The Early History of Kingston
& Ulster County, NY
by: Marc B. Fried

Preface

From its earliest days, when the energies and resources of nearly all New Netherland were enlisted to defeat the local Indian tribe, until after its burning by the British in October of 1777 Esopus, or Kingston, was the third most important settlement in the territory that became the state of New York. At the time of its near-destruction during the Revolution, Kingston was the state capital. Necessity immediately forced the seat of government to move elsewhere.

The town of greatest importance in the province was New Amsterdam or New York. That settlement had an early history of considerable interest. But intense urbanization on Manhattan and western Long Island has long since obliterated nearly all of the old houses and historic sites and resulted in an atmosphere not conducive to the development of historical awareness or to the preservation of traditions. Albany (formerly Fort Orange and Beverwyck) and much of the surrounding area have likewise suffered considerably from the effects of urbanization and suburbanization.

Kingston and the Shawangunk region to the southwest have been far more fortunate. Within Kingston, the Old Dutch Church and ancient burial grounds, the museum, county court house, and county offices, as well as the Senate House and many other historic stone structures, give the old part of the city a continued distinctiveness and preeminence, despite three centuries of urban growth in the area to the east and southeast toward the Hudson and Rondout. At the northern edge of the old city lie the fertile lowlands of the Esopus Creek, worked by the Indian in prehistoric times, and under cultivation continuously since the beginning of Dutch settlement here. To the southwest, up the valleys of the Esopus, Rondout, and Wallkill into the heart of the Shawangunk region, a rural atmosphere has persisted, and much of the better land has remained in use for agriculture.

The mood or atmosphere that lingers over portions of the old stockade area of Kingston is known best to those familiar with the events of the early period. It is a mood of tranquility, a feeling that the nineteenth and twentieth centuries have somehow managed to bypass this corner of America, leaving only a few reminders of the changes wrought elsewhere by the passage of 200 years. This undisturbed quality was dramatized in 1970 when remnants of the seventeenth-century stockade were uncovered in the soil less than two feet beneath a sidewalk on Clinton Avenue. The quiet dignity of the stone buildings speaks of the eighteenth and late seventeenth centuries. Yet, once the mind has become so fully tuned to the past, it takes but little effort for the imagination to wander back even further to that most ancient period when, amidst the newness and restlessness of the pioneer setting, the village became the scene of bloody Indian warfare, and the Dutch soldiers and inhabitants were compelled to set out on expeditions deep into the Shawangunk wilderness in pursuit of the savage foe.

This book tells the story of that most ancient period. It covers the history of Esopus from the first documentary reference to the name in 1616, through the early period of actual settlement, into the 1670s. By the mid-seventies the Indian threat had subsided, the village fortifications had reached their maximum extent, English rule in the province had been finally established, and Kingston’s role as the pioneer settlement of Ulster County and the Shawangunk region had been fulfilled. Thereafter, the tide of settlement moved rapidly southwestward up the valleys of the Esopus, Rondout, and Wallkill. Not until a century later did Kingston once again play a dramatic role in history, this time as the birthplace of state government in New York and as the target of British arson.

The uncovering of new information of interest and the correction or clarification of old errors and assumptions found in previous history books have been the primary aims of The Early History of Kingston. The narrative often includes considerable analysis of historical questions and problems. Because a full understanding of these matters requires some familiarity with the sources used, the serious reader would do well to read the discussion of sources in Appendix 4 before beginning the text. It is likewise recommended that the Guide to Place-names (Appendix 3) be consulted beforehand, as this will give the reader preliminary acquaintance with certain names and events met with in the text.

During the time span covered by this book, two different calendars were in use in the province. In the records of the period postdating the English conquest of New Netherland in 1664, dates are often given in dual form. The New Style or Gregorian calendar, in use throughout the Western world today, had been accepted by the Dutch and was the calendar used in New Netherland until the English conquest. The English used the less accurate Old Style or Julian calendar, and continued to do so until 1752. During the middle and late seventeenth century, the Old Style calendar was ten days behind the New Style, so that, for instance, the surrender of Stuyvesant to the English forces took place on September 8 according to the Dutch, but on August 29 according to the English. Further confusion results from the fact that the Old Style calendar counted March 25, rather than January 1, as the first day of the new year. Thus, a date written March 24/April 3, 1664/5 means April 3, 1665 by the New Style calendar, in use today, and March 24, 1664 by the Old Style calendar. The next day’s date would be written March 25/April 4, 1665, and not until the following December 22/January 1 would the year itself have to be written in dual form. In this book, except in case of direct quotation, the year of an event is always given in New Style form. The day and month are given in whichever form (Old Style, New Style, or dual) appears in the document that was used as a source.

Although uniform spellings of proper names have been adopted throughout this book (except in cases of direct quotation), the reader should be aware that great variation in spelling and form of names occurs in the early records. With many individuals, the surname or the "van" before a name was used only intermittently. With many other individuals, no surname was used at all. Sometimes a nickname was adopted. In the present work, a surname given parenthetically following a given name and patronymic generally indicates the surname eventually adopted by the person in question, or by his descendent s.

Before concluding this Preface, I would like to mention three friends who assisted me by their suggestions regarding style and organization of this book: My thanks go to Donald Friary, formerly Associate Professor of History at the State University of New York at New Paltz, currently Assistant Director and Director of Education, Historic Deerfield, Inc. (Mass.); to Fred Johnston, formerly Chairman of the Kingston Historic LandMarcs Preservation Commission; and to Harry Matzen, Professor of History at Ulster County Community College. Professor Matzen gave further help by his knowledge of the Dutch language. I would also like to express my appreciation for consulting assistance provided by Mike Gladstone through the New York State Council on the Arts.

Marc B. Fried, 1975