etherland and the Amst lhrav Secret

y 1640 the West India Company was faced with decks they usually carried a bounty of liquor, guns, and increasing pressure from the merchants of , cloth goods for the fur trade. A good deal is to be learned the shareholdersin the chambers,and the government to from a closer examination of this movement of trade abandon its trade monopoly throughout the chartered goods and people. territory. The revised version of the “Articles and Con- ditions” had been approved by the States General in Pnchart 2 the sailings are arranged to show the per- January 1639, and with its approval disappearedthe last centageof the total shipping controlled by the four most vestige of Company monopoly.’ Amsterdammerchants active Amsterdam merchants5 Through a variety of were the ones to benefit most from this changein policy, financial instruments, including ship charters,bottomry for they had been largely responsible for the develop- bonds, and rental agreements for ship space, these ment of a regular shipping and distribution system for merchantscame to control many of the voyagesin which furs, tobacco, and timber. They held a they invested. The relationship between Amsterdam decided advantageas the ageof free trade dawned in the merchants and the colony of New Netherland has no colony, Although the mighty Company could still parallel in American colonial history. It is this relation- proclaim itself the largestjoint-stock company operating ship, formed out of economic motives, but having the in the westernhemisphere, it could no longer outfit fleets, qualities of an apparentcollusion of self-interest, which pay its employees or supply its colonists, The private has much to tell us of the history of New Netherland. merchantsof Amsterdam,on the other hand, were eager Someconclusions and speculations may be drawn from to take up the transatlantic trade once the cumbersome an analysis of the information provided in charts 18~ 2. regulations governing the Company’s monopoly had been removed. One obvious conclusion is that during the last fifteen years of New Netherland’s existence four trading firms, These merchants appear to have been successful in operating almost exclusively out of Amsterdam,came to exploiting their advantages.Chart no. 1 below shows the play an important role in the commerce between the number of sailings to New Netherland from the port of colony and the fatherland. The role was clearly not one Amsterdam for the years 1645-1664. If periodic dismp- of monopoly or even oligopoly since every time the total tions of the trade causedby war conditions between the number of ships increased,the percentagecontrolled by UnitedProvinces and GreatBritain areaccounted for, the the four merchants declined. In lean years, conversely, trade between the fatherland and New Netherland when war preparationsdrove up insurancepremiums and appearsto have grown steadily after 1645.3IvIoreover, the risks of financial ruin were on the rise, the four in the last years before the English conquest, the trans- merchants dominated the trade+ontrolling 50% or atlantic exchange of commodities appearsto have been more of the trade in twelve of the fifteen years charted. increasing in volume.4 This increasemay have been an This fact would seemto suggestthat the four Amsterdam upsurge in trade fosteredby improved market conditions merchantfirms were the steadyand reliable New Nether- for New Netherland products in Europe and a dramatic land trade specialists. They were not chased out when increase in the colony’s population, brought on largely conditions deteriorated, nor did they surrender to the through immigration. The latter phenomenon is docu- temptation to overexpand in boom times. Between 1640 mentedby the shipping recordspreserved in the notarial and 1664 the merchantsparticipating in the chartering, archives of the city of Amsterdam. It appears that the outfitting, and freighting of trade ships acquired the growth in trade volume paralleled that of immigration. experience necessary to make the trade pay. Gther lvlany of the ships docking at in these merchants were less directly involved in the trade but years were filled with men, women, and children. Below were active in developing warehousesand hiring factors. 270 SELECTED RENSSELAERSWIJCK SEMINAR PAPERS

Chart 1 ANNUAL SAILINGS TO NEW NETHERLAND 1645-1664

Number of ships

1645 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

Year

Chart 2

ANNUAL PERCENTw;ES OF SHIPPING '10 NEW WJZTHERLAND

CO-D BYrOURWXTACTIVETRNXFIRMS

Percentage

Year Fig. 47. Charts by author on shipping to New Netherland. NEW NETHERLAND AND THE AMSTERDAM MERCHANTS 294

By 1664 many of thesemerchants had becomepartners English Virginia were included as assetsin the estate.In in the four firms operating out of Amsterdam.As partners 1654 Seth Verbrugge drew up another will. Seth’s life in each others’s businessesand as private entrepreneurs, had undergonesome wrenching changes.Catharina had the merchantsof Amsterdamsuccessfully enveloped the died in 1653, and the thirty-eight year old widower had New Netherland trade within a web of personal obliga- remarried within the year. His new wife was the wealthy tions, ad hoc partnerships, and long-term cartel agree- widow, Maria Wijckenburch, a native of Amsterdamand ments. the daughter one of the most successful merchant wholesalers in the city. Maria had two children by her %ntheory all traderswith licenses from the West India previous marriage, and she brought not only wealth but Company were free to trade with New Netherland under political connections with her when she wed Seth the regulations of 1639.In practice, however, only larger Verbrugge. Seth was now connected by marriage to firms could afford to cut profit margins by underselling Maria’s uncle, Edward Dill, the auctioneer for the their rivals, monopolizing shipping, and buying out Amsterdamboard of admiralty. Seth may have exploited would-be competitors. The risks of transatlantic trade, this family tie by soliciting information about confis- moreover,encouraged adequately capitalized, long-term cated vessels.Several Verbrugge ships were purchased trade relationships to withstand the periodic losses at auction from the Amsterdamadmiralty. The last will, incurred in , and other disasters. The four drawn up in 1657,listed severalother enterprises,includ- merchant firms that cameto play such an important role ing a number of partnershipswith the De Wolff and Van in New Netherland’s commercial life were Gillis and Hoombeeck firms for the exploitation of New Nether- Seth Verbrugge, Dirck and Abel de Wolff, Kiliaen and land? Jan Baptiste ,and Gillis van Hoornbeeck and Associates. Although little is known of the private lives of Gillis and Seth Verbrugge, the material available for their The Verbrugge Company, founded originally as a business activities is extensive. Until the mid-1650s father-son partnership in the early 1640s to exploit the Gillis and Seth participated in the New Netherland and New Netherland and Virginia trade, was one of the first Virginia trades by chartering ships for single annual to prosper in the period of free trade following the voyages. In these first years, the Verbrugges sought to abandonmentof the West India Company monopoly. In keep their business dealings with North America on a the twenty-three years between the founding of the cash-and-carry basis, and the notarial records suggest Verbrugge partnership in 1641 and the fall of New that they were successful in doing so. Bottomry bonds Netherland in 1664, Gillis and his son Seth chartered, were paid on time and insurancepremiums were kept up. owned, or invested heavily in some twenty-seven These first contacts with New Netherland were made voyages to New Netherland and about fourteen voyages through trade partnerships with other Amsterdam mer- to English Virginia.6 By the mid-1650s the Verbrugges chants, someof whom provided short-term capital loans were also actively engaged in sponsoring American in return for a percentageof the return cargo. voyages with the other important Amsterdam merchants7 Since none of Gillis Verbrugge’s personal The 1650sbrought changesto the trade. The passage records have survived, what little is known of the of the English Navigation Act in 1651 and the subsequent family’s personal life comes from Seth Verbrugge’s war with England drove up the costsof theNorth Atlantic wills preserved in the notarial archives of the city of trade, although prices for New Netherland furs also rose Amsterdam.8 when the risk of maritime trade decreasedthe supply. The Verbrugges were forced to seek partnerships of Over the years, Seth drew up three wills before longer duration. They were also forced to reassessthe Amsterdamnotaries. These wills and the various codicils risks of the direct Amsterdam-Virginia trade. chronicled his personal fortunes and those of his family. The first will, filed in 1650, left his sizable estateto his The successof operations in New Netherland and the wife Catharina and their four children, three sons and a increasing difficulties createdby the English Navigation daughter: Johannes,Gillis, Seth, and Anneken. The will Acts forced the Verbrugges to abandon the direct bequeathed to Catharina the family townhouse in Amsterdam-Virginia trade in 1656.Relying, instead,on Amsterdamand all of its furnishings. In addition, Seth’s English merchants. many of them possessing dual profits from several voyages to New Netherland and citizenship as Virginians and New Netherlanders, the 272 SELECTED RENSSELAERSWIJCK SEMINAR PAPERS

