Global
histories a student journal
“Attracting all Indians under the Pretext of Religion”: Dutch-Indigenous Relations and the Moravian Mission in Berbice (1738-1763) Marie Keulen
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/GHSJ.2021.401
Source: Global Histories, Vol. 7, No. 1 (May 2021), pp. 8-33. ISSN: 2366-780X
Copyright © 2021 Marie Keulen
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Publisher information: ‘Global Histories: A Student Journal’ is an open-access bi-annual journal founded in 2015 by students of the M.A. program Global History at Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. ‘Global Histories’ is published by an editorial board of Global History students in association with the Freie Universität Berlin.
Freie Universität Berlin Global Histories: A Student Journal Friedrich-Meinecke-Institut Koserstraße 20 14195 Berlin
Contact information: For more information, please consult our website www.globalhistories.com or contact the editor at: [email protected]. “Attracting all Indians under the Pretext of Religion”: Dutch- Indigenous Relations and the Moravian Mission in Berbice (1738–1763)
by MARIE KEULEN
8 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 M a r i e K ABSTRACT e u l n In the middle decades of the eighteenth century, the Dutch
| colony Berbice on the northern coast of South America “ A formed the stage of the short but successful mission of the t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P Moravian Church among the Indigenous people of the region. Whereas from the perspective of the Moravians this religious mission was part of their numerous missionary activities in the Atlantic world from the 1730s onwards, for the governor, council, planters, and various Amerindian groups living in Berbice the arrival of the missionaries was something new. This article brings together the historiographical fields of Moravian missions in the Atlantic world on the one hand and Dutch-Indigenous relations on the other hand. Examining the reaction of the local and metropolitan colonial authorities to x t o f R the Moravian community and the missionaries’ interaction with different Indigenous population groups inhabiting the region, e l i g o n this article argues that the history of the Moravian community in Berbice opens a window through which Dutch-Indigenous ” relations can be investigated. From the perspective of the Dutch colonial authorities, the alliances with the Amerindian peoples were of vital importance for oppressing the majority enslaved population, and the interactions between their much needed-allies and the Moravian missionaries were seen as a threat. Using colonial archival material on the conflicts and confrontations between missionaries and authorities, this article shows that their relationship was primarily defined by the (desired) interactions of both parties with the Amerindian populations. It shows the colonial perspective on the interactions between European missionaries and Indigenous groups while revealing the metropolitan and local authority’s priorities, limits, and fears.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Marie Keulen is a Research MA student in Colonial and Global History at Leiden University. Her research interests include the interplay of global, regional, and local dynamics within colonial societies. She is particularly interested in the interactions, confrontations, and connections between the different social and cultural groups inhabiting the Atlantic and Caribbean region.
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 9 ” INTRODUCTION several places in North America.
e l i g o n In both German and English, In the middle decades of these Moravian missions have x t o f R the eighteenth century, the Dutch been discussed extensively, with colony Berbice on the northern coast a particular focus on the lives and of South America formed the stage beliefs of the missionaries as well as of the short but successful mission their interactions with the enslaved of the Moravian Church among the and Indigenous populations.3 Indigenous people of the region.1 With their missions, the Moravians From 1738 until the slave revolt in established a global community with 1763, the Moravians established a a shared Christian identity.4 Within small Christian settlement in Berbice the Moravian religious community, t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P from where they maintained contact which was founded by Nikolaus A with various Amerindian groups, of Ludwig von Zinzendorf in 1722, whom several people were baptized missionary activities were considered e u l n | “ and lived among the Moravian fundamental for their unconditional missionaries. This was a striking commitment to the expansion of the M a r i e K event, given the fact that in Dutch kingdom of God. The missionaries, Atlantic historiography the absence seen as the chosen warriors for the of missionary work has often been Saviour’s service, had a special place mentioned as characteristic of Dutch within the Moravian congregation colonialism in the region, and as and were in close contact with the characteristic of Dutch-Indigenous home front. Whereas the activities relations in particular.2 From the and attitudes of the missionaries perspective of the Moravian Church, within the colonies of the Atlantic the mission in Berbice was part of world have been widely examined, their numerous missionary activities however, the reaction and attitude from the 1730s onwards in the towards the missionaries from the Atlantic world, including the Danish perspective of the colonial society West Indies, Suriname, Jamaica, and
3 Hartmut Beck, Brüder in Vielen Völkern: 250 Jahre Mission Der 1 I would like to thank Michiel van Brüdergemeine (Erlangen: Verlag Groesen for his insightful comments. für Mission und Ökumene, 1981); I also wish to thank the editors of Gisela Mettele, Weltbürgertum Global Histories: A Student Journal Oder Gottesreich: Die Herrnhuter for their comments and suggestions. Brüdergemeine Als Globale 2 Recently, Danny Noorlander has Gemeinschaft 1727-1857 (Göttingen: challenged this view of missionary Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009); work in the Dutch Atlantic: see Danny Michele Gillespie and Robert L. Noorlander, Heaven’s Wrath: The Beachy, eds., Pious Pursuits: German Protestant Reformation and the Dutch Moravians in the Atlantic World (New West India Company in the Atlantic York: Berghahn Books, 2007). World (Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell 4 Mettele, Weltbürgertum Oder University Press, 2019). Gottesreich.
