianae, writing some eight or nine little volumes on the geography and government of as many different countries."  See Jameson, J. Franklin, Narratives of New Netherland 1609-1664, p. 31 (NY, NY:  Charles Scribner's Sons, 1909).  Although De Laet "seems never to have visited America," id., p. 32, he had not only a geographical interest, but also a personal interest in New Netherland.  According to Jameson:

"De Laet's most direct interest in New Netherland arose some years after he had published the first edition of the New World.  In 1630, soon after the institution of the system of patroonships, he became a partner in the abortive Dutch settlements on either side of Delaware Bay, and in the more permanent patroonship of Rensselaerswyck."  Id.

De Laet's folio on the "New World" published in 1625 was divided into fifteen "books."  Book III dealt with "Virginia" and included chapters 7 through 11 that dealt with New Netherland.  Chapter 8 was entitled "Situation of the Coast of of New Netherland from Pye Bay to the Great River of Mountains."  Pye Bay was a Dutch reference to a feature near Marblehead, Massachusetts.  The "Great River of Mountains" was a Dutch reference to the Hudson River.  Within this description of the northeastern coast between today's Marblehead, Massachusetts and today's Upper New York Bay off the tip of Manhattan was a description of the coastal area between Hell Gate below today's City Island and the Four Mile and Quinipiac Rivers in Connecticut.  Within the description of that area appears the following reference, as translated and published in 1909 by J. Franklin Jameson:

"Four leagues further to the west there lies a small island, where good water is to be found; and four leagues beyond that are a number of islands, so that Captain Adriaen Block gave the name of Archipelagus to the group.  The great bay is there about four leagues wide.  There is a small stream on the main that does not extend more than half a league in from the shore, when it becomes perfectly dry.  The natives here are called Siwanois, and dwell along the coast for eight leagues, to the neighborhood of Hellegat."

Source:  Jameson, J. Franklin, Narratives of New Netherland 1609-1664, p. 44 (NY, NY:  Charles Scribner's Sons, 1909) (reference appears in Book III, Ch. on "Virginia," p. 86, in original 1625 De Laet folio).

 

Detail from Book III, p. 86 of  de Laet, Ioannes, Nieuvve Wereldt, Ofte,

Beschrijvinghe van West-Indien Wt veelderhande schriften ende

aen-teeckeninghen van verscheyden natien by een versamelt door

Ioannes de Laet; ende met noodighe kaerten ende tafels voorsien

Leyden, Netherland:  Elzevier, 1625).  NOTE:  Click on Image to Enlarge.

Red Arrow Points to Reference to "Siwanois" on Original Page.

An immediate reaction to this reference may suggest to some that de Laet, who seems never to have visited New Netherland, had some knowledge from some unidentified source that the Natives in the coastal region that includes today's Pelham and Pelham Bay Park were known as "Siwanoys."  The reference does not, however, rise to the level of primary source evidence that there were Natives in the Pelham region that referenced themselves, and were referenced by others at the time, as "Siwanoys."

First, in both the 1625 edition and a 1630 edition of the same folio, de Laet included an assertion that among the Natives that inhabited an area along the "South River" (known today as the Delaware River) was a group named the "Sauwanoos."  See Jameson, J. Franklin, Narratives of New Netherland 1609-1664, p. 52 n.3 & p. 53 (NY, NY: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1909). This reference to "Sauwanoos" along the Delaware River joins 17th century map references to "Siwanoys" north of today's Stamford and to "Siwanois" in the northeastern part of today's Massachusetts as well as the earlier-described de Laet book reference to "Siwanois" near Hell Gate.  These four Siwanoy references tied to widely-disparate geographic locations together suggest either mistakes due to reliance on uninformed and inaccurate map references or -- more likely -- mapmakers' (and, perhaps, others') mistaken use of Native descriptive phrases intended to apply across different groups of Natives as though such descriptive phrases were the tribal names of the various groups of Natives.  (See below.)  