Verbrugges were able to maintain a coastal trade with (born 1639), and Judith (born 1643). received the usual Virginia which employed a small fleet of coastal sloops high standardof education for Dutch girls, eachcomplet- built especially to bring “Virginia leaves” to New ing primary school and some secondary school. Amsterdam.” Geertruyd was especially keen to participate in the family business, and Dimk employed her on a regular Having concentrated the bulk of their capital on the basis in the business. New Netherland trade, the Verbrugges suffered more than most when the Anglo-Dutch war threatenedthe sea Indeed, it was Geertruyd Verbrugge’s marriage to lanes between the fatherland and the colony. The cost of Gerrit JanszCuyper that marked the beginning of the De marine insurance alone was enough to make some Wolff involvement with New Netherland, Gerrit Jansz merchants chance the crossing without it and others to Cuyper had engaged in the New Netherland trade for abandonthe trade totally.” The notarial records suggest someyears. As both an agent for Amsterdam merchants that the number of merchants participating in the New and as a private trader, Cuyper had acqujied a first-hand Netherland trade declined steadily after 1651. Charter knowledge of the trade. He had worked for the Verbrug- contracts for ships and bottomry loan applications bear ges in the late 1640s as an Indian trader and for Jan fewer and fewer signatures after 1651, which indicates Hendricksz Sijbingh, a large textile wholesaler who that the increased risks of maritime trade may have supplied cloth for the fur trade, as an agent. Sijbingh was driven out the smaller merchants or forced them into a longtime businessassociate of Dirck de Wolff and may silent partnership arrangements with the four largest have introduced Cuyper to the family.15 Amsterdam firms. The Verbrugges were especially vulnerable becausetheir enterprises were concentrated The opportunity to participate in the New Netherland in New Netherland and tied up in land, ships (sitting tradecame when Dirck, in partnership wiith his eldest son idle), and warehouse space. In 1662, when rumors of Abel and Gerrit Jansz Cuyper, organize:da company to anotherwar with England were rife, the Verbruggeswere trade with the colony. Dirck provided the capital and forced to sell most of their New Netherland assetsto meet perhaps important connections in the Amsterdam the demandsof their creditors for cash.Interestingly, but merchant community, while Abel handled the manage- not coincidentally, the syndicate of merchants, ment of the company in Amsterdamand Cuyper directed authorized by notarized power-of-attorney to supervise the operation in New Netherland. Dirck:‘s new business the sale of the Verbrugge properties in New Netherland, interest meantthe loss of his favorite daughte,Geertruyd, was headed by two other important New Netherland who sailed to thecolony with her husban’d.In its first year traders,Abel de Wolff and Jan Baptiste van Rensselaer, of operation the company developed a distribution son of the .12 system for furs, timber, and tobacco. Clolonial products were assembledby Cuyper in New Netherland each year Abel de Wolff had entered the New Netherland trade and sold for profit in Amsterdam by Abel de Wolff. By when his father, Dirck de Wolff, invested in a number of all accounts the small company was persistently New Netherland voyagesin the 165Os,and by the decade profitable. of the 1660sthe De Wolff family enterprise was one of the four largest dealing with the colony.13 The founder In contrast to the Verbrugges’ effort in New Nether- of the family enterprise, Dirck de Wolff, displayed his land, the De Wolff investments tended to concentrateon prosperity by building a spacious townhouse on the single projectsrather than on numerous trading voyages. exclusive Heerengracht (literaally, gentlemen’s canal) The chartering of ships and the outfitting of trade expedi- and purchasing sixty acres of land in the countryside tions, for example, occupied a a small’er percentage of between Haarlem and Amsterdam. For his five children the family’s capital. Whereasthe Verbrugge family had by Grietje Engberts, he provided the best education invested an average of 80 percent of their resources in available. His two sons Abel (born 1636) and Hendrick ships, cargos,and warehouses,the De Wolff investments (born 1646)received generoussupport from their father. in such things never exceeded60 Percent. The family’s Abel, as heir to the family business,was to be trained as total capital investment in New Netherland remained a merchant.Hendrick, the scholar of the family, received much more liquid, being tied primarily to the salariesof money from his father to support theological studies at agentsin the colony and the rentals of cargo spaceaboard the University of Utrecht, where he eventually took his ships belonging to others.16 Moreover, the De Wolff degree.14The daughters,Geertruyd (born 1637),Trijntje business interests were generally more diversified than NEW NETHERLAND AND THE AMSTERDAM MERCHANTS 27’3 the Verbrugges. With money invested in Baltic grain, signed by Abel de Wolff on the occasion of assuming French wine, and West African slaves, the family was direction of the trade, he was given perpetual use of the protected against the type of financial trouble that had house on Manhattan and the lands surrounding it for an cost the Verbrugges their once dominant position in the annual rent of fl20. Dirck de Wolff retained the title to New Netherland trade. The De Wolff strategy paid the property.‘” Everything seemedin place for a major dividends. The De Wolffs choseto exploit New Nether- expansion of the family’s enterprise in New Netherland land by developing the colonial market for provisions. when news of tbe colony’s surrender reached Amster- The carrying trade continued to be the most lucrative of dam.Gnecan only imagine theeffect the news must have the family’s long-term investments, but the essential had on the family. Abel’s dreamswere shattered.Dir&s thrust of the De Wolff businesswas the establishmentof hopes for his family’s fortune and his son’s career were a commercial presence in New Netherland that could threatened. Just a year before, Dirck had invested his serve as a distribution system for manufactured goods daughtersf&O00 dowries in the New Netherland trade, and a conduit for furs, timber, and tobacco. perhaps as a gesture of family confidence in his son, perhaps out of an enthusiasm for the trade which had Abel de Wolff was 2g years old when he took over the lately proven lucrative?’ In any event, Abel’s two managementof his father’s businessin New Netherland. unmarried sisters, Judith and Trijntje, had reason to be He had earned his job with years of work in Amsterdam anxious as the family waited news from America. as the broker for the family company, and he had bought a share in the businesswith money he earnedin the New The fall of New Netherland was a catastrophefor the Netherland trade. His personal investment included Amsterdam merchants. It not only spelled the end of a f2,OOO from his own pocket, and f4$,000 of his half-century effort to make New Netberland a success, inheritance pledged by Dirck de Wolff as his son’s but by meansof the English Navigation Acts it separated wedding portion.” Abel had already demonstratedan the Dutch merchant suppliers from their clients, enterprising spirit in investment schemeswith Gillis van employees, and customers. From bJew England to the I-Ioombeeckand Jan Baptiste van Rensselaer.Just four southern boundaries of Virginia the North American years before, acting on his own and investing his own seaboardwas English. The Amsterdammerchants, Abel money, Abel de Wolff had shippedacargo of tradegoods de Wolff and his anxious family among them, could only to New Netherland aboarda large ship charteredby Gillis wait to seewhat they could salvagefrom the situation. van I-Ioombeeck.I%e voyage turned out to be a financial success, contributing to Abel’s private fortune and English authorities attempted to curtail Dutch trade convincing the young merchant that his future lay in the immediately, and in their zeal to anglicize the colony’s development of New Netherland. In 1661 and again in trade everyone suffered. Without the continued shipping 1662 Abel de Wolff joined Jan Baptiste van Rensselaer of the private merchantsof Amsterdam the commercial as an equal partner in the outfitting of the BBoopfor two position of New b?etherland,now , declined trading voyages to New Netherland. These voyagesalso rapidly. Both the Dutch and English colonists bore the turned a profit. At the close of 1662 the partnership’s brunt of the economic collapse. In 1667,the new English warehouse in Amsterdam was filled with tobacco and governor, Colonel Francis Lovelace, ordered special furs. The next year witnessed Abel de Wolff back in passportsto be drawn up, permitting Dutch merchantsto partnership with his brother-in-law, Gerrit JanszCuyper send three ships a year to New York.” The merchants and Jan Baptist van Rensselaer.This partnership, one of were required to pay high fees to the Duke of York’s the last formed during the period of Dutch rule, agentsfor thesepassports, and to makematters worse the completed one trading voyage in 1664. The voyage of West India Company continued to collect its licensing the Eendmchr, although extended by the circumnaviga- feeseven though it had lost the colony three yearsbefore. tion of Scotland to avoid English warships, returned a The result was that the increased costs of the trade fell profit for its investors.l* heavily on the Amsterdam merchants.