10 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2020 M a r i e K have been less widely investigated. reaction to the same religious
In Berbice, a small and community makes the hostile attitude e u l n sparsely populated Dutch colony of the Society of Berbice even more
| centred around the Berbice River interesting. Although the Moravian “ A on the Caribbean coast of South community in Berbice is the central t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P America, the presence of the subject of this article, the main Moravian missionaries led to tensions interest lies not in the community between them and the local and itself, but in how their environment – metropolitan colonial authorities. in particular the colonial authorities The colony was owned by the – reacted to their presence. This Society of Berbice, a company that way, the story of the Moravian operated under the sovereignty of missionaries could tell us more about the Dutch Republic. The company the colony of Berbice. directors were based in Amsterdam A central and recurring and the local colonial administration concern of the directors and the x t o f R consisted of an appointed governor governor of Berbice was the large e l i g o n who had to protect the interests number of Amerindian people
of the company. Conflicts and living with and, according to ” confrontations about the oath of them, influenced by the Moravian allegiance, participation in the civil missionaries. In the entire Guianas, militia, and payment of capitation an area stretching from the Orinoco taxes eventually led to a hostile river to the Amazone river, a large, situation in which the directors and multi-ethnic Indigenous population the Society of Berbice’s governor inhabited the region. These various decided not to allow more Moravians Indigenous peoples – in the Dutch to settle in their colony. This differs Guianas the Arawaks (Lonoko), the from the attitude of the local colonial Caribs (Kari’na), the Waraos, and authorities in Suriname, where the the Akawaios – lived in their own Moravian missionaries were seen settlements outside the colonial as less of a threat. In her article, society. In Berbice, the Arawaks Jessica Cronshagen shows that in and Waraos lived closest to the the second half of the eighteenth plantations, whereas the Caribs century, the governor of Suriname and Akawaios lived more inland, was satisfied with the Moravian away from the colonial society.6 The missionaries forming a “European frontier” between the plantations and Maroon communities.5 This different 1 (2019): 9, https://doi.org/10.5325/ jmorahist.19.1.0001. 6 Marjoleine Kars, ““Cleansing the Land”: Dutch-Amerindian Cooperation 5 Jessica Cronshagen, ““A Loyal Heart in the Suppression of the 1763 Slave to God and the Governor”: Missions Rebellion in Dutch Guiana,” in Empires and Colonial Policy in the Surinamese and Indigenes: Intercultural Alliance, Saramaccan Mission (c. 1750–1813),” Imperial Expansion, and Warfare in Journal of Moravian History 19, no. the Early Modern World, ed. Wayne E.