Second, others who have considered the matter closely likewise have rejected the notion that de Laet's work published in 1625 supports the existence of a group of Natives properly known as "Siwanoys."  For example, in his recent book on Wiechquaeskeck Natives, John Alexander Buckland argues extensively that "Siwanoy" was a descriptive term that meant the people who make wampum in this place.  He devotes a chapter in his book to the argument and begins as follows:  "Siwanoy means 'the place of sewan-making,' or 'the people who make sewan at this place.'  Sewan means 'wampum,' or 'shell beads.'  Oy, ois, or og means 'place.' There were Siwanoy all along the shore on both sides of Long Island Sound, in Delaware and in Massachusetts, north of Boston, when the Europeans arrived."  Buckland, John Alexander, The First Traders on Wall Street: The Wiechquaeskeck Indians of Southwestern Connecticut in the Seventeenth Century, p. 65 (Westminster, MD: Heritage Books, 2009).  He further notes:

"It is very probable that, about 1630, someone charting the shore asked the people there the name of their tribe, through an interpreter.  The two languages were vastly different in grammar and structure, and the question was understood as 'who are you?'  The answer was simply 'Siwanoy,' the people who make sewan. . . . Use of the name Siwanoy was not unique to the north shore of Long Island Sound in early accounts.  Johan de Laet (deLaet: 53) mentioned the Sawanoos [sic] on Long Island [sic] in 1609.  Adraien Block's 1614 map of northeastern Massachusetts has Sywanois there.  That simply means that they also made wampum on Long Island and in northeastern Massachusetts.  The name also turned up on maos of Delaware.  Various early spellings of Siwanoy included:  Sewonkeeg, Siwanoos, Siwanois, Sywanois, and Siwanog."

Source:  id., p. 66.

Third and most significantly, research has not revealed even one New Netherland or New England colonial document that uses the term "Siwanoy" or any spelling variant of it as the name of an identifiable group of Natives in the region of today's Pelham or elsewhere.

Despite the single reference in De Laet's 17th century book indicating that coastal Natives near Hell Gate were named "Siwanois," no primary evidence supports the assertion.  De Laet certainly was mistaken. 

*          *          *          *          *

"CHAPTER 8

Situation of the Coast of of New Netherland from Pye Bay to the Great River of Mountains. . . . 

"Pye Bay is perhaps that of Marblehead, Massachusetts."  [NOTE:  The "Great River of Mountains" was how the Dutch, who came from a flat sea-level nation, first described the Hudson River in the earliest years of the 17th Century.  Thus, what follows is a relevant portion of a chapter that describes the northeast coastline from today's Marblehead, Massachusetts to New York Harbor and Upper New York Bay.]

[Page 43]

Next, on the same south coast, succeeds a river named by our countrymen Fresh River, 3 which is shallow at its mouth, and lies between two courses, north by east and west by north; but according to conjecture, its general direction is from north-northwest.  In some places it is very shallow, so that at about fifteen leagues up the river there is not much more than five feet of water.  There are few inhabitants near the mouth of the river, but at the distance of fifteen leagues above they become numerous; their nation is called Sequins.  From this place the river stretches ten leagues, mostly in a northerly direction, but is very crooked; the reaches extend from northeast to southwest by south, and it is impossible to sail through them all with a head wind.  The depth of water varies from eight to twelve feet, is sometimes four and five fathoms, but mostly eight and nine feet.  The natives there plant maize, and in the year 1614 they had a village resembling a fort for protection against the attacks of their enemies.  They are called Nawaas, and their sagamore was then named Morahieck.  They term the bread made of maize in their language, leganick.  This place is situated in latitude 41° 48'.  The river is not navigable with yachts for more than two leagues farther, as it is very shallow and has a rocky bottom.  Within the land dwells another nation of savages, who are called Horikans; they descend the river in canoes made of bark  This river has always a downward current, so that no assistance is drived from it in going up, but a favorable wind is necessary.  

From Fresh River to another called the river of Royenberch, 4 it is eight leagues, west by north and east by south; this stream 

[Page 44]

stretches east-northeast, and is about a bow-shot wide, with a depth of three and a half fathoms at high water.  It rises and falls about six feet; a southeast by south moon causes high water at its mouth.  The natives who dwell here are called Quiripeys.  They take many beavers, but it is necessary for them to get into the habit of trade, otherwise they are too indolent to hunt the beaver.

Four leagues further to the west there lies a small island, where good water is to be found; and four leagues beyond that are a number of islands, so that Captain Adriaen Block gave the name of Archipelagus to the group.  The great bay is there about four leagues wide.  There is a small stream on the main that does not extend more than half a league in from the shore, when it becomes perfectly dry.  The natives here are called Siwanois, and dwell along the coast for eight leagues, to the neighborhood of Hellegat.  At the entrance of this bay, as we have already mentioned, are situated several islands, or broken land, on which a nation of savages have their abode, who are called Matouwax; they obtain a livelihood by fishing within the bay; whence the most easterly point of the land received from our people the name of Fisher's Hook and also Cape de Baye. 1  This cape and Block Island are situated about four leagues apart, in a course east by north and west by south."

[Page 43, Footnote 3 Reads:  "3 Four Mile River."]

