| A
Comparative Analysis of Archaic Peoples and Early Dutch Settlers
Living in The New York Region
The coastline of current-day New England was considerably
different thousands of years ago. Manhattan and Staten Island were
some 40 miles inland eight thousand years ago (Cantwell 2001: 37).
It was only as the ice sheets receded north and melted, a result
of a global warming trend, that ocean levels rose to today’s
elevation over a period of thousands of years (Cantwell 2001: 38).
The area around Manhattan, which is now on the coast, was once a
varied inland landscape with marshes, lakes, and forests. Through
analysis of seeds, pollen, and other plant remains, research shows
these forests were densely populated with trees such as spruce,
fir, pine, and birch (Cantwell 2001: 38, 42) (Tankersley 1990: 306).
In 1624, the Dutch established their first outpost about 150 miles
north of Manhattan, up the Hudson River, called Fort Orange. It
was located near the modern city of Albany, NY. (Cantwell 2001:
119) Interestingly, the environment was similar to that of prehistoric
Manhattan. The plant life was similar, with spruce, fir, birch,
and poplar dominating the area around Fort Orange (Tankersley 1990:
306). Because archaic groups and a fledgling European outpost relied
so heavily on the local environment to survive, there are many commonalities
in how they lived. Using this similar environmental context, one
can explore how each group, with their different technologies and
social traditions, adapted and survived.
The rich flora supported a remarkable diversity of animal life,
and allowed archaic and European groups to live off the land and
not rely on agriculture. It appears that the available animal life
was very similar for both the archaic peoples and the Dutch. Megafauna
like mammoth, mastodon, and giant sloth had become extinct by archaic
times. Large numbers of caribou, bear, moose, elk, and especially
white tailed deer were present throughout (Baker 1994: 96, 97) (Cantwell
2001: 38, 42, 47, 57) (Keene 1981: 93, 101) (Tankersley 1990: 310).
These animals were regularly hunted and likely provided much of
the subsistence for these groups. At Fort Orange, large caches of
white tail deer remains have been found, supported by a historical
document noting that deer meat was a main dietary component at the
outpost (Huey 1988: 241, 603). The Dutch settlers found the abundance
of deer astonishing because venison was a delicacy in Europe (Cantwell
2001: 179) (Huey 1988: 241). There was also plenty of small game
to be hunted, including rabbit, squirrel, raccoon, muskrat, beavers,
hares, and otters (Baker 1994: 97) (Keene 1981: 106).
Enormous populations of birds, supported by the flourishing plant
and animal life, were hunted. The Passenger Pigeon, now extinct,
was an important avian resource for paleoindian and archaic communities.
Arriving in huge flocks in early spring, these birds would provide
feasting for an entire community (Keene 1981: 112). Wild foul were
also heavily hunted and were still populous by the time the Dutch
set up Fort Orange (Huey 1988: 241, 362) (Keene 1981: 116). Large
populations of geese, swan, crane, turkey, pheasants, and duck were
present and likely hunted by archaic people, and certainly by the
Dutch (Baker 1994: 97) (Huey 1988: 243, 245).
Hunting wasn’t limited to terrestrial game. Fish such as salmon,
trout, sturgeon, and bass, were abundant in the many streams and
lakes that populated the region in both time periods, and were heavily
exploited (Baker 1994: xxii, 97, 32) (Cantwell 2001: 40, 42, 45,
47) (Huey 1988: 243) (Keene 1981: 121) (Tankersley 1990: 311). Clams,
mussels, and oysters were also collected (Baker 1994: 97) (Cantwell
2001: 55) (Huey 1988: 243, 245, 362, 363) (Keene 1981: 126). Archaeologies
have uncovered many large shell heaps from the middle Archaic, indicating
that large quantities of shellfish were consumed, and likely being
processed for beads as well (Cantwell 2001: 54, 58). Shellfish,
especially oysters, offered an emergency protein source during hard
times when other resources were not available (Cantwell 2001: 55,
59).
There were other types of food besides animals available. Nuts and
seeds, such as acorns and sunflower seeds, were an easy resource
to collect, were nutritious, and could be stored (Keene 1981: 65)
(Cantwell 2001: 47, 59) (Baker 1994: 74) (Cantwell 2001: 58). However,
many of these had to be processed before they were edible (Keene1981:
71). Fruits, such as grape and pumpkin, provided an immediately
consumable resource (Keene 1981: 81) (Baker 1994: 72) (Huey 1988:
7) (Cantwell 2001: 44).
Although many of the animal and plant resources were the same for
archaic peoples and early Dutch settlers, their means of procurement
was quite different. Before Fort Orange evolved into a village with
farming, it relied almost exclusively on hunting and gathering food,
like the archaic peoples before them. The technology the Dutch employed
was significantly more advanced. However, this did not help as much
as one might think. The principal component for archaic weapons
was the knapped point, made for a spear, atlatl, or various other
implements (Cantwell 2001: 43, 48) (Spiess 1987: 37) (Tankersley
1990: 305). The Dutch had gunpowder and advanced fabrication processes
that allowed them to make items like firearms and cannons (Huey
1988: 56) (Baker 1994: 226).
