Relations between the Huguenots of New Paltz, N. Y.
and the Esopus Indians

by Eric Roth, Archivist
Huguenot Historical Society
10/8/1998
Revised 3/15/1999

When twelve Huguenot refugees from Northern France purchased a large tract of land from the Esopus Indians on May 26, 1677, they founded a settlement that they knew would be vulnerable to Indian attack because of its great distance from other white settlements. The settlers were well beyond the range where they could be easily protected by the English forces stationed at Kingston, and for at least the next fifteen years, had no physical refuge other than the simple dwellings in which they lived. It wasn't until 1705 that the New Paltz settlers had a defensible redoubt to which they could retreat if the natives did decide to attack. Living in such vulnerability, it was imperative that the Huguenots forge peaceful relations with the local tribesmen. The people of New Paltz appear to have been successful in this mission, as there is no record of any Indian uprising against them, and only a handful of sources suggest that there were even tensions between the two groups.

In his book, History of New Paltz and its Old Families, local historian Ralph LeFevre claims that the reason for this peace "was because the Paltz people had honestly paid for the land and treated the Indians kindly" (1). LeFevre also suggests that the early settlers of New Paltz did not mistreat the Indians the way other European groups did. Other local legends tell of the honesty and fairness of both parties towards each other. LeFevre includes several anecdotes depicting friendly relations between the two groups; and other similar legends are told by today by local descendants and historians. LeFevre's view reflects the dominant mythologies surrounding relations between Huguenot and Indian at New Paltz has persisted to this day.

These stories cannot be fully accepted as accurate, however, since LeFevre's book is filled with errors and obvious over-romanticizations of the truth, and many of the local legends transmitted down through the generations likewise originated from uncertain sources. The fact that such stories are difficult to verify should not in and of itself be a cause to question their accuracy. But information gleaned from other sources does call into question the belief that relations between the two groups were always free of tension. Even the events surrounding the purchase of the New Paltz lands by its founders (generally recognized as a friendly affair) reveal the Native Americans' mistrust of the process of land acquisition practiced by the Europeans.

Although LeFevre may be partially correct in his beliefs concerning the relations between Huguenot and Indian, the reasons for the peace enjoyed at New Paltz are in reality more complex. I believe that while the Huguenots should be commended for not mistreating the Esopus Indians, it must be understood that relations between the two groups were not as placid as often believed, and that there were many other internal and external factors contributing to the situation at New Paltz. These factors include the decimation and subsequent dispersal of the Esopus Indians due to war, disease, and economic opportunities in the Susquehanna Valley; English policy towards the Native Americans after the English conquest of New Netherland in 1664; and changing relations between the Esopus and other native tribes. In order to truly understand the nature of relations between Huguenot and Indian, these outside pressures must be explored. In this essay I intend to show that the Huguenots and Esopus were both minor players in a very complex political game involving three European nations and several Indian nations.

Why indeed were there peaceful relations between Native and European in New Paltz? Was it really because the Huguenots were honest and fair in their dealings with the Indians? And did the Indians themselves always act honorably towards the settlers? Certainly the actions of the Esopus Indians during the hostilities antedating the New Paltz Patent demonstrate that they were not above treachery. But there are other instances of the Indians acting very honorably and making diligent efforts towards peace even when the Dutch were mistreating them.

By 1675 there were rumblings of discontent among the tribesmen, and two years later it was ordered that a perambulation of the bounds be made publicly in the presence of both Indians and Christians. Furthermore, the white population in the area was growing, and pressure was being exerted on the natives to sell still another larger tract, partly for the accommodation of some newly arrived French Huguenots. When the Indians proved reluctant, the council refused to let the matter drop and invited settlers to try their luck at individual negotiations. A month later Andros came up to add his voice to the clamor, and Indian resistance collapsed...The next day Andros permitted the Huguenots to negotiate with the Indians for a separate tract of their own, which resulted soon afterward in the settlement of New Paltz, several miles south (2).

Trelease's analysis raises some interesting points. First of all, the purchase of the New Paltz land did not go as smoothly as always claimed by local historians. Obviously, the Indians were not jumping at the chance to sell more land to the Europeans who had defeated them in battle. In fact, they even had to be persuaded to negotiate with the Huguenots by Royal Governor Andros himself. On the other hand, the fact that the Huguenots had more success negotiating with the Indians than the government officials supports the notion that the Huguenots were able to convince the Esopus of their sincerity. The goods that the Huguenots paid to the Indians for the land were apparently acceptable to both parties, and one can argue that the deal was not nearly as one-sided as many other land transactions between whites and Indians. And there are a number of other instances of Indian tribes of the Northeast selling land to honest, peace-loving, non-speculative neighbors such as Quakers, Labadists, and other minority groups (3). It seems reasonable to conclude that a similar mood prevailed at New Paltz.