When Abel de Wolff took over the family businessin In 1668, Abel de Wolff requesteda four year audit of New Netherland in 1664, over f7.000 worth of goods the accounts in New York from the company’s new awaited shipment to Holland at New Amsterdam. In factor, Harmen Vedder. The audit turned out to be a addition, the family owned a house and a few parcels of staggering tale of decline. In the four years preceding land on Manhattan Island. IJnder the terms of the bond 1668 no profits were recorded. An investment of f4,400 274 SELECTED RENSSELAERSWIJCK SEMINAR PAPERS by Vedder was not recoverable, and the house and farm York trade until his death in 1679. As a naturalized on Manhattan Island had to be sold to pay debts. The citizen of the colony of New York, he co-sponsoredthe company’s entire cashreserve in New York amountedto voyages of the Rebecca in 1677 and 1678 under the less than f3,700. An inventory of furs and tobacco was command of the Englishman, Thomas Williams. This valued at less than f800. From an annual profit of 50% partnership with English merchantswas soon dissolved in the 1650s the New Netherland-New York trade had when Cuyper could not meet his financi.al obligations, ceasedto be profitable for Amsterdam merchants.22 but he maintained his partnership with the Dutch textile wholesaler, Jan Hendricksz Sijbingh. With Sijbingh he -The De Wolff family continued to trade with New continued to import Dutch cloth goods from Amsterdam. York under a series of agreementswhich permitted the Some profits must have been forthcoming in this trade shipment of goods via England to America. One such because after Gerrit’s death his son, Jan Gerritsz de agreementin 1670involved Abel de Wolff in a syndicate Wolff Cuyper, took over the cloth trade; as late as 1683 of English, Dutch, and New York merchants. The he was still conducting business with fonmer customers complex financial arrangementsfor the chartering of the of the De Wolff company.24 English ship, Duke of York, suggested the extreme measures taken in these years to circumvent the The Van Rensselaersof Amsterdam developed by far provisions of the Navigation Acts. the most complex commercial relationship with New Netherland. It was an old family, wealthy and genteel, The Duke of York was captained by JohannesLuyck, steepedin tradition. The men in the family had become a Hollander by birth but a naturalized English subject merchantsin the late sixteenth century, and in the seven- living in New York. The ship was registeredas English, teenth the family was among the most respected but chartered in Amsterdam. Several documents were merchant families in Amsterdam. notarized testifying to the fact that the trade expedition was essentially an English undertaking in complete Kiliaen van Rensselaer was born at Hasselt in the compliance with the Navigation Acts; yet the sponsors about 1580; the only son of Hendrik van of the voyage and the beneficiaries of the marine Rensselaerand Maria Pasraat.He had one sister, Maria, insurance policy were all Dutch. And finally, Abel de who married Ryckaert van Twiller, father of Wouter van Wolff gave personal testimony before an Amsterdam Twiller, a future director-general of New Netherland. His notary which confirmed that the voyage of the Duke of mother, Maria Pasraat,was the daughter of one of the York was “not subject to confiscation for violations of Pasraat Brothers, a famous printing firm in Deventer. the English Navigation Act.” The untimely death of Hendrik van Rensselaerand the uncertain conditions of war forced Maria to make an Even thesecomplicated arrangementscould not make important decision about her son’s future. She decided the voyage profitable. When the Duke of York returned to sendthe young man to Amsterdamto learn the jewelry to after an uneventful voyage, a flurry of legal trade from his uncle, Wolfert van Bijler.‘!5 questions tied up the sale of her cargo and forced the Dutch merchantsto declare the enterprisea loss. Abel de In Amsterdam Kiliaen’s natural talents for business Wolff could no longer count on profits from the trade were soon evident, and Van Bijler developed a con- with North America. He had overestimated the profits fidence in his nephew. As the firm’s agent to the royal from furs and tobacco and in anticipation of a good courts east of the Rhine, Kiliaen had the opportunity to voyage had borrowed heavily to pay the English fees. travel throughout Europe, from Budapest to Paris and When his portion of the cargo was finally sold in Amster- from Rome to Copenhagen.Having assumedcontrol of dam some months later, the sale could not begin to pay Van Bijler’s businessin 1609,he ran it profitably for five the loansF3 years before selling out to the larger firm of Jan van Wely, one of the wealthiest and most successful of By 1675 Abel de Wolff was no longer seriously Amsterdam’smany jewelers. As ajunior partner, Kiliaen involved in the New York trade, but his reluctant had little say in the decisions of the co:mpany,but his withdrawal from the trade did not end the family’s talents soon found expressionwhen Van Wely appointed connection with the former Dutch colony. Gerrit Jansz him chief