Gathering plant resources, such as fruits, nuts, seeds, roots, greens,
and sap would have been similar for both the Archaic peoples and
Dutch colonists. However, hunting animals is much more difficult
because of their mobility. In response, people developed ranged
weapons. Archaic people had developed the atlatl, a spear with a
throwing device for extra mechanical advantage. The Dutch had firearms
using spherical, lead ammunition and black powder. Studies have
shown that the effective range of the atlatl was about 50 meters,
although only accurate at half that distance (Keene 1981: 128).
Interestingly, firearms of the early 1600s, which the Dutch were
equipped with, had a further effective range, but only acceptable
accuracy for hunting at ranges of less than 30 meters. They were
also very unreliable and sometimes exploded (Baker 1994: 226, 249).
This meant that both groups had to engage game at close range. The
Archaic people were probably very proficient hunters, knowledgeable
about their native environment, unlike the Dutch. Also, firearms
likely scared away nearby animals, making it harder for the Dutch
to kill enough game to sustain the settlement.
Archaic people could build wooden watercraft (Cantwell 2001: 70).
These were probably used for transportation as well as fishing.
Basic fishing technology hasn’t changed much since archaic
times. It is believed that traps, weirs and nets were used for mass
collection of fish by archaic peoples (Cantwell 2001: 58) (Keene
1981: 124, 128). Spears, harpoons and even baited lines could have
been used as well (Keene 1981: 125). The Dutch certainly would have
had access to all of these methods.
Europeans repeatedly remarked how wonderfully rich New England was
when they first discovered the land (Howell 1886: 21) (Huey 1988:
iii). Verrazzano, an early North American explorer compared it to
the Garden of Eden, and also explained how the land was “suitable
for every kind of cultivation” (Baker 1994: 72). Indeed, when
the Dutch first landed, they wanted to engage in more familiar agricultural
pursuits. However, such an ambitious undertaking is time consuming,
and it took the Dutch nearly 20 years to become self-sufficient
(Barnes 1851: 46) (Cantwell 2001: 125, 146). During this time, the
colonists at Fort Orange were ill equipped to survive solely off
this rich, but foreign land; to survive, they needed assistance
from the local Native American communities. Groups like the Munsees
helped sustain them with food and also assisted in building housing
(Cantwell 2001: 122, 124). Soon, this relationship grew into mutually
beneficial trade.
The Dutch had established Fort Orange for fur trading operations.
There was a huge demand for fur in Europe because of its scarcity,
making it a status symbol (Cantwell 2001: 132, 150). For food, tobacco,
fur, and other assistance, the Dutch traded beads, firearms, metal
axes, copper kettles, liquor, cloth, knives and other European items,
which were highly sought after by many Native Americans (Baker 1994:
146) (Cantwell 2001: 119, 132) (Howell 1886: 2) (Huey 1988: 7, 30,
81) (Hyde 1924: 7). This trade soon involved many local Native American
groups, including major ones like the Iroquois, Mohawks, and Algonquians
(Cantwell 2001: 132) (Hyde 1924: 8).
Scholars believe that trade was an important factor in population
movement and settlement patterns, as groups vied for access to important
resources (Keene 1981: 180) (Tankersley 1990: 316). Archaic groups,
although mostly sedentary, were mobile at certain times of the year,
perhaps covering distances up to 500 km a year (Tankersley 1990:
314). Like the Dutch, archaic peoples were engaging in trade and
interacting with other groups. There were many navigable routes
to the west and north that could have been used for trade (Cantwell
2001: 60). Material trade seems to have been present even in earlier
periods. A paleoindian archeological site in Maine contained cobble
chert of exotic origin (Spiess 1987: 34, 37). This material may
have originated in the mid-Atlantic region and diffused from group
to group, rather than through direct trade (Spiess 1987: 37). The
material found in Maine was almost certainly transported through
the New York region; indicating groups there were engaged in trade
in paleoindian times as well. Port Mobil in New York, another paleoindian
site supports this. Materials from chert quarries, possibly from
Eastern Pennsylvania, have been recovered there (Cantwell 2001:
43). A reddish-purple argillite, a Mesozoic stone mostly found in
the central Delaware River Valley, has been recovered in archaic
archaeological sites in New York (Cantwell 2001: 60, 79). Archeologists
are unsure if the spear points made from this material or just the
raw materials themselves were traded. However, archeologists periodically
recover new styles of spear points that are not locally produced,
which means that finished products were being traded as well (Cantwell
2001: 56). These trade networks continued into the Woodland Period,
although evolved considerably in complexity and reach, including
trade of not only materials like sheet mica, but also ideas, rituals,
and even domesticated plants (Cantwell 2001: 76, 79).