A document from 1683 paints a different picture, however. On February 13, 1683 Abraham Hasbrouck, Jean Hasbrouck and Louis Bevier petitioned the Kingston courts to purchase more land from the Esopus Indians. Their reason for this request is quite revealing.

"...We citizens of New Paltz inform your honor that we must keep a great fence between us and the Indians, and that the Indians are disposed to sell us their land to their New Indian fort. We therefore humbly petition your Honor to give us a further hearing upon the approval of His Excellency the Governor, and will then give satisfaction to the IndiansÖ" (4).

Why did the citizens of New Paltz declare that they "must keep a great fence" between themselves and the Indians? It is hard to say why the Huguenots felt they needed this extra buffer zone between themselves and the Indians, but the wording of the petition suggests that they were not as friendly with the Indians as LeFevre has suggested.

But other than this document and a very small number of sketchy accounts found in published genealogies identifying settlers being "possibly" killed by Indians, there are no other reports of unrest at New Paltz. In fact, records show that public officials from Ulster County maintained regular contact with the Indians at least until 1727, as is evidenced by the numerous bounties paid to Indians by the Board of Supervisors for killing wolves (5). But after the petition of 1683, there is no evidence to suggest that the Esopus Indians as a tribe ever even visited New Paltz. So, where did they go? The answer to this question is complex and deserves a thorough discussion here. But before we analyze the Esopus exodus from the region, it will be useful to provide some information regarding their history, culture, and relations with the white man prior to the settlement of New Paltz.

The Esopus Indians of Ulster County were part of the Delaware, or Lenape Nation, which extended from the Catskill Mountains to the northern tip of the Delaware Bay. The northernmost tribes of the Delaware Indians included not only the Esopus, but also the Catskills, and Wappingers, all of whom spoke the Munsee dialect of the Algonquian language group. Although these three tribes were part of a vast nation consisting of perhaps as many as 24,000 people before the arrival of the Europeans (6), it is important to understand that "the aboriginal sociopolitical units were very small and that village life was central to their existence" (7).

Relations between the Esopus and the Huguenots of New Paltz really begin with the Esopus Wars in the 1650's and 1660's. These wars were only two of several conflicts in the New York region between the whites and Indians during the Dutch Colonial rule. Other outbreaks include Kieft's War in the 1640's and the "Peach War" of 1655. In general, tensions between the Europeans and the natives stemmed from differences in concepts of land tenure and all too frequent occurrences of the settlers' uncontrolled livestock destroying Indians' crops. Also, the inability of the Indian leaders to control alcohol-induced acts of aggression of the younger braves on the one hand, and general mistreatment of the Indians by settlers on the other hand also contributed to the developing sense of mistrust between the two peoples (8).

The outlook for the Esopus Indians at the conclusion of the Second Esopus War was bleak, indeed. The Dutch forces had destroyed much of their farmlands and crops. Many of the Esopus had been slain during the fighting, and still others were dying from disease. In his book The History of the Indian Tribes of Hudson's River, historian Edward Ruttenber includes a report made to Gov. Fletcher showing that the population of the combined tribes of the Mid-Hudson Valley (called River Indians) was on the decline. In 1689, for example, there were 250 River Indians. Nine years later, that number had fallen to ninety. And although tribes experienced similar rates of depopulation, the River Indians were the hardest hit out of all the tribes (9). As a result of these difficulties, many Esopus Indians scattered to friendly nations, including the Nevesinks, Wappingers and Mohicans.

The reasons for the diminishing influence of the Esopus at Kingston were due not only the wars, but also to several other factors. One major determinant contributing to the reduction of the native population (and therefore influence) throughout America during the contact period was the introduction of European diseases to the Indians, since the latter had no natural defenses to these new and devastating maladies. Diseases such as smallpox, typhus, diphtheria, measles and mumps devastated Indian populations. By far the most disastrous of the European maladies was smallpox, which desolated Indian communities throughout the New World, including South America and the Caribbean as well as North America. Esopus country was no exception to this unfortunate calamity. Official records reveal two major smallpox outbreaks among the Esopus and their brethren the Minisink Indians in 1691 and 1702 (10). Also, historian Robert Grumet claims that there were no less than 14 epidemics experienced by the combined Delaware Indians between 1633 and 1702 (11).