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2020 11 ” constant focus on the Amerindian Although an important
e l i g o n populations by the colonial characteristic of the colonial society authorities was no coincidence, of Berbice, this topic of Dutch- x t o f R given the dependency of the latter Indigenous cooperation has not on the various Indigenous groups yet been the subject of a focused living in and around the colony of historical study.8 This article argues Berbice. During the seventeenth that the existence of the Moravian and eighteenth centuries, Dutch- community in Berbice during the Indigenous encounters and middle decades of the eighteenth relationships played an important century, and more importantly, the role on the northern coast of South reaction of the colonial authorities America, in particular in the Dutch to their interaction with the valuable 7 t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P Guianas. At the beginning of the allies of the Society of Berbice, forms A seventeenth century, those Dutch- an interesting window through which Indigenous relations were primarily this topic could be investigated. In e u l n | “ defined by trade. Over time, as answering the question of how the the Dutch colonies developed into Moravian missionaries and the local M a r i e K plantation colonies with an enslaved and metropolitan colonial authorities African majority, the military role interacted with each other during the in suppressing slave revolts and existence of the Moravian community capturing runaway slaves became in Berbice (1738-1763), I hope to get more important. a better understanding of social and political relations between the four different groups involved – the Amerindians, the Moravian Lee (New York: New York University missionaries, and the metropolitan Press, 2011), 253, 262; Lodewijk and local authorities of Berbice – Hulsman, “Nederlands Amazonia. with special attention to the position Handel met Indianen tussen 1580 en 1680” (PhD diss., University of of the Indigenous peoples in the Amsterdam, 2009), 1–2. colony. This brings together the two 7 For the seventeenth century see historiographical fields of Moravian Hulsman, “Nederlands Amazonia”; missions on the one hand and Dutch- Mark Meuwese, Brothers in Arms, Indigenous relations on the other. Partners in Trade: Dutch-Indigenous Alliances in the Atlantic World, 1595- This new approach to the 1674 (Leiden: Brill, 2011); for the subject matter of the Moravian eighteenth century see Neil Lancelot missions in early modern Atlantic Whitehead, “Carib Ethnic Soldiering colonies also calls for a new focus in Venezuela, the Guianas, and the Antilles, 1492-1820,” Ethnohistory 37, no. 4 (1990): 357–385, https://doi. org/10.2307/482860; Bram Hoonhout, 8 The exception is an article by Borderless Empire: Dutch Guiana in Marjoleine Kars on the Dutch- the Atlantic World, 1750-1800 (Athens, Indigenous military cooperation GA: University of Georgia Press, during the slave revolt of Berbice in 2020). 1763: Kars, ““Cleansing the Land””.
12 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 M a r i e K concerning source material. Until same is true for the more extensively 12 now, the extensive and very well- researched missions in Suriname. e u l n preserved correspondence network Even the article by Cronshagen, in
| of the Moravian missionaries has which she discusses the position and “ A been the main source for historians the role of Moravian missionaries t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P working on Moravian missions. in the colonial politics of Suriname, Keeping contact with both the only uses Moravian sources.13 religious communities in Europe Although occasionally using those and North America, letters were Moravian letters and reports, this frequently sent back and forth across article primarily focuses on a different the Atlantic Ocean.9 Nowadays, the type of source material: the colonial traces of this exchange can be found archival material of the Society of in several archives.10 The mission in Berbice preserved in the Dutch Berbice, most recently discussed National Archives in The Hague.14 by the historian H. Weiss in 1921, This consists of both documentation x t o f R has only been investigated based written by the directors of the e l i g o n on those Moravian sources.11 The Society of Berbice in Amsterdam
and documentation written for the ” directors by the colonial officials 9 From 1747 onwards the administration in Berbice. The governor of the of the Moravian Church was colony was supposed to inform the divided between a European and directors as accurately as possible an American front. The American on his actions, which resulted in and Caribbean missions, including the mission in Berbice, were under letters, minutes of the council, and the administration of Bethlehem. financial books being sent to the However, after 1747 still, many letters Dutch Republic. This article draws on were also sent from and to Europe. documents from both the directors 10 The Unity Archives in Herrnhut, and the colonial officials identified the Moravian Archives in Bethlehem Pennsylvania, and the correspondence of the Zeist Mission Society held in the Utrecht Archives. Berbice En Suriname 1738-1816,” New For the missions in Suriname and West Indian Guide / Nieuwe West- Berbice specifically, many of the Indische Gids 2, no. 1 (1921): 36–44, personal letters and official reports 109–12, 113–21, 181–97, 249–64, are available through the source https://doi.org/10.1163/22134360- publication of Friedrich Staehelin: 90001820. see Friedrich Staehelin, Die Mission 12 Weiss, “De Zending Der Der Brüdergemeine in Suriname Herrnhutters”; Maria Lenders, Strijders Und Berbice Im Achtzehnten Voor Het Lam: Leven En Werk van Jahrhundert. Eine Missionsgeschichte Herrnhutter Broeders En -Zusters in Hauptsächlich in Auszügen Aus Suriname, 1735-1900 (Leiden: KITLV, Briefen Und Originalberichten 1996). (Hernnhut: Missionsbuchhandlung, 13 Cronshagen, ““A Loyal Heart to God 1914). and the Governor””. 11 H. Weiss, “De Zending Der 14 National Archives, The Hague (NL- Herrnhutters Onder de Indianen in HaNA), Sociëteit van Berbice, 1.05.05.