[Page 43, Footnote 4 Reads:  "4 Quinipiac River, near New Haven."]

[Page 44, Footnote 1 Reads:  "1 Montauk Point."]

Source:  Jameson, J. Franklin, Narratives of New Netherland 1609-1664, pp. 43-44 (NY, NY:  Charles Scribner's Sons, 1909) (Includes an English translation of those portions of de Laet's "New World" relating to New Netherland as one of a series of "Original Narratives of Early American History Reproduced Under the Auspices of the American Historical Association").   

"CHAPTER 11

Further Description of the Coast to the Second Great River, and from thence to Latitude 38°, [and what the free Netherlanders have done there]. . . . 

"Ed.  1630, which, at the passage below relating to Indian tribes, reads:  'On this South River dwell divers nations of savages, namely, the Sauwanoos, Naraticons, Ermonmex, Sankicans.  TheMinquaas, Capitanasses, Gacheos, Sennecaas, Canomakers, Konekotays, Matanackouses, Armeomecks, etc., dwell further inland and upon another river. . . ."

Source:  Jameson, J. Franklin, Narratives of New Netherland 1609-1664, p. 52 n.3 (NY, NY: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1909) (Includes an English translation of those portions of de Laet's "New World" relating to New Netherland as one of a series of "Original Narratives of Early American History Reproduced Under the Auspices of the American Historical Association").

"CHAPTER 11

Further Description of the Coast to the Second Great River, and from thence to Latitude 38°, [and what the free Netherlanders have done there]. . . . 

"Within this bay is the other large river, called the South River, of which we have spoken in the seventh chapter; and several smaller streams. . . which I shall omit to describe as their true bearing and situation have not reached me, although some of our navigators are well acquainted with these rivers, which they discovered and have visited for several years.  Several nations of savages inhabit the banks of these rivers, namely, the Sauwanoos, Sanhicans, Minquaas, Capitanasses, Gacheos, Sennecaas, Canomakers, Naratekons, Konekotays, Matanackouses, Armeomecks, etc., nearly all of whom are of the same character and condition as those we have already described.  They plant the land and have much maize, beans, and whatever else the other natives possess."

Source:  Jameson, J. Franklin, Narratives of New Netherland 1609-1664, pp. 52-53 (NY, NY: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1909) (Includes an English translation of those portions of de Laet's "New World" relating to New Netherland as one of a series of "Original Narratives of Early American History Reproduced Under the Auspices of the American Historical Association").

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Why Did the Settlement at West Chester Planted by Thomas Pell Reportedly Display the "Parliament's Arms"?

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

The story of the first English settlement planted on the lands acquired by Thomas Pell from local Native Americans on June 27, 1654 is fascinating.  The settlement was known as West Chester by the English.  It was known as Oostdorp (East Village) by the Dutch. It was located near today's Westchester Square in The Bronx.  I have written about this settlement on many, many occasions, given its importance to the history of our town.  Here are a few of many examples.

Tue., Apr. 24, 2018:  Important New Scholarship on the Men to Whom Thomas Pell Sold Part of the Manor of Pelham in 1654.

Wed., Aug. 19, 2015:  Dutch Records Regarding Thomas Pell's Settlement at Oostdorp, Known by the English as the Village of West Chester.

Fri., Apr. 24, 2009:  Dutch Authorities Remove the Settlers At West Chester in March, 1656.

Fri., Jan. 02, 2009:  An Account of the Dutch Capture of Westchester in 1656.

Thu., Oct. 18, 2007:  April 19, 1655 Dutch Protest Against Thomas Pell's Efforts To Settle Englishmen on Lands the Dutch Called VreedLandt.  

Mon., Oct. 16, 2006:  17th Century Papers Relating To Westchester County Published in 1849 Contain References Important to Pelham.

Thu., Apr. 13, 2006:  Rumors in 1657 That Thomas Pell Manipulated Local Native Americans To Protect His Land Acquisition From Incursions by the Dutch.  

Mon., Aug. 17, 2015:  Buyer's Remorse:  After Thomas Pell Bought Pelham From Native Americans, He Wanted His Money Back!

For a general history of the English plantation once known as Westchester, West Chester, Oostdorp, Oost-Dorp, East-Town, East-Towne, Easttowne and by many more names, see the following: 

The Borough Towne of Westchester -- An Address Delivered by Fordham Morris, on the 28th Day of October, 1896, Before the Westchester County Historical Society, in the Court House at White Plains, N. Y. (White Plains, NY:  Privately Printed, Ca. 1896).  