These outbreaks were so devastating to the native tribes that some Indians even accused the Europeans of deliberately exposing the Indians to the diseases in retaliation for earlier Indian acts of aggression (12). Afflicted tribes often went on the warpath against other Indian tribes to capture prisoners to replace their diminished numbers, further upsetting already impoverished communities (13). The fact that this particular re-population tactic was often employed the Iroquois served to spell further disaster for the Delaware Indians, who shared much of their northern border with the powerful Indian Nation.

In the later eighteenth century, the Esopus Indians were unfortunately caught in the middle of the French and Indian, and Revolutionary Wars, which led to violent altercations to the west of the Shawagunk Mountains in the towns of Rochester and Wawarsing (14). Esopus Indians in the eighteenth century also complained of being harassed and abused by white colonists, who in turn accused them of raiding white settlements in New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. At Walden, several miles to the south of New Paltz, colonists even went so far as to kill nine Indians, including some women and children. Sir William Johnson, in reaction to an Esopus uprising against English soldiers searching their wigwams for murderers, imposed on the Mohawks to persuade the Esopus remaining in Ulster county to relocate to the Mohawk settlement in the Schoharie (15).

As English interests in the New World differed with those the Dutch, their seizure of the New Netherlands came to exert some influence on the lives of the Esopus Indians and in their relations with their white neighbors. This development is excellently expressed in Robert Grumet's 1989 book, The Lenapes. Concerning this transfer of power, he writes:

The Dutch had become so weakened by conflict with the Indians that their colony fell easily. Learning from Dutch mistakes, the triumphant English made peace the following year with all Indians in the region. ... The peace was an illusory one, however, as many sources of the conflict remained unresolved. Most of the Lenapes were pressed between the mountains and the coastal towns of the colonists. Powerful neighboring tribes fought to dominate or absorb them. Ö The Lenapes' wisest leaders realized that their only hope lay in buying time, which held the possibility of recovery for themselves and decline for their enemies. They bought that time by playing powerful rivals against one another (16).

The "illusory" peace mentioned by Grumet refers to the fact that the English were no less imperialistic then the Dutch. In fact, they were much more interested in colonization and expansion than the Dutch, whose primary vision was strictly one of commerce. The English realized that it would be in their best interests to foster good relations with the many native tribes in their colonies. They also believed that an alliance with the Indians could be used as leverage in the growing conflict with the French in Canada. In order to promote peace with the native tribes, the English passed laws designed to standardize land sales, crack down on arms and alcohol contraband, encourage fence building (to prevent the colonists' livestock from trampling Native American crops), and judge abuse cases between Indians and settlers fairly "as if the case had been between Christian and Christian" (17).

Another situation that served to further weaken the Esopus Indians in the late seventeenth century was the conflict developing between the English and French Canadians. This conflict, resulting largely from competition for dominance of the Indian beaver trade, served to wreak havoc on the entire Indian population of New York, including the Esopus. The Five Nations of the Iroquois, for example, allied with the English in order to gain a military advantage against their enemies the Ottowas and the Hurons of Canada, while the English used the Five Nations as a buffer against invading French forces. The Esopus Indians, subject to the mighty Five Nations, were dragged into the affair, further reducing their numbers in the Wallkill Valley. This fact is documented in several sources noting Esopus participation in the conflict. In 1675, for instance, Mohawks reported that a band of "Esopus savages" killed "French savages," greatly disturbing the General of Canada. In response, the Esopus claimed no knowledge of such an attack but mentioned that they had problems with the "French savages" on earlier occasions. They then offered to pay the Mohawks and French Indians to ease any difficulties (18). Later in the 1680's, the English made attempts to recruit Esopus and Minisink Indians as scouts to track French and Indian activity in the North (19).

Precarious relations with other Indian tribes also served to assure the rapid dispersal of the Esopus and their Lenape brethren from their ancestral lands. First, the Lenapes faced severe economic hardships in the mid-seventeenth century due to the fact that their territory had never been a particularly favorable habitat for furbearing animals. It appears that the few beavers inhabiting the area had probably been hunted or trapped to extinction some years before the whites had settled in present-day Ulster County. Needing beaver pelts and other skins to trade for increasingly important European-made goods, Lenapes turned to other territories and tribes for their furs. Their trappings and trading parties ranged widely throughout the Northeast in search of pelts. These journeys found the Lenapes forging particularly strong relations with Indians living in the lands of Ohio, which had an abundant beaver population. But the Lenape often found their path to Ohio blocked by Senecas and Susquehannocks, both of whom jealously guarded access routes leading beyond the Appalachian Mountains. In the 1670's, however, the dispersal of the Susquehannocks by the Iroquois removed a major obstacle to Lenape travel to the west. Indeed, it seems that by 1700 many Lenapes had left Ulster County to settle along the Susquehanna River valley in search of economic security (20).