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 13 ” by searching the Handwritten Text two missionaries living and working
e l i g o n Recognition data of the Dutch at several plantations. In those early National Archives.15 years, the cooperative relationship x t o f R The first section examines between the governor, council, and the emergence and growth of the missionaries made it possible for the Moravian community in Berbice. Moravians to peacefully establish a Arriving in the colony in 1738, the growing religious community. This, Moravian community consisted of however, changed with the arrival of the new Governor Jan Frederik Colier in 1749. The conflicts and 15 Liesbeth Keijser, “6000 Ground confrontations that arose during his Truth of VOC and Notarial Deeds term form the subject of the second 3.000.000 HTR of VOC, WIC and t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P section. Several times, Moravian A Notarial Deeds” (Zenodo, 21 January 2020), https://doi.org/10.5281/ missionaries had to appear at a ZENODO.4159268. The HTR-data meeting of the council where the e u l n | “ of the archive of the Society of civil status of the Moravians was Berbice was obtained by the Dutch questioned. Both the governor M a r i e K National Archives in the context of and the directors of the Society of their project ‘De IJsberg’ using the Transkribus HTR platform. They used Berbice expressed their concerns both documents from the Dutch regarding the missionaries’ contact East-Asia Company (VOC) and the with the Amerindians. This attitude Noord-Hollands Archief to create of the colonial authorities – and the a trained Transkribus HTR+ model central role of the Amerindians in called ‘IJsberg’. This model was used for the HTR-data of the archive of their worries – is explicitly examined the Society of Berbice. Because the in the third and last section of this HTR-data of the Society of Berbice article. Comparing this to the situation has a relatively high fault rate, I used in Suriname, it becomes clear that the several spelling possibilities when reaction of the metropolitan and local searching the keywords ‘moravische’ and ‘herrnhutters’ in Voyant Tools colonial authorities of Berbice to the (mora*, morav*, herr*, hern*, herrn*) Moravian missionaries in their colony
14 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 M a r i e K Moravian Church, Nikolaus Ludwig the perspective of the Amerindians, von Zinzendorf, was asked by Jan planters, governor, and council in e u l n Nicolaas van Eys to send some Berbice, on the other hand, the arrival
| missionaries to his plantation to teach of the two Moravian missionaries was “ A his slaves the Evangelical religion.16 something new. t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P Zinzendorf agreed, and in the spring In the first two years of the of 1738, he found Johannes Güttner mission in Berbice, Güttner and and Ludwig Christoph Dehne, two Dehne were the only Moravians men willing to go to Berbice. It was in the colony. For one year they from that moment onwards that the lived at one of the plantations of Moravian community shifted their Van Eys, from where they would attention from Suriname to Berbice. work at several plantations in the Already between 1735 and 1738, region to earn enough money for several attempts had been made to their livelihood.18 In November 1739, establish a missionary community both Güttner and Dehne wrote x t o f R in Suriname without success. In several letters to the Moravian e l i g o n total, eleven Moravian ‘brothers’ community in Herrnhutt, in which