officer of the company with the responsibility Cuyper, husband to Geertruyd de Wolff and Abel’s of keeping the books. Kiliaen held this job for six years. longtime partner continued to participate in the New It was during this period that the future patroon took a NEW NETHERLAND AND THE AMSTERDAM MERCHANTS 275 wife. He married Hillegond van Bijler, niece of his forever in her name, It was a fortunate match for Van former patron and his own cousin. Rensselaer.Anna’s wealth was now added to his own considerable fortune just at the time when his plans for Hillegond’s dowry was just over f12,OOOand Kiliaen establishing Rensselaerswijck demanded large capital quickly found a use for the money. In 1615, he bought outlays. two lots along the recently completed Keitersgrucht (emperor’s canal) on which he commencedconstruction As Kiliaen’s fortune grew so did his ambitions. In the on a house for his bride. The new home was a stately 1620s he participated in several reclamation projects townhouse in the most fashionable area of the city. In (droogmakerijen) which sought to recover land along the less than a decadeafter arriving in Amsterdam,Kiliaen southwestern shore of the &rider Zee just south of van Rensselaer had risen from a jeweler’s apprentice Amsterdam. In 1628 he purchasedland near Huizen for (living in cramped quarters on the Oudezijds Voor- a country home. Moreover, he continued in the jewel burgs&, the old side of the city wall) to an independent trade, and his responsibilities as an officer of the West merchant with a townhouse on the Keizersgracht. For a India Company increasedwith eachpassing year. But the thirty-five year old newcomer to Amsterdamthe future project that consumedhim from 1629 until his death in appearedbright indeed. 1643 was the patroonship of Rensselaerswijck. In the wilderness of New Netherland Kiliaen found an outlet Kiliaen van Rensselaer’s initial investment in the for his restlesstalents. West India Company was a substantial one. That it was at least f6,OOOis proved by the fact that he was desig- Van Rensselaer’srole as patroon of Rensselaerswijck nated a principal shareholder (hoofdparficipunt) in the has been explained by others, but his role as a private Amsterdam chamber. As a principal shareholder, Van merchant engagedin the colonial provision, fur, timber, Rensselaerenjoyed many privileges and much authority. and tobaccotrades has not beenas fully examinedP7Van One of the most important powers held by the principal Rensselaer’s interests in New Netherland differed shareholders was the right to vote for the chamber’s markedly from that of the other Amsterdam merchants. directors. Kiliaen not only voted for the directors, he As a patroon, Kiliaen’s responsibilities were more became one himself when a vacancy occurred on the territorial than commercial. Saddled with the problems board in 1625. As a director he was eligible to sit on any of populating the upper Hudson River region while of the chamber’s commissions; he chose the one estab- simultaneously jockeying with his enemies on the New lished to makepolicy recommendationsfor New Nether- Netherland Commission to acquire Company land, compliance with its pledges, Van Rensselaer and his heirs were forced to develop a complex mercantile Van Rensselaer’s impassioned advocacy of the relationship with the colony. patroonship plans of 1628 and 1629 earned him many enemies on the commission and within the chamberZ As the fortunes of the West India Company waned,the As a patroon he found himself in a difficult position. Amsterdamchamber looked to the private merchantsfor Every time he complained of Company intransigence in suppliesand shipping. In the late 1630sthe firms of Gillis fulfilling the obligations undertakenin the Freedomsand and Seth Verbrugge and Dirck and Abel de Wolff were Exemptions he was accusedby his enemiesof trying to active in theNew Netherland trade.By 1640,Kiliaen van ruin the Company for his own pro&. Rensselaeralso beganto tap the provisioning tradeas the first flood tide of immigration surged.As the patroon of Less than a year after the deathof Hillegond and in the Rensselaerswijckhe knew from past experience that his midst of the controversy over the drafting of the colony on the Hudson River would play a key part in any Freedomsand Exemptions, Kiliaen van Rensselaermar- schemeto provision New Netherland from America. He ried Anna van Wely, daughter of his former partner. also considered the possibility of Rensselaerswijck Anna was rich and wise in financial affairs. Before becoming a grain exporting colony which could supply stepping to the altar, she had a prenuptial agreement the Company’s slaves in Brazil in exchange for sugar?* prepared before an Amsterdam notary, The agreement Likewise, he must have been aware that his colony could specified mat her personal fortune could be used by her serve as an excellent base for a continuous transatlantic husbandduring his lifetime, but for all legal purposesthe trade in furs and supplies, if the Company monopoly personal property both chattel and real would remain were ever broken. Thus, when the decadeof the forties 276 SELECTED RENSSELAERSWIJCK SEMINAR PAPERS

opened with the announcement of the scrapping of the death1in 1643to assumeleadership in the family’s affairs. Company monopoly, Van Rensselaer was prepared to He had to watch insteadas his half brother, Johannes(son becomea major merchanttrader. VanRensselaerwas not of Kiliaen and Hillegond van Bijler), managedthe Van a newcomerto the private shipping business.In the 1630s Rensselaerfortune. Johannes was apparently not well he had been frustrated in his efforts to supply his suited for the role of patroon. He had no love for colonists by the West India Company’s refusal to rent Rensselaerswijck,and certainly no commitment to make him spaceaboard its ships. In desperation,he contracted it succeed.Richaert van Rensselaer,younger brother of a shipwright to build his own vessel, the 60-ton Jan Baptiste and half brother to Johannes, described .Rensselaerswijck. The enterprise had two principal Johannes’attitude toward his New Netherland manor to goals: to carry some twenty families to the colony of his brother. “The patroon,” wrote Richaart in 1658,“does Rensselaerswijck,and to trade for furs and tobaccoalong not even give it [Rensselaerswijck]a thought.“31 In fact, the coast of North America. A one-tenth share in the the patroon had given the colony some thought. He had venture was sold to the Varlet brothers of Amsterdam thought enough about it to turn its affairs over to his (furriers) for f1,200. Other shares, comprising nearly alcoholic uncle, former director-general Wouter van fifty percent of the ship’s total insured worth, were sold Twiller. In 1651, Jan Baptiste could no longer watch before she sailed to the colony.29 Johannesdestroy his inheritance; he took ship for New Netherland to take over the affairs of R.ensselaerswijck As a wealthy Amsterdam merchant with influential personally. connections, Kiliaen had accessto information on ships, low cost loans on bottomry, and supplies. His position as On arrival in New Netherland Jan Baptiste was patroon also allowed him to take advantageof his built-in astonishedand dismayedto find that the patrconship was colonial market at Rensselaerswijck,where warehouses failing. Tenants were leaving or failing to work. Crops were already built and a colonial distribution center were unplanted, and the inept hand of Wouter van functioned. The financial arrangementsrequired to make Twiller was everywhere to be seen.Thle ruinous condi- the trade profitable encouragedcooperation among the tion of the family’s inheritance in New Netherland major suppliers of New Netherland and brought all four prompted Jan Baptiste to request that his younger of the most active Amsterdam traders into contact brother, Jeremias, come to America to assist him in -indeed collusion might be a better word. bringing order out of the chaos he confronted. Jan Baptiste and his brother were to work together for four In thevoyagesof theAker(l639and Ml), the Wapen years in New Netherland. The colonial experience van Noorwegen (1639), the Wapen van Leeuwarden convinced Jan Baptiste that profits were possible in the (1640), and the ConinckDavid(1641 and 1642-43) Van private shipping and provisioning t.rade. When he Rensselaerhad sufficient sharesto be named the owner returned to Amsterdam in 1658 he undertook to channel (eigenaer) on all notarial records referring to these the family’s fortune into shipping and trade. vessels. In other voyages during this same period his financial investment was too small to be accounted as In partnership with his uncles and brothers, Jan ownership, but on at least two large ships, the Engel Baptiste charteredand outfitted no less than six ships for Gabriel and the Eijkenboom, Van Rensselaer’sportion the New Netherland tradebetween 1659and 1664.These of the operating capital entitled him to be designatedas years also witnessed the Van Rensselaersin partnership a principal freighter (hoofdbevrachfer). That he with the other large New Netherland traders. With Abel participated in other voyages in this period is almost de Wolff and Gerrit Zuyck (executor of the Verbrugge certain. The notarial records of the Verbrugge and De company) he pooled capital for the purehase of ships, the Wolff enterprises referred to a “notable merchant in hiring of crews, and the obtaining of trade goods.In each Amsterdam, lord over vast lands in America” as being of theseenterprises he had a substantial investment and one of the partners in voyages to Virginia and New was designatedan owner or a principal freighter. Even Netherland. Such ventures were important undertakings after the English conquest, he continlued to invest in for the patroon, and his son was no lessenthusiastic about shipping companies organized for the New York- the profits to be made in shipping to New Netherland. ‘Amsterdam trade. As late as 1671 records show Jan Baptiste investing $23,000 in one ship “to trade with Jan Baptiste van Rensselaer,eldest son of Kiliaen’s English northern Virginia, called la.tely by us New marriage to Anna van Wely. was too young at his father’s Netherland.” NEW NETHERLAND AND THE AMSTERDAM MERCHANTS 277