The Dutch, although thousands of miles away from their homeland,
had strong ties to the Netherlands culturally. They received news
regularly as merchant ships visited Fort Orange. Although itself
a trading outpost, residents at the fort often traded for European
goods to reestablish “the comfort and sophistication of everyday
life in the Netherlands” (Cantwell 2001: 177, 180) (Huey 1988:
iv). Furniture, plates and tobacco pipes of Dutch and English origin
have been recovered at Fort Orange in significant numbers (Huey
1988: 249 255). They even built a brewery at Fort Orange, partly
for trade, but also for social reasons (Barnes 1851: 46) (Huey 1988:
33, 42). These social elements were important for the Dutch colonists.
It maintained social traditions and a sense of nationality, especially
as more and more children were born in the New World that had never
been to The Netherlands. Fort Orange slowly evolved from a fortified
outpost to a village called Beverwyck, with increasing European-style
opulence (Barnes 1851: 46) (Cantwell 2001: 135) (Huey 1988: 51,
559) (Hyde 1924: 6).
The Fort regularly hosted entertainment for the residents and also
local Native American groups, which were very friendly (Howell 2)
(Hyde 1924: 6). The social interaction and strong economic partnership
between Fort Orange and Native American groups forged an attitude
of cooperation. This included mutual economic benefit and collective
protection from hostile Native American tribes and the French to
the north (Huey 36). Even throughout the political upheavals in
New Amsterdam (current-day Manhattan), where Native Americans were
being brutally raped and massacred, life at Fort Orange and the
surrounding areas remained peaceful (Howell 1886: 47) (Huey 1988:
96). The Dutch at Fort Orange continued to work, trade, and sign
treaties with Native Americans long after the Dutch in New Amsterdam
had broken off ties with such groups (Hyde 1924: 8).
In some ways, archaic groups were similar to the Dutch socially.
Scholars believe that archaic groups visited neighboring communities
of kin or allies (Cantwell 2001: 60). Ceremonies and exchanges of
valuable raw materials like chert or ivory were probably common
(Cantwell 2001: 43). These trips were “to maintain social
and political relationships”, much like the Dutch were doing
with their neighbors (Cantwell 2001: 60). Escalating communication
between distant groups also meant marriage partners could have been
traded, which increased long-range social interaction (Cantwell
2001: 61). This phenomenon probably resulted from an increasingly
complex culture, which by the late archaic, for example, had developed
elaborate burial rituals (Cantwell 2001: 64, 67).
New England is unique in that it has been continually occupied for
eleven thousand years (Cantwell 2001: 3). Group after group has
occupied this land and settled it. Initially, the Dutch found themselves
in a land where their technology could not save them. They needed
to adapt quickly to survive, and in doing so, behaved much like
their archaic counterparts thousands of years earlier. The Dutch
settlers at Fort Orange and the archaic peoples around the area
of modern-day New York City had many parallels. They both lived
in a similar environment; living off the rich plant and animal resources
it provided them. They traded for desirable resources and established
extensive trade networks. They both had complex social systems,
and interacted with their neighbors to maintain good relations and
cooperate for mutual protection and economic benefit. As archaeological
efforts continue, researchers will undoubtedly gain new insight
into how these two groups lived, which will almost certainly reveal
additional parallels.
Works
Cited:
- Baker, Emerson et al, ed. American Beginnings:
Exploration, Culture, and Cartography in the Land of Norumbega.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1994.
- Barnes, William. The Settlement and Early
History of Albany. Albany: Gould, Banks & Gould, 1851.
- Cantwell, Anne-Marie and Diana Wall. Unearthing
Gotham. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2001.
- Howell, George. Bi-Centennial History of
Albany: History of the County of Albany, N.Y., from 1609 to 1886.
New York: W.W. Munsell & co., 1886.
- Huey, Paul. Aspects of Continuity and Change
in Colonial Dutch Material Culture at Fort Orange, 1624-1664.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1988.
- Hyde, J. A. Lloyd. The Relations Between
the Early Dutch and the Indians as Affecting the Subsequent Development
of the Colony of New York. New York: 1924.
- Keene, Arthur. Prehistoric Foraging in
a Temperate Forest: A linear Programming Model. New York: Academic
Press, 1981.
- Spiess, Arthur and Deborah Wilson. Michaud:
a Paleoindian Site in The New England-Maritimes Region. Augusta,
Maine: The Maine Historic Preservation Commission, 1987.
- Tankersley, Kenneth and Barry Isaac, ed.
Research in Economic Anthropology: Early Paleoindian Economies
of Eastern North America. Supplement 5. Greenwich, Connecticut:
Jai Press, Inc., 1990
Go to Home Page
Go to Projects Page
|