and ‘sisters’ were sent to Suriname, they wrote that they had moved to ” but they all either died, came back another plantation called Johanna to Europe, or joined their fellow at the invitation of its owner Erhard brothers and sisters in Berbice.17 Arthing.19 Already several months Only more than ten years later, in the earlier, Güttner wrote about their 1750s, were the missionary activities plans of leaving Groot-Poelgeest in Suriname successfully continued. because of the “wicked lifestyle” at From the perspective of the Moravian the dining table of the plantation’s community, the missions in Suriname director and, more importantly, the and Berbice could be seen as part of remote location of the plantation, the same story, often with the same with the consequence that “not actors. Several missionaries spent many Indians come here”.20 Although time in both colonies and regularly the Moravians had initially come to travelled between the two. From Berbice to convert plantation slaves, they had soon shifted their focus to the Amerindian populations of the
16 Staehelin, Die Mission Der region, more specifically the groups Brüdergemeine, Teil II. Erster of Arawak people they encountered Abschnitt: Anfang der Mission in during their first year in Berbice. Berbice 1738-1748, 3–5; Weiss, “De Zending Der Herrnhutters,” 41. 17 Cronshagen, ““A Loyal Heart to God and the Governor”,” 6; H. Weiss, “Het 18 Staehelin, Die Mission Der Zendingswerk Der Herrnhutters in de Brüdergemeine, Teil II. Erster Oerwouden van de Boven-Suriname,” Abschnitt, 3, 7–25; Weiss, “De De West-Indische Gids 1 (1919): 102–3, Zending Der Herrnhutters,” 41. https://doi.org/10.1163/22134360- 19 Staehelin, 25–27. 90001942. 20 Staehelin, 23.
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 15 ” Having had good contact with the this, Dehne writes that they were
e l i g o n “wild heathens”, Güttner writes, dismissed once they declared to be the missionaries had more hope loyal citizens.23 In the years after their x t o f R to spread their Christian messages arrival, Dehne and Güttner described among the Indigenous peoples their contact with the local authorities than among the enslaved African as cooperative. Plantation owner people.21 This became even more Arthing, with whom the Moravians apparent in July 1740, when Güttner worked and lived for one year, and Dehne were accompanied by was a member of the council, and Heinrich Beutel and his wife Elisabeth helped the missionaries to get a Beutel, who brought with them a small estate to build their own house letter by Zinzendorf, which ordered called ‘Pilgerhut’.24 The successor t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P Güttner and Dehne to live among of Waterham, Governor Jan Andries A the Amerindians and to learn their Lossner, was also favourably language.22 disposed towards the missionaries. It e u l n | “ Regarding these early years was under his rule that the decision of the mission in Berbice, there seem was made in autumn 1740 to grant M a r i e K to be no (preserved) records from the the Moravians a ten-acre plot of land Society of Berbice that mention the along the creek Wieronje. In a later Moravian presence. It is only from the report about the mission in Berbice, documentation of the missionaries written by missionaries in 1753, themselves that we know that there Governor Lossner was praised for was contact between the Moravians this decision, stating that during his and the colonial authorities in the “Government of 9 years the Brothers first two years. In his journal on had an opportunity of establishing their voyage to Berbice, Dehne themselv’s in stillness & our savior described an encounter between begun to gather the rewards of him and Güttner and the council of his Pain & Labour from among the governance during the first days Heathen here”.25 of their presence in the colony. It was half a year after As head of the council, Governor the settlement of the Moravian Bernhardt Waterham explained to missionaries in Pilgerhut that the the missionaries the laws of the first preserved mention of the colony, including the obligation to missionaries in the documentation of take the civil oath of allegiance. the Society of Berbice was written. The missionaries, however, refused to do so, stating that it would be against their belief to take a secular 23 Staehelin, 10–11. oath. Although the governor and 24 Staehelin, 33–36. the council were not happy about 25 Moravian Archives, Bethlehem Pennsylvania (MA), MissSur Suriname Papers, inventory number 2, ‘Report 21 Staehelin, 24. of the mission at Berbice, Suriname, 22 Staehelin, 31–33. 1738-1752’, p. 29.