The Esopus also became embroiled in the larger conflict between the Iroquois and the Lenape nations, the existence of a conflict well supported by the archeological findings of Dr. Charles Philhower (21). Concerning the hostilities between the two nations, Weslager writes:

I still hold the view I first expressed in a paper in 1944, which has been reinforced by subsequent study, that the Delawares had been subjugated, and the Iroquois reduced them to a subservient position. In the circumstances the Delawares were placed in, there was no honor attached to being looked upon as women, rather they were humiliated because they were reminded constantly that they lacked political or military power. Canyase, a Mohawk, expressed it thus, 'We, the Mohocks are Men; we are made so from above, but the Delawares are Women, and under our Protection, and of too low a kind to be Men.ÖBeaver, a Delaware chief, once addressed the Six Nations as follows, 'Uncles: I still remember the time when you first conquered us and made Women of us...'" (22).

In a similar statement, Grumet claims that the bitter feelings between the two nations seemed to have endured at least as late as 1758, when a Lenape delegation defiantly refused a request by an Mohawk delegation to lay down their arms. In defiance of the Mohawks, one Delaware chief proudly exclaimed, "We are men, and are determined not to be ruled any longer by you as women" (23).

Local records also show evidence that this antagonism existed in New York as early as the 1660's and that the Esopus sided with the rest of the Lenape nation against the Iroquois. In January 1661, the Esopus Indians threatened to kill a group of Mohawks if they journeyed through the Esopus territory. A week later Fort Orange magistrates wrote Stuyvesant warning them that "the Esopus savages are in danger of being attacked by the Maquas" (24). The Esopus also faced problems garnering support for their excursions against the Dutch in the 1650's and 1660's. According to Benjamin Brink, the Esopus could never field more than 250 warriors when united, and could not convince their friends the Catskill Indians to join in the attacks on Nieww Dorp and Kingston (25). Only the Minisink Indians provided the Esopus with any tangible support. The aggressive actions of the Esopus did, however, induce their other natives to join the Dutch efforts against the Esopus, such as the case of the Marsapequas, who contributed 46 men to Kregier's forces in 1663 (26).

When looking at the bigger picture, it is easy to understand the dilemma faced by the Lenape tribes during the seventeenth century. Caught in the middle of complex power struggles between more powerful nations, they sought to salvage their situation through diplomacy and cunning instead of brute force. Thus, "the Delawares retained their autonomy for a century and a half by selling land slowly and methodically and by extracting as many concessions from the buyers as possible...In order to ingratiate themselves with their more powerful colonial neighbors and to forestall more drastic forms of aggrandizement, the natives sold cheaply." By deeds of sale, Indians all over the English colonies were permitted to hunt, trap, fish, plant, cut wood, or gather natural resources for the foreseeable future (27).

The same strategy appears to have been present in the Indian deeds of sale in Ulster County. In particular, they reveal an unmistakable, however unsurprising trend of expansion into the Wallkill Valley by the Europeans, followed by the subsequent removal of the Indians from the region. From the earliest hostilities involving the Esopus tribes, we can see that Stuyvesant drove a hard bargain, gobbling up large chunks of land as retribution for the attacks on the Dutch settlements. The Esopus twice ceded land in 1677, first in the Andros Treaty with Kaelcop for land north of Kingston up to Catskill, and then in the New Paltz Patent to the south. In 1682 "five Esopus Indians sold 'all their land named Sawankonck, on which the savages owe a part'" (28). In 1706 and Indian named "kakawaramin" sold a large tract of land northwest of Marbletown. And three more land sales in 1721, 1738, and 1768 completed the transfer of land to various European settlers, thus ending the era of land ownership by Native Americans in Ulster County.

By this time, New Paltz was a growing community full of second and third generation Huguenots, as well as a handful of Dutch and English settlers. Surveyors were now making regular trips into the New Paltz land to divide plots for sale or lease; townsmen were just commencing work on their first roads; and landowners were increasing their holdings through speculation and direct purchase. But life seemed to remain peaceful at New Paltz, despite evidence of mistrust between Huguenot and Indian, at least in the early years of the settlement. Apparently, the two groups did attempt to foster good relations with one another, but it was ultimately underlying conditions and outside influences that prevented hostilities between the two groups.