Fig. 48. Totius Neobelgii, by R. & J. Ottens, 1673, basedon the 1655 Visscher map, Courtesy of Manuscripts and Special Collections, New York StateLibrary, Albany. Photo by Craig Williams. 278 SELECTED RENSSELAERSWIJCK SEMINAR PAPERS

The family remained deeply involved in the commer- In 1661 he served as a deacon and an investment cial affairs of the colony. Their territorial holdings alone counselor for the congregation. He al:so served as a guaranteed a continuing concern over the colony’s financial advisor to other congregations, notably the future. It would take another Anglo-Dutch war, a second Flemish Baptist Congregation of Amsterdam (Vlaamre conquest of New York, and a warrant from the Duke of Doopsgezinde Gemeente van Amsterdam). For both York to finally legitimize the Van Rensselaerclaim to churches he advised investment in the New,Netherland Rensselaerswijck. That legitimation secured the Van tmde?6 Rensselaerswithin the developing English mercantile system. As “naturalized” citizens of His Britannic Van Hoombeeck’s first involvement in the New Majesty’s empire, the Van Rensselaers’ commercial Netherland trade came when he formed a private enterpriseswere protected by the sameNavigation Acts shipping company with two other Amsterdam that had rendered the continuation of the New York merchants.The company was chartered fforfour years to Amsterdam trade too expensive for Abel de Wolff. trade with New Netherland under license from the West India Company. This company proved so successfulthat A frequent partner of the Van Rensselaersin the last it was re-charteredin 1660 and again in 1664. It did not years was Gillis van Hoombeeck. Van Hoombeeck first ceaseoperations until 1666.37This was the sameyear in appearsin the notarial documents in 1656. In the eight which the Verbrugge company finally went bankrupt, years preceding the English conquest, however, this leaving the other New Netherland trade specialists hold- latecomer to the New Netherland trade was as active in ing loans and bottomry bonds on Verbrugge assets.The exploiting the trade as the De Wolffs and Van executors of the Verbrugge estate (both Gillis and Seth Rensselaers. As a shipowner, financier, freighter, Verbrugge had died in 1663) appointed Gillis van insurance broker, and retail fur distributor, Gillis van Hoombeeck and Gerrit Zuyck to the probate arbitration Hoombeeck ranked second only to Jan Baptiste van board whose task it was to sort out the various claims on Rensselaeramong the Amsterdam merchantsspecializ- the estate and recommend measuresto bring solvency ing in the New Netherland trade. Gillis van Hoombeeck back to the company. Zuyck’s appointment was hardly came from a family considerably less genteel than the unexpected, since he had taken over Verbrugge opera- Van Rensselaers.His father, Tobias van Hoombeeck, tions in the late 1650swhen he offered Gillis Verbrugge had been a Haarlem salt refiner, vinegar distiller, and a way out of his financial problems by buying out more local merchant. When he died in 1637, the estate was than half of the company’s shares. Van Hoombeeck’s estimated to be worth f16,260. The salt refinery was appointment to the board after only ten years in the trade assessedat f8,560 and the family home and all of its is more surprising. It appearsthat Gillis van Hoombeeck furnishings at f7,700.33 This modest estate had to obtained his seaton the arbitration board1because he was support a wife and four children. the Verbrugges’ largest creditor and because no less a person than Jan Baptiste van Rensselaerhad supported Gillis was raised by his mother and half-brother, his appointment?8 In 1668Van Hoombeeckjoined with Hercules van Hoombeeck (son of Tobias and Maria the other “great traders” of New Netherland to form a Herculesdochter Schatters of Haarlem). Gillis was to company to trade with New York. display a strong sense of familial responsibility throughout his life. He married Maria Wijs in 1654T4 A The new company aimed at developing a long term poor girl without a dowry, she had lived with her market for Dutch merchants in English New York. To widowed mother on the Achterburgwal in Amsterdam’s avoid the strictures of the English Navigation system the working class neighborhood. The marriage was a love three partners,Van Hoombeeck,Van Re.nsselaer,and De match which lasted for twelve years,during which Maria Wolff, purchasedpassports issued by the Duke of York. gave birth to two children. She died a young woman as The passportswere acquired through the company’s two a result of complications attending her third pregnancy. New York agents, former director--general Petrus Her death was a devastating blow for Gillis, who liqui- Stuyvesant and Comelis Steenwijck. The operating dated his business affairs in Amsterdam and returned capital, set initially at just f6,OOOwas to be increasedas with his two children to Haarlem. He spent a year in the needs of the trade arose. The company shareswere Haarlem before finally shaking himself free of the grief. divided into fifths with each partner receiving twenty He never remarried?5 Van Hoombeeck was an active percent of the profits in return for twenty percent of the member of the Reformed Congregation of Amsterdam. capital. Jan Baptiste van Rensselaerwas made operations NEW NETHERLAND AND THE AMSTERDAM MERCHANTS 279 officer (hoo~dbewinthebber-literally chief director) for colony’s sometimes tenuous lifeline with the United the company’s first voyage; Van Hoombeeck served as Provinces open even in the faceof Company bankruptcy, operations officer for the second?’ maritime war*and national indifference. That they did so with profits in mind should only serve to prove that the The company sent three ships to New York: the four Amsterdam merchant families were typical of a Posthoorn, Juffrouw Leonora, and Meuw Jorck, Dutch merchant class whose profit-mindedness was undoubtedly a Dutch phonetic spelling for the English legendary in the seventeenthcentury. ship, New York. Only the Jufi-ouw Leonora was a Dutch ship, the other two were CharteredBnglishships, manned One feature which appearsto stand out in the Dutch by English crews and skippered by English captains in mercantile relationship with New Netherland is the accordance with the Navigation Acts. The three ships amount of financial control exercisedby the Amsterdam were loaded at Amsterdamwith tradegoods, passengers, merchants. The Amsterdam-based, New Netherland and some livestock. The cargo of the Posfhoorn, for trade specialists were reluctant to permit control of the which a number of insurancepolicies have survived, was trade to slip from their grasp. Having vied so long with assessed at f15,000.40 Notwithstanding the careful the West India Company for their rights, they were measurestaken by the partners, the company failed to unwilling to allow their factors in the colony a free hand live up to expectations. One year of operations nearly in setting prices or determining the percentageof trade bankrupted the firm, and in 1669 the company was goods needier%to support the trade. Bearing most of the dissolved with the mutual consent of all partners. The risks of the transatlantic trade,the Amsterdammerchants costsof outfitting and freighting two ships and the build- expectedand graspedits responsibilities. The result was ing of a third had proven more expensive than the a form of colonialism that dependedon financial power partners had expected, but the real cause of the rather than government restrictions. company’s failure was the costs of trading legally as foreigners in the English navigation system. The sheer In the 1630sKiliaen van Rensselaerestimated the cost inefficiency of the administration of the system made it of shipping supplies to his colony to be roughly fifty pointless to attempt to comply with its provisions. The percent of the original vendor price in Amsterdam!2 passportsissued to the companyby representativesof the Several other sources confirm Van Rensselaer’s Duke of York and paid for with speciewere never made estimate,including one from the notarial archives which official, or so His Majesty’s customsagents would claim noted that the West India Company storeat New Amster- when they confiscated the return cargos of all three dam was selling shoesin the early 1660sat 140 percent vessels, The Amsterdam notarial records chronicle a above their wholesale cost in the fatherland.43 When long legal dispute between the Dutch merchantsand the theseestimates are added to the litany of complaints by English government, The result, after years of legal Company soldiers and returning colonists of the high wrangling, was a decision by an arbitration board which cost of trade goodsand commodities in New Netherland, awardedthe Dutch partnersless than five percenton their we begin to seethe classic pattern of colonialism. investment!t The population surge in the colony openedup a thriv- By I670 the increasedcosts of trading legally within ing trade in provisions after 1645, and the surviving the English navigation system had proved too great for cargo lists testify to this. In New Netherland, livestock the trade to bear. The four Amsterdam merchants had raising provided an auxiliary income to farming and fur failed individually and collectively to maintain the trading for many colonists. and the Amsterdam profits of the pre-1664 period. Only the Van Rensselaers merchants were among rhe first to build livestock with their unique status as could continue to transports and engage in cattle raising on Manhattan engage profitably in the transatlantic trade. The others Island.44Even former Company officials like ex-direc- were forced to abandonthe trade altogether or pursue it tar-general, continued to invest in on a much smaller scalethrough London merchants.The livestock through the merchant houses of Van four Amsterdam merchant families just described were Rensselaer and Van Hoombeeck long after he had not competitors. They were, instead,the constituent parts returned to Holland in disgrace.45 of a collective effort to exploit the free trade provisions of the revised West India Company charter after 1639. The cost of European goods to the settlers remained Indeed; the Amsterdammerchants were able to keep the persistently high, since the only transportablespecie they 280 SELECTED RENSSELAERSWIJCK SEMINAR PAPERS