16 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 M a r i e K In April 1741, pastor Johann Christian The problem pastor
Frauendorff wrote an alarming letter Frauendorff reported to the local e u l n on behalf of the Church Council of authorities was thus not the presence
| the Protestant Church in Berbice of the Moravian missionaries as such, “ A about the Moravian missionaries but the religious act of baptism he t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P to the governor and the council.26 regarded as illegitimate. The solution, Given the fact that the Moravian he wrote to the governor and the Church was not a privileged religion, council, was a redoing of the baptism the Protestant Church Council felt by the Protestant Church. obligated to report the baptism of Not knowing how to the child of Heinrich and Elisabeth handle the matter, the governor Beutel, a religious act they regarded decided to forward the issue to the as illegitimate. In his letter, pastor directors of the Society of Berbice Frauendorff made a clear distinction in Amsterdam. In a brief letter, the between the civil and religious status directors responded by stating that x t o f R of the Moravians. While he saw the they did not have any knowledge e l i g o n latter as problematic and illegitimate, of the presence of the so-called
Frauendorff, on the other hand, “herrenhutters” in the colony. ” characterized the missionaries as Concerning the issue of baptism, “free citizens” who were allowed to the directors did not think that live in the colony of Berbice, the Moravian missionaries would agree to the pastor performing [W]hich could not be denied their sacraments.28 Eventually, to them, as they subject at the end of that same year, the themselves to the laws of the council of Berbice decided in line country as obedient subjects with the Church Council that the to their rulers, neither has one baptism performed by Moravians received the slightest complaints was illegitimate. However, the about them, while in silence and council did not insist on a redoing peace they earn their bread, and of the religious act, as suggested are a burden to no one.27 by Frauendorff. Instead, they let the Moravians continue their practice, with the only consequence being the acknowledgement that the 26 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 80, p. 178– sacraments performed by them 189. were regarded as illegitimate. The 27 Idem. Citation in Dutch: “konde directors approved of this decision haar sulxs niet gewijgert worden als made by the council and explicitly deselve sig de wetten van het land, als gehoorsaame onderdaanen aan emphasised that this religious hunne overheden onderwerpen, men issue was not a matter of the “High heeft ook tot hiertoe niet de minste klagte over deselve tevoezen, terwijl in stilheijd ende vrede haar brood winnen, ende niemand tot last zijn”. 28 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 14, p. 278.
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 17 ” Government”.29 Thus, although the continued on the same cooperative
e l i g o n baptism of Heinrich and Elisabeth footing. In addition to the plot of land Beutel’s child by their fellow Moravian that was given to the missionaries in x t o f R missionary Güttner led to several the year 1740, Lossner granted them letters back and forth between the some additional land in 1745.32 In the Church Council, pastor Frauendorff, meantime, the Pilgerhut community the governor, the council, and the expanded during the 1740s. Firstly, directors, the matter had no major several Moravians from Europe, consequences for the Moravian North America, and Suriname came community in Berbice and their to Berbice. In the year 1745, the relationship with the local colonial community grew from four to ten authorities.30 This can also be seen missionaries, and in subsequent t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P from how the Moravian missionaries years, several more people joined A themselves described this issue. In a the Pilgerhut community.33 The most letter to the Moravian community in significant change in the 1740s, e u l n | “ Herrnhut, Güttner briefly mentioned however, was the growing number that he had to appear for the of Amerindian people that settled in M a r i e K council to answer questions on the or next to Pilgerhut. According to the baptism of Beutel’s child. According reports written by the missionaries, to Güttner the council “was very by the year 1748, around 60 friendly” and afterwards “[he] felt Amerindians lived with the Moravians, good in [his] heart and was happy of which 41 people were baptised.34 and went back to [his] Brothers”.31 The Amerindian people living closest In the years after this religious to the colonial settlements, including matter, relations between the the Moravian community, were missionaries and Governor Lossner the Arawaks, whom the Moