h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I am doing a lot of research about the period that the Dutch colonized a small area around the Hudson River and the part in the south of Manhattan.

Next year there will be a celebration in Amsterdam and in New York, because then it will be 400 years ago that captain Hudson was hired by the Dutch to find a shorter way to China, but stranded at Manhattan.
Somewhere I already wrote that.

I'd better not write until I've done all I would like to do.

Still I do.

So Hudson came in 1609 and after him most poor men came from "Holland" (that was not a nation these days) to do the necessary preparations for colonists that might come later.
But in the first years no one in Amsterdam was interested in colonizing Manhattan. Holland was rich and the trade with the local Indians was very good. We bought the skins of beavers and sold it with a lot of profit in Europe.
So why colonizing.
By the way; the whole East Coast of "America-now" was occupied by the English, French, Spanish, Swedish, etc. and the English could easily kick us out.

That's what they did in 1664 and in 1673 we reoccupied it until the summer of 1674.
The contract made in 1674 became later on the mirror of what we know now as the Bill of Rights. It was a very good contract and the settlers got it even better under English rule than under Dutch.


I'm reading the book that's based on the immense research, done by

http://www.ulster.net/~hrmm/halfmoon/gehring.htm

That Charles Gehring found thousands of old Dutch documents and translated these all. Our queen has honored him for that around 2000.


To me, it's interesting to understand the influence of Dutch culture in the development of the United States of America.

The text of the declaration of independence in USA was apparently inspired by the Dutch pamphlet against the Spanish occupier.

One of the Founding Fathers – John Adams - who wrote that (USA) document, so to speak, said about the relation with the Dutch "plakkaat van verlatinghe";
Quote;
”The originals of the two republics are so much alike, that the history of one seems but a transcript from that of the other………
the great characters the Dutch republic exhibits …………have been particularly studied, admired and imitated in every American state”.

Well, big names and their ancestors. It's known but not that important.
Neither our "Sinterklaas" and their "Santa Claus" and that kind of stuff, although it has its own value.

The philosophy of the rebelling Protestants in - what we know now - The Netherlands has also been inspiration for the U.S constitution.
Not very surprisingly, to know that many colonists who came from Europe found their way in the US and England and Holland were for many years the only protestant nations in Europe.

What surprises me, is, that the so called "tolerance" in Holland these days, indeed was real tolerance and no myth.
All those who were persecuted because of their beliefs (protestants, baptists) or race (Jews) found their way into the North of the Netherlands.
In those days "The Netherlands" were what we know now as "The netherlands" and "Belgium" together. But the "Belgium part" was mainly always occupied by the Spanish troops and in the north it was 80 years of trading places between the Dutch and Spanish troops.

By the way; they were Spanish troops, but only a small number were really from Spain. At least 30 percent were Dutch. In those days, 1500, 1600 and also later on, it was very normal in Europe to find a living as a soldier. So Scottish soldiers could be hired by the Dutch to fight against England.

My own ancestors fought against Napoleon as well as for him.
Strange, but it needs a lot of care to understand the culture of these days.

Anyhow; yes, I'm impressed by what was allowed in Amsterdam and Leiden and what we know now as Rotterdam and the Northern provinces.

When there was a fight between protestants in England, the hardliners went to Holland and after a few years they went to the big continent = Manhattan, etc.

The impact of Dutch settlers appears to be far more than just having a colony for 40 years.
All these dates like 1609, 1624, 1664 and 1673 etc. don't reflect the impact of their presence.
Why?
Because these settlers remained their in their very own way of life for hundreds of years. It was quite normal for a notary anno 1775, to sign a paper "The New Netherlands".
That's because of the conditions Peter Stuyvesant demanded when the British took over. Their way of life just went on, as it did before.

And there are some public thoughts about the relation between New York and Amsterdam.
It cannot be proven, and is speculation.
But the translator of all these ancient Dutch manuscript started it and in the Book "New Amsterdam" it's also paid attention to.