The biggest influence on the peaceful relations between the Huguenots and Esopus Indians of New Paltz was not English policy, nor the good intentions or diplomacy skills of either of the two groups, but rather the simple fact that the population of the Esopus Indians was already in the process of rapid decline by the time New Paltz was settled. Dwindling in number, the Esopus were rendered virtually powerless at the negotiating table and simply had to comply with the demands of the local colonists for their very survival and well being. They had already learned this very difficult lesson after they were defeated by the Dutch in the Esopus Wars. Thus, despite the fairness of the New Paltz land purchase, it must be remembered that the Huguenots negotiated as victors, not equals.

The Esopus were seriously weakened by the Esopus Wars, numerous epidemics of smallpox and other diseases, and by the developing conflicts between the English and French and their respective Indian allies, and between the Delaware and Iroquois Nations. Economic opportunities opening up in the Susquehanna Valley served to draw Esopus Indians away from Ulster County. And finally, the fact that many Indian tribes sided with the British during the American War for Independence ensured their removal from Ulster County, and eventually New York altogether. All of these factors contributed to the decline of the Indian population, and therefore, their influence at New Paltz.

The Esopus Indians, their power broken by war and disease, had little to gain by staying in Ulster County. Many of the Esopus who joined other tribes or settled in the Susquehanna Valley were eventually relocated to Wisconsin in the 1820's, far from their ancestral lands, while the fertile floodplains of the Wallkill Valley enriched the European settlers who supplanted them. The heritage of the Esopus Indians is not completely forgotten, however. Place names such as Esopus, Kerhonkson, Shawangunk, Wawarsing, Mohonk and many others, a renewed interest in the study of Native American history, and successful archeological investigations all serve to remind us of those people who were here first, and of the legacies they left behind. Scholars, historians, archaeologists, students, and others continue to explore this field of research in order to further understand the events that provided the foundation for our local community of today.

Endnotes

1. Lefevre, Ralph. History of New Paltz and Its Old Families. Fort Orange Press, Albany, N. Y. (1909): p. 78.

2. Trelease, Allen W. Indian Affairs in Colonial New York: The Seventeenth Century. Lincoln and London, University of Nebraska Press (1960): p. 198.

3. Axtell, James. Beyond 1492: Encounters in North America. New York, Oxford University Press (1992): p. 113.

4. LeFevre, p. 21.

5. "Minutes of the Board of Supervisors of Ulster County 1711-1731." Transcriptions of Early County Records of New York State. Albany, New York, The Historical Records Survey (1939).

6. Grumet,Robert S. The Lenapes. New York, Chelsea House Publishers (1989): p. 34.

7. Hauptman, Lawrence M. The Native Americans: A history of the first residents of New Paltz and environs. New Paltz, Elting Memorial Library Haviland-Heidgerd Historical Collection Bulletin, No. 9 (1975): p. 3.

8. Hauptman, p. 7.

9. Ruttenber, Edward Manning. The History of the Indian Tribes of Hudson's River. Albany, J. Munsell (1872). Reprinted by Hope Farm Press, Saugerties, N. Y. (1992): p. 179.

10. Ruttenber, p. 177; Hauptman, p. 13.

11. Grumet, p. 32.

12. Weslager, C. A. The Delaware Indians. New Bruynswick, N. J. Rutgers University Press (1972):, p. 134.

13. Axtell, p. 106.

14. Many stories of these events are told in Abraham G. Bevier's The Indians: or narratives of massacres and depredations on the frontier of Wawasink and its vicinity during the American Revolution. Rondout, NY, Bradbury & Wells (1846).

15. Hauptmann, p. 13.

16. Grumet, pp. 38-39.

17. Ruttenber, p. 162.

18. Fried, Marc B. The Early History of Kingston & Ulster County, N.Y. Marbletown, Kingston, NY, Ulster County Historical Society (1975): p. 137.

19. Ruttenber, pp. 177, 179.

20. Grumet, p. 34-37.

21. Weslager, p. 133.

22. Weslager, p. 181.

23. Grumet, p. 54.

24. Fried, p. 56.

25. Brink, Benjamin Myer. "The Remnants of the Esopus Indians" Olde Ulster: An Historical and Genealogical Magazine. Kingston, NY. Volume III, (Nov. 1907): pp. 321-329.

26. Ruttenber, p. 73.

27. Axtell, p. 113.

28. Fried, p. 95.