could lay their hands on were furs and tobacco. Cargos Blessedwith an abundant fur supply and the Hudson returning from New Netherland were frequently made River to carry the furs to market,New Netherlandoffercd up wholly of furs and tobacco. Thus, the Amsterdam lucrative rewardsto private traderswho could masterthe merchants could receive the prized colonial products intricacies of the transatlantic trade. The numerous with almost no expenditures for permanent fur trading attemptsby the West India Company to impose monopo- factors in the colony. As the middleman for the Amster- ly conditions on the trade failed because the private dam merchants,the colonist ran all the risks involved in merchantsof Amsterdamremained active in thecolony’s the fur trade, while the Amsterdam merchantsbenefited trade by circumventing the Company regulations from a lucrative colonial secondarytrade. blatantly in the 1620s.operating under lilcensefrom the patroons in the 163Os,or participating as free traders The systemwas very effective in driving out competi- under the expanded trade provisions of 1639. Unlike tion from small home-country merchants, because it , the individuals largely responsible for required accessto supplies and lines of credit simply not exploiting New Netherlands resourceswere merchants available to newcomers. It also encourageda collusion of the home country. Secure in their Amsterdam count- of capital to limit the liabilities of the trade. Hence, ing houses,the merchantsgrasped control of the colony’s self-interest explains why the De Wolff, Van Rensselaer, lifeline to Holland and held fast. Profits from their and Van Hoombceck enterprises so frequently merged enterprises flowed into coffers in Amsterdam, thus in partnerships. Caution and experience, moreover, depriving New Netherland of capital and the opportunity served these merchants well. Ultimately, it was these to develop a viable, colony-based merchant community. characteristics-selfinterest, caution, and experience- The results of this “secret colonialism” were evident in which led to wise businessdecisions and resulted in the the 1660s. Nurtured by the free trade lpolicies of the four Amsterdam merchant firms dominating the transat- bankrupt West India Company, the private merchantsof lantic trade in the years of high risk while holding steady Amsterdam had succeededall too well. Their success at about 50% of the total trade during periods of lower may have been New Netherland’s undoing. risk.

Notes

‘Parts of this article have appearedin my book Holland were approximately 9,000 Europeans living in New on the Hudson: An Economic and Social History of Netherland, many of whom had arrived in the last 20 Dutch New York (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, yearsof the colony’s history to take advantageof the new 1986); they are reprinted here by permission of Cornell opportunities. University Press. 3Data for Chart 1 have come from approximately 300 zrh e revised charter of 1639represented the final chapter charter contracts and several hundred bottomry bonds in a decades-long struggle to maintain the Company and marine insurance policies in the ‘Gemeentelijke monopoly. Forced by the States General to relinquish Archief van Amsterdam.The collection of notarial docu- control of the fur trade or risk losing the colony, the mentsis the work of the late Simon Hart, Director of the directors of the West India Company proposed a set of Archives. Dr. Hart introduced me to this collection and “Articles and Conditions*’ which essentially removed supervisedmy use of the documentsduring my year stay Company authority in most economic matters while in the Netherlands in 1973-74. simultaneously thrusting the Company into politics. %he unusually high number of sailings in 1655probably After yet another revision in the Articles and Conditions, reflected the movement of Company soldiers and equip- demandedby the StatesGeneral, a new set of Freedoms ment aboardprivately-owned vessels,whlereas the large and Exemptions was proclaimed. The new regulations drop in annual sailings between 1647and 1650may have followed the pattern of other joint-stock companies in echoed higher marine insurance rates in anticipation of America, most notably the Virginia Company, in provid- war with England. The amazing statistic, however, is that ing free land-200 acresper head of household-to any after 1645no year witnessed less than four sailings from immigrant who would settle permanently in New Amsterdam to New Netherland. If the average tonnage Netherland. The incentives worked, and by 1664 there is computedto be 250 tons for a transatlantic freighter in NEW NETHERLAND AND THE AMSTERDAM MERCHANTS 289 the seventeenthcentury, the evidence for New Nether- ‘ken Hendrick d’ted in 1700, he possesseda private land indicates a minimum of 1,000 tons per year for the library of more than four hundred volumes, mostly on 1645-1664 period. We must keep in mind, moreover, subjectsin theology. Gemecntelijke Archief van Amster- that many of theseships carried colonists on the outward dam, Notarial no. 5460, undated, 308. voyage. For a discussion of cost factors, insurancerates, 15Gn the account books of the textile merchant the De and averagetonnages for Dutch shipping in this period, Wolff family stood second only to the Verbrugges as see: Simon Hart, “The Dutch and North America in the customers. Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, Fist Half of the SeventeenthCentury: Some Aspects,” Notaria%no. 1306, September1,1656,162 f.v. Mededelingen van de PJederlandse vereniging VOOY ‘%he informatio n on percentagesof Verbrugge capital zeegeschiedenis, 20 (March 1970), 5-17. invested in the New Netherland trade comesfrom docu- ‘Various sources have served for Chart 2. The most ments drawn up in 1667 by arbitrators for the bankrupt important of which were the charter contracts in the estateof Gillis and Seth Verbrugge. The most important Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam. Much useful document arising from the arbitration is an inventory of information also turned up in genealogical sourcesused Verbrugge assets.Gemeentelijke Archief van Amster- for the construction of ehe histories of the four New dam, Notarial no. 2223, Feb. 10,1667,258-59. The data Netherland-Amsterdammerchant families. for the De Wolff investment percentagesare drawn from ?Tbese figures were compiled once again from the eleven wills and codicils preparedby Dirck de Wolff in notarial archives of the Gemeentelijke Archief van the eight years preceding his death in 1679. These wills Amsterdam-specifically from the charter contractsand and codicils are in Gemeentelijke Archief van Amster- bottomry bonds notarized before Amsterdam notaries. dam, Notarial no. 2367, May 28, 1671,267; no. 2370, The twenty-sevenVirginia voyageswere documentedby December22,%673,40; no. 237 II, October 3 %,1674,60; somethirty-nine separateentries in the protocol booksof no. 2371,Gctober 31, 1674, 62 addendum; no. 2371, Amsterdamnotaries. November 24, 1674,80; no. 2371, July 20, 1675,224; 7Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. no. 2372, June B7,1676,214; no. 2372, June 17,1676, 1352,October 19,1654,82; No. 2139, Gctober28,1654, 223 codicil; no. 2372, February 17,1677,404; no. 2374, 87; No. 2197, December 18,1654,181-83. June 6,%678,479 f.v. ‘Even the birthplace and date of birth for Gillis “Jansen, “‘Geschiedenisvan de familie De Wolff,” 136. Verbrugge are difficult to pin down. He was not an l*Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. Amsterdammerby birth, for the city’s vital statistics list 2224, December 1663,32; no. 2444, February 29,l664, only Gillis’s children being born in the city. A notarial 134-134 f.v.; no. 11518,March 15,1664,115; no. 2768, document from 1656 lists his age as 65, which would March 26, 1664,608; no. 3138, April 3, 1664, 31,33 place his date of birth in 1591. The same document f.v.-34 Lv.; no. 2769, April 8, 1664. 54-55; no. 2885, mentions Seth as being 40 (b. 1616). Gemeentelijke April 8,1664,155; no. 2769, April 16,1664,8%-82; no. Archief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. 1579, Nov. 7, 2218, January 5,1665,49-50; no. 2218, March 7.1665, 1656,428. 497-98 tv.; no. 2223, April 27, 1667, 913; no. 2224, 9Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. May 5,1667,32-33. 1388, February 20,1650,10; No. 1393, April 18,1654, “Jansen, “Geschiedenis van de familie De Wolff,” 136 48 f.v.; No. 1355,June 5,1657,83 f.v. ‘“Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. ‘kid., 136. 1305, April 27,1655,65. “‘Gemeentelijke At-chief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. “Premiums were rarely less than 10% after 1651, and 2225, November 16,1667,945-52 f.v. 12% and more was not uncommon. Gemeentelijke “‘Jansen, “Geschiedenis van de familie De Wolff,” 138. Archief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. 1035, October “3Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. 1648 with notarized addendumin 1664,491-93 f.v. 2223, May 27,1670,34. l’Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. 24Jansen,“Geschiedenis van de familie De Wolff,” 146. 11143,November 9,1662,X50. 13The following summary of De Wolff activities is 25The Van Rensselaer family has been the subject of drawn partly from C.H. Jansen, “Geschiedenis van de much research. For the following summary of the familie De Wolff: sociale en economischefacetten van family’s commercial interest in New Netherland I have de Republiek der Verenigde Nederlanden in de zeven- relied on Arnold J.F. van Laer, The Vm l?ensselaer- tiende eeuw,” Jaarboek van her Genootschap Bowier Manuscripts (Albany: University of the Stateof AmsrelodarPaum,56 (1964), 131-55, and from my own New York, 1908) and S.G. Nisseson, The Patroon’s researchin the Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam. Domain (New York: Columbia University Press,1937). 282 SELECTED RENSSELAERSWIJCK SEMINAR PAPERS

2601iver A. Rink, “Company Management or Private 34Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam. Begrafnis Trade: The Two PatroonshipPlans for New Netherland.” register van de Westerkerk van Amsterdam, Jaarboek New York History (1978) 5-26. voor 1659. 271nEnglish, see: Nissenson,Patroon’s Domain and the 35GemeentelijkeArchief van Amsterdam, Doop, Trouw translation of Nicolaas de Roever’s monograph,“Kiliaen en Boedel Boeken van Amsterdam. No. ,473, May 28, van Rensselaerand His Colony of Rensselaerswijck,”in 1654,232. Van Laer, Van Rensselaer-Bowier Manuscripts, 40-85. 36GemeentelijkeArchief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. 28VanLaer, Van Rensselaer-Bowier Manuscripts, 482. 2965, June 1661, unpaginated. 291bid.,323 and Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, 37The company was formed as a shipping concern in Notarial no. 1045, August 8,1636,120-21 f.v.; no. 414, 1656. The partners were Lambert Leyssen, merchant of August 8.1636, 173; no. 995, September10,1636,578. Amsterdam, Simon van Apheren “for himself and his Secondaryaccounts of this first Van Rensselaerattempt unnamed partners,” and Gillis van Hoornbeeck. With to engage in the New Netherland trade as a private Leyssen’s death in 1666 the company was dissolved. Its shipper have appearedin Nissenson,Patroods Domain, chief agent in New Netherland was Comeliis Steenwijck. 69 and 81n, and in J. Spinoza Catella Jessurun,Kiliaen Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. van Rensselaer van 1623 tot 1636 (: Nijhoff, 2895, June 11,1666, unpaginated. 1917), Appendix XXI. Neither of these accounts, 38GemeentelijkeArchief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. however, madeuse of the notarial documentsof Amster- 1996, November 8, 1666, 161-63 f.v.; no. 2223, dam. February 10,1667,258-59; no. 2232, January 11,1670, 30GemeentelijkeArchief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. 75-76 f.v. 1500, May 9, 1640, 13-17; no. 1526, May 6, 1641, 39GemeentelijkeArchief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. 136-37; no. 1526, July 2, 1641, 161; no. 1626, July 4, 2784, February 27,1668,447-50. 1641,unpaginated; no. 1626,July 6,1641, unpaginated; 40GemeentelijkeArchief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. no. 696, July 8,1641,93; no. 524, July 10,1641,204 f.v.; 2845, March 3,1668,127 f.v.-128; no. 2784, March 26, no. 1059, July 11, 1641, 116; no. 1501, July 20, 1641, 1668,642-43; no. 2784, March 29, 1668,669-70; no. 83-84; no. 1501, November 26, 1641, 165; no. 1059, 2226, April 28,1668.994-97 f.v. December 18, 1641, 176176 f.v.; no. 1285, April 9, 1642,52; no. 732, May 6,1642,571; no. 1336, May 22, 41GemeentelijkeArchief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. 1642,27; no. 1569,July 24,1642,X8; no. 732, Septem- 2790. August 20,1669,663-664 f.v. ber 13, 1642,745. 42VanLaer, Van Rensselaer-Bowier Manuscripts, 325- 31Amold J.F. van Laer, ed., The Correspondence of 26, and, Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, Jeremias van Rensselaer (Albany: University of the Notarial no. 1045, August 8,1636,120-21 f.v. Stateof New York, 1932), 118. 43GemeentelijkeArchief van Amsterdam,,Notarial no. 321bid., 342 and Van Laer, Van Rensselaer-Bowier 2855, January 12,1664, folio 361-62 unpaginated. Manuscripts, 399-401,403,405,670,790 and 795. ?n 1639 two former West India Company farmers in 33TheVan Hoombeeckgenealogy has never been exten- New Netherland testified that livestock prices in the sively researched. The information for the following colony were nearly 100 percent higher than those in account of the family wasdrawn largely from a“working Holland. Gemeentelijke Archief van Amsterdam, genealogy” compiled by myself with the assistanceof Notarial no. 1280, May 5,1639,60 f.v.-61. Simon Hart and the gracious staff of the Gemeentelijke 45GemeentelijkeArchief van Amsterdam, Notarial no. Archief van Amsterdam. 1332, May 7,1639,44 f.v.