The Dutch around Hudson did not have a society as the English or French. Our society is not built on class spirits, so people from "below" could have a real opportunity to find their way up.

Second; the culture of "tolerance" existed far longer than just 1624-1664. Far longer.
The English were very surprised that so many Jews came to live in New Amsterdam, and "even" some Black Africans.
Roman Catholics, Italians, Danish, Swedish; it all was there.
In fact there were more people from Belgium than from Holland.
The initiative, power and support came from Amsterdam, but not more than 15% of all inhabitants came from Amsterdam.
The policy was not only based on "tolerance", for who the hell goes in a ship for two months between cattle, arrives and has to find his way (more men than women)from scratch on.
So it was also smart to invite anyone who wanted.

That last reason is also the explanation for the fact that "marginal" behavior was not always rejected, so to speak.
A famous pirate of the Caribbean found his home in New Amsterdam, married a rich widow and was a cult figure. He became adored and famous and in his mood of glory he even took a ship just for fun, to Boston.
Oh, my God, Boston; here they come. Police of Boston took him from his ship, because of piracy accusations in the past and the man was hanged.

These "liberal ingredients" so to speak may have had their influence on the social and cultural life in New York.
But it is speculation.

And the Dutch could sometimes be very harsh and one governor was absolutely allergic for the word "tolerance".
A century later on, Manhattan was a place of criminality and lawlessness without any horizon, let alone inspiration for others.

But, it's interesting.
I like geo politics as much as the human interest stories. It's like a movie.

And I must admit, that the Dutch in these days were more, real " tolerant" as we are now - 2008 - for fugitives, different religions. Maybe because they themself suffered from oppression by Spain and cath.church.

http://www.henryhudson400.com/index.php?lid=1&sid=1

http://www.russellshorto.com/books/

http://www.newamsterdamhistorycenter.org/

http://www.nnp.org/index.shtml

http://www.hollandsociety.org/index1.html

http://www.historichousetrust.org/item.php?i_id=14

http://www.halfmoon.mus.ny.us/ New Netherland Museum Half moon

http://www.hudsonvalley.org/content/view/43/102/

http://www.john-adams.nl/home/

http://polyglot.lss.wisc.edu/aans/ American Association for Netherlandic Studies. AANS is a university-level organization that promotes the study of the language, literature, history, art history and general culture of the Low Countries.

http://www.newyorkamsterdam.com/ info omtrent culturele evenementen.

I just found an article about that "Meltingpot" of the non-pilgrims..
by the author of the book I was talking about.
I didn't know he had a website.
He appears also to be a witer for the New York Times.

http://www.russellshorto.com/articles/Un-Pilgrims.htm

Today, I finished my work about "New Netherland"= Nieu Nederlandt = nieuw Nederland.

It was very fascinating; the maps, the birdsview maps with codes to know what is wat. Asif I was walking around on Long Island or Manhattan, or the Hudson.

The story about John Adams (second president) about his fascination for the Dutch declaration of independence, I knew.

What's new to me is, that when The Dutch finally surrendered in 1674, they had a huge list of conditions.
These were all accepted and they had more freedom than ever before and life went on at least for a hundred years this way.

If there is a link between the melting pot (a myth, by the way) and the Dutch colony with 18 (yes 18) languages is pure speculation.
Lots of "tolerance" was pragmatic; they desperatedly needed people.

But, if there was a real fight about freedom of religion, Amsterdam, The netherlands, referred to a covenant; "that there is freedom for religion for all" and Stuyvesant had to back down.

It was like a movie, but I also felt the struggle between romanticism and the real history, like many Indians who became alcoholics and lived just outside the wall of the city, while their wives became prostitutes for people within the cities.
A drama like the Aboriginals .

Besides, criminality was not always unwelcome. A famous pirate married a rich widow and got respect from the whole community.
But that's life......... isn't it.

Fascinating, but I felt the need to stop within days and I brought all the stuff to one of my daughters. I just finished it in a rush and they can enjoy it whenever they want.