Thomas Pell’s successful negotiation of the so-called "Indian Deed" with local Native Americans for the purchase of the land that subsequently became known as the Manor of Pelham had enormous implications for the dispute between the English and the Dutch over control of the area. The tract was vast -- about 50,000 acres. The Dutch claimed some of it.   Effective dominion over the lands could block any further northward movement of Dutch settlers – at least along the shore of the Long Island Sound westward to an area just beyond the Hutchinson River.   As one judicial authority has said in examining the acquisition, Thomas Pell’s purchase was “a bold attempt to extend English hegemony in the New World at the expense of the Dutch.”

Pell soon arranged settlement of a portion of the area near its western / southwestern border directly on the fault line between the feuding Dutch and English colonies.  The Dutch called the larger tract within which the settlement was located "Vreedland” (among other spellings including Freedlant, Vreedlandt, Vreelant, and Vreedlant).  Indeed, the lands that later became today's Pelham were first called "Vreedlandt."

Within months after Thomas Pell obtained his so-called "Indian Deed" to the land, he made land available to English settlers who planted a settlement at the mouth of today’s Westchester Creek in what is known now as The Bronx.  The Dutch and others later called the little settlement “Oostdorp” or “Easttowne”.

The enormity of Pell’s move was not lost on Dutch authorities.  Almost immediately they took steps to halt it.  At a meeting of the director general and council of the New Netherlands, it was resolved:

“that whereas a few English are beginning a settlement at a great distance from our outposts, on lands long before bought and paid for, near Vreedlant, to send there an interdict, and the attorney general, Cornelius van [Thienhoven], and forbid them to proceed no farther, but to abandon that spot. . . .”

On April 22, 1655, Dutch authorities served a formal protest dated April 19, 1655 on the settlers at Vreedland.   According to Lockwood Barr, who wrote a popular book on the history of Pelham and its surrounding area, the protest was served on Thomas Pell.  That is unlikely since it seems to have been served on leaders of the community in which Pell never resided.  Written in Dutch, the protest laid claims to the lands Pell had bought.

The response, reportedly delivered on behalf of the settlers at Vreedland, suggests both their strength of character and resolve on behalf of the Commonwealth and, presumably, for personal gain. The Dutch official named Claes van Elslant who delivered the protest returned to the Dutch authorities with the following reply ascribed to the settlers:

“Why doth not the Fiscal write English?  Then we could answer in writing; we expect a settlement of the boundary between Holland and England; until then, we abide under the State of England.”

The Dutch were unwilling to ignore such a dismissal of their demand.  They invaded the settlement and removed many of the Englishmen to a prison ship near Fort Amsterdam.  Eventually, the settlers were released and forced to pledge allegiance to the Dutch in order to be permitted to settle in the area under Dutch authority.  In March, 1656, however, the Dutch Fiscal presented a statement to the Director-General and the Council of New Netherland summarizing Thomas Pell’s “intrusion” at West Chester and asking that he be ordered, once again, to quit the area.

When the Dutch official (the official "Court Messenger") named Claes van Elslant appeared at the newly-planted settlement at West Chester on April 22, 1655 to deliver a warning from the Dutch Director General and his Council, he observed a number of things according to his later report of the incident.  He observed "houses" near where he could "land" his boat.  He was met by four "armed men" who tried to stop him from landing and stepping onto the land of the settlement.  He stepped out anyway to read the Dutch protest.  He then was held there until the "leader" of the group of New Englanders was brought forward, armed with a pistol and accompanied by eight to ten armed men "more."  Claes van Elslant was with a colleague referenced as "Albert the trumpeter" who accompanied him presumably to call an assembly with a horn if necessary.  

The two Dutch men were, for a time, placed under guard in a "hut on the shore well guarded by men."   The English told the two men that if they had any wine they would have shared it, but they had none.  The English then, in an apparent show of force, "discharged their guns all round."

In his subsequent report of the events, Court Messenger Claes van Elslant reported that he tried to gain some intelligence about the little settlement against which the Dutch planned to take actions to expel the settlers.  He reported as follows:  "I had also inclined to see their houses and fixtures; also, the Parliament's arms, which the English say hang on a tree, carved on a plank; but they left us standing in a hut on the shore well guarded by men.  Done as above."  Immediately below is van Elslant's brief report to Dutch authorities, in its entirety.  


"This day, 22d April, 1655, have I, Claes van Elslant, Court Messenger, by order of the Hon ble Fiscal, Cornelis van Tienhoven and the Supreme Council of New Amsterdam, in New Netherland, protested against those who were building the new village on the Company's land called Vreedlant; four armed men came to meet me at the ill, demanded what I was after?  I said, Where best could I land; near the houses?  They answered, You shall not land.  I said, Let me land, I am cold; and I sprung ashore.  Whereupon I and Albert the trumpeter, were placed under a guard and warned not to advance a foot further, until he who had the command came to us with a pistol, holding the barrel forward in his hand, accompanied by 8 @ 10 armed men more, to whom I read the Protest, word for word, and handed him the same, who gave for answer:  I cannot understand Dutch; why did not the Fiscal send it in English?  If you send it in English, then shall I answer in writing.  But, said he, that's no matter; we expect the ships from Holland and England which are to bring the settlement of the boundary.  Whether we are to dwell here under the States or under the Parliament, time will tell; furthermore, we abide here under the States of England.  Whereupon we took our departure.  They said, if we had a sup of wine we should offer you some; but we have not any.  And they discharged their guns all round.  I had also inclined to see their houses and fixtures; also, the Parliament's arms, which the English say hang on a tree, carved on a plank; but they left us standing in a hut on the shore well guarded by men.  Done as above.

(Signed), 

CLAES VAN ELSLANT."

Source:  O'Callaghan, E. B., ed., Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New-York; Procured In Holland, England and France by John Romeyn Brodhead, Esq., Agent, Vol. II,  p. 161 (Albany, NY:  Weed, Parsons and Co., 1858).   

I have indicated on the 1868 map of the Town of Westchester immediately below roughly where I believe this tiny little settlement stood in 1654.

1868 Map of the Town of Westchester With Red Outline of Area

Where This Author Believes the First Huts Were Built in Late 1654

to Plant the Settlement of West Chester Begun by Thomas Pell.

Source:  Beers, Frederick W., "Town of Westchester, Westchester

Co., N.Y." in Atlas of New York and Vicinity from Actual Surveys By

and Under the Direction of F. W. Beers, Assisted by A. B.

Prindle & Others, pg. 14 (Philadelphia, PA: James McGugan,

1868). NOTE: Click on Image to Enlarge.

The brief report of Claes van Elslant to the Director General and his Council in Fort Amsterdam is fascinating for a host of reasons.  It affirms that on April 22, 1655, only six or seven months after the settlement was planted, there were at least fourteen to sixteen armed settlers present and that they already had built "houses" and a "hut on the shore."  It further demonstrates that the houses were "near" a shore where a boat could have landed.  It affirms that the settlers knew they were on disputed land and even recognized that they believed that news from England would arrive any day with an indication of precisely where the disputed boundary between New Netherland and New England would be settled.  Thus, the leader of the settlers reportedly stated:  "we expect the ships from Holland and England which are to bring the settlement of the boundary.  Whether we are to dwell here under the States or under the Parliament, time will tell."

In short, the settlers understood that Thomas Pell had planted them on lands claimed by the Dutch.  They also recognized that depending on where their nations, through negotiations, settled on the boundary between their colonial holdings known as New Netherland and New England, they might eventually be subject to local Dutch rule or local English rule.

The reference to Parliament by the leader of the New England settlers is also important.  Oliver Cromwell (a "Roundhead" or Parliamentarian) had played a significant role in the defeat of the Royalists during the English Civil War and, on December 16, 1653, became the "Lord Protector" of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland.  In short, there was no English King to which the New Englanders could profess allegiance -- hence the references to whether they would "dwell here under the States [i.e., Dutch dominion] or under the Parliament."

Even more fascinating is Claes van Elslant's report that while he was present in the tiny settlement he tried to see "the Parliament's arms, which the English say hang on a tree, carved on a plank."  What were these "Parliament's arms" and why did they convey such significance that van Elslant felt compelled to report to Dutch authorities in New Amsterdam that he had tried to determine whether they, in fact, had been carved on a plank and were hung in the settlement by the English?

The concept of marking territory with Royal Arms almost like a boundary or no trespassing sign was important to the Dutch.  In the case of the English at that particular time, however, they had no King (rather, they had a Lord Protector).  Thus, they had no "Royal" Arms as previous English Kings had had.  It seems likely that the reference to "Parliament's arms" is a reference to the "Arms of His Highness By the Grace of God and Republic, Lord Protector of England, Scotland and Ireland" that represented the dominion of Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell.  

Those arms are described as follows:  

Crest:  "A demi lion issuant argent, holding in his paws a broken spear proper" 

Escutcheon:  "Quarterly of six: first, sable, a lion rampant argent; second, sable, three spear-heads argent imbrued proper; third, sable, a chevron between three fleurs-de-lis argent; fourth, gules, three chevrons argent; fifth, argent, a lion rampant sable; sixth, argent, on a chevron sable a mullet of the field."  

An example of an image of the arms is depicted immediately below.

 

Coat of Arms of Oliver Cromwell (1599 - 1658).  English Military

and Political Leader and Later Lord Protector of the Commonwealth

of England, Scotland and Ireland.  Source:  Wikipedia.  NOTE:  Click

on Image to Enlarge.

One scholar recently has emphasized the importance to the colonial Dutch authorities and to the West India Company of affixing the Arms of the States General "in prominent places along the coast" in the region over which the Dutch exercised dominion in New Netherland.  Thus, of course, for settlers from another nation to affix the arms of their nation along the coast in an area claimed by the Dutch as part of New Netherland would have been viewed as a direct slap in the face of Dutch authorities and, indeed, a hostile action.  

As Professor Andrew Lipman recently wrote in his important study entitled "The Saltwater Frontier:  Indians and the Contest for the American Coast":  

"To establish the bounds of their trading zone Dutch colonists affixed 'the Arms of the States General' in prominent places along the coast.  Soon these shield-shaped plates of metal adorned spots from Cape Cod to the current site of Philadelphia.  The historian Patricia Seed points out that since the Middle Ages Dutch market towns used 'municipal arms as equivalent to modern 'No Trespassing' signs.'  Posted around the outskirts of town, they allowed a city to assert 'its freedom from the local lord, warning revenue, judicial, and military officers to 'keep out' for the town administered these functions.'  These metal plaques served as warnings that any violation of Dutch commercial territory would be answered with force.  Amsterdam's emblem, adorned with three diagonal crosses in a kind of triple-X shape, is the most famous of these medieval seals.

The exact appearance of the States Arms is unknown, but most were likely fashioned from copper, and they almost certainly featured De Nederlandse leeuw (Dutch lion) holding seven arrows in its right paw, representing the seven provinces united against Spanish tyranny.  As the historian Simon Schama points out, this heraldic climbing leeuw was a ubiquitous symbol in seventeenth-century Dutch visual culture.  Lions appeared in relief on silver coins, pressed into sealing wax, etched in woodcuts, and traced on maps that arranged the seven provinces into the form of the iconic leeuw, while the animal itself was shown holding raised swords, bounding from the sea or surrounded by a stockade wall in defiance of Spanish sieges.  Perhaps a few centuries-old leonine images are still scattered somewhere deep in the soil near Manhattan; in 1972 an excavation at the footprint of Fort Amsterdam unearthed a finely made clay pipe dating to the 1660s with a maker's mark on the heel featuring the triumphant great cat.

The copper lions the West India Company affixed to trees were subject to frequent vandalism.  'Mischievous savages' from the Delaware Bay had pilfered one of these arms near the Swanendael settlement in 1631, possibly as a protest against an act they recognized as staking out territory or perhaps to reuse the valuable copper.  The furious Swanendael colonists demanded that the Indians bring them the head of the thief.  The Natives obliged the request, but the Dutch remained suspicious:  a colonist later assumed the incident was the cause of the eventual destruction of the settlement by Indians.  Colonial competitors were likewise known to have defaced the arms on multiple occasions.

The West India Company's belief that marking their trading zones with metal seals would reify the borders of New Netherland was just as compromised and self-serving a ploy as the opportunistic claims of vacuum domicilium by the English.  There was a basic ideological chasm between the rivals on the topic of possession.  The Dutch tended to believe that trafficking where Indians were still present would grant them ownership and authority over the territory, while the English gained a purchase on the mainland by opportunistically repopulating and replanting the ruins of a devastated Native landscape.  To put it in the most simple terms, the Dutch leadership presumed that American territory could be theirs through commerce, while the English liked to think their chosen corner of the continent was a gift given by God."

Source:  Lipman, Andrew, The Saltwater Frontier:  Indians and the Contest for the American Coast, pp. 119-121 (New Haven, CT and London:  Yale University Press, 2015) (endnotes omitted).

Thus, on April 22, 1655, Claes van Elslant looked for the "Parliament's arms" that he had heard had been carved on a plank and hung by the New Englanders in the tiny little settlement of West Chester.  Though there is no evidence he saw such arms, he noted that he was held in a hut near shore and was not allowed to look around.  Clearly van Elslant understood that if such arms were present and he reported that fact back to the Dutch authorities, it would incense them even further -- though they already were furious that the New Englanders had settled on Thomas Pell's lands that the Dutch claimed as theirs.

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

Why Did Local Wiechquaeskeck Natives Sell Their Land to Thomas Pell in 1654?

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."

In 2009, the Bronx County Historical Society Journal published an article by this author on the identities and biographical data of Thomas Pell and the New Englanders who signed the Pell Deed acquiring lands from local Wiechquaeskeck Natives on June 27, 1654.  See Bell, Blake A., The New Englanders Who Signed Thomas Pell's 1654 Agreement Acquiring Much of Today's Bronx and Lower Westchester Counties From Native Americans, The Bronx County Historical Society Journal, Vol. XLVI, Nos. 1 & 2, pp. 25-49 (Spring / Fall, 2009).

Since then, the author's research has focused on the identities and biographical data of the Natives who signed the Pell Deed.  See, e.g.:

Fri., Jun. 15, 2018:  Who Was Shawanórõckquot, a Native American Sachem Who Signed the Pell Indian Deed on June 27, 1654?

Tue., Jun. 19, 2018:  What Do We Know About "Cockho," a Native American Who Signed the Pell Indian Deed on June 27, 1654?  

As such research has progressed, interesting light has been shed on the possible motives behind the decision of local Wiechquaeskecks to sell their land to Thomas Pell in 1654.  Today's Historic Pelham Blog article collects a little of that research and presents a hypothesis.

There is evidence to suggest that at the time Thomas Pell purchased the land for 500 pounds sterling on June 27, 1654, news that the April 5, 1654 Treaty of Westminster ending the First Anglo-Dutch War had not yet reached Thomas Pell and his compatriots.  See Bell, Blake A., The New Englanders Who Signed Thomas Pell's 1654 Agreement Acquiring Much of Today's Bronx and Lower Westchester Counties From Native Americans, The Bronx County Historical Society Journal, Vol. XLVI, Nos. 1 & 2, pp. 25-49 (Spring / Fall, 2009).  Indeed, New Englanders were in the midst of preparing for an assault against New Netherland and Fort Amsterdam when news of the Treaty of Westminster finally reached them.  See id.  

It is possible, therefore, that local Wiechquaeskecks viewed the sale to Thomas Pell as a way to align themselves with New Englanders rather than the Dutch of New Netherland in the event the First-Anglo Dutch War enveloped the region as feared.  Indeed, it seems that local Wiechquaeskecks were very unhappy with Dutch authorities and their diplomatic "incompetence" in their dealings with Natives.  Moreover, Shawanórõckquot (the Wiechquaeskeck sachem who was listed as the first "Saggamore" who signed the Pell Deed) had a long, unpleasant history with the Dutch authorities of Fort Amsterdam further supporting the hypothesis that local Natives sold their land to Pell to spite the Dutch and align themselves with the New Englanders.

For years Director of New Netherland Willem Kieft had bullied local Natives and even savaged some Native settlements.  The Wiechquaeskecks in the Pelham region had grown to detest the Dutch.  Indeed, in August 1643, local Natives descended on settlers who had planted on today's Throggs Neck and in the region of today's Pelham Bay Park and massacred many including Anne Hutchinson and most of her family who were authorized by the Dutch authorities to settle in the region.

One scholar recently has described how the Wiechquaeskecks of the region had grown to hate the Dutch authorities in connection with long conflict between 1636 and 1645 that included both the Pequot War and Kieft's War:

"For the more independent Munsee-speaking democracies to the west [i.e. nearer New Netherland], war with colonists led first to a sense of solidarity between between sachems, but that cohesion faded the longer the war dragged on.  Some powers, particularly the Raritans and Esopus, were defiant throughout the conflict and remained dismissive of Dutch authority in the years following.  Other powers that had long sought peaceful dealings with New Amsterdam -- the Wiechquaesgeeks, Hackensacks, Tappens, Tankitekes, and Canarsies -- were at first frustrated at the Dutch director's incompetence in diplomacy and then became enraged at his provocation. . . ."

Source:  Lipman, Andrew, The Saltwater Frontier:  Indians and the Contest for the American Coast, p. 130 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2015).

Although the Dutch, the English, and the Natives were brutal during the long conflict, the Dutch killed far more Natives than the English who also, when the brutality finally ended, had far more "Indian partners" than the Dutch.  According to Lipman:

"Yet even in these wars of domination, diplomacy was essential.  English governors' attention to -- and sometimes deliberate manipulation of - Algonquian rules of alliance was in sharp contrast to the Dutch leadership's indifference to Native peacemaking protocols.  The English, who killed far fewer of their enemies than the Dutch, would end up claiming more territory  and more Indian partners, while the grueling Dutch war with their Munsee neighbors ended with the colonists in the same position as when they began."

Source:  Id., p, 129.  

Moreover, the great Wiechquaeskeck sachem Sawenaroque who signed the Pell Deed via his mark and is referenced in that document as "Shawanórõckquot" had a long and unpleasant history with local Dutch authorities.  For example, some have suggested that in his younger days, Shawanórõckquot was a great "warrior chief" who fought the Dutch as Dutch authorities sought to massacre peaceful Native American bands in the lower Hudson River Valley during Kieft's War (1643-1645), also known as the Wappinger War. See, e.g. Smoke Signals, Bound Vols. 7-9, p. 20 (NY, NY: Indian Association of America, 1955) ("Faced with extermination at the hands of the sadistic Gov. Kieft who proceeded to massacre peaceful bands in the lower Hudson River area in 1643, the Mohegans under the famous warrior chief Shanorocke or Shenorock found themselves forced into a wholesale war.").

Clearly there was no love lost between the Wiechquaeskeck sachem Sawenaroque and the Dutch.  Indeed, a few years after the sachem signed the Pell Deed, he was imprisoned for unspecified charges by the Dutch in New Amsterdam at the close of the so-called "Esopus Wars" that raged during the 1660s.  Indeed, on March 6, 1660, Dutch officials summoned several local chiefs to Fort Amsterdam to warn them against joining with or assisting the Esopus and Raritan Natives in the ongoing conflict. The five sachems present at the gathering agreed and the agreement was documented as a "Treaty" in the minutes of the meeting. 

Those minutes reflect that at the end of the meeting, the Dutch officials asked the Natives "whether they had anything more to say." The Natives responded by demanding to know "why Sauwenare [i.e., Sawenaroque] was not also present, whereas he was also a chief and their friend." Significantly, the Dutch responded that the Wiechquaeskeck sachem was not present because he was being held in a Dutch prison at Fort Amsterdam "on account of some [unspecified] charges made against him." The Dutch responded that they would immediately bring Sauwenare to the meeting and grant him a release from prison if each of the chiefs present "would engage themselves, that he or his people should do no more harm to us or to ours or in case it should happen, that they would then deliver the evil-doer into our hands." The chiefs agreed and the sachem referenced as Sauwenare was brought to the room. The minutes reflect in detail what happened next: 

"Sauwenar was brought up and informed of the foregoing, whereupon he answered that he was glad, that the peace was renewed, that his heart would henceforth be that of a Dutchman and he would live with them like a brother. Thus they left satisfied and the Sachems engaged themselves, to inform all their savages and it was made known to the neighboring villages by the firing of a cannon." 

Source: Documents Relating to the Colonial History of the State of New York, Vol. XIII, pp. 147-49 (Albany, NY: Weed, Parsons and Company, 1881).

This incident, of course, suggests that there likely was no love lost between the Wiechquaeskeck sachem "Sauwenar" and the Dutch. He may have informed the Director General that "his heart would henceforth be that of a Dutchman and he would live with them like a brother," but what would he be expected to say as a man hoping to avoid a return to imprisonment and depart with his sachem colleagues?

Given that news of the end of the First Anglo-Dutch War does not seem to have reached the Pelham area before June 27, 1654 and the fact that local Wiechquaeskecks and their sachem Sauwenaroque hated the Dutch, it seems likely that the Natives decided to sell their lands to Thomas Pell as a way of aligning themselves with English settlers in the event fighting began between New Netherlanders and New Englanders in the region as part of the First Anglo-Dutch War.  This also could explain why the lands were sold to Pell despite evidence that the same lands previously were sold to the Dutch at least once (in 1649) if not more than once before.  See Mon., Sep. 07, 2015:  Why Did Native Americans Sell Lands Including Today's Pelham First to the Dutch and then to the English?  See also Wed., Aug. 12, 2015:  Significant Research on the First "Indian Deed" Reflecting the Dutch Purchase of Lands that Included Today's Pelham; Mon., Aug. 31, 2015:  Seyseychkimus, The Native American "Chief" and Signer of 1649 Indian Deed Encompassing Pelham.

Munsee Family Like Munsee-Speaking Wiechquaesgecks Who

Once Inhabited the Region Including Today's Pelham.  NOTE:

Click on Image to Enlarge.

Archive of the Historic Pelham Web Site.
Home Page of the Historic Pelham Blog.
Order a Copy of "The Haunted History of Pelham, New York"
Order a Copy of "Thomas Pell and the Legend of the Pell Treaty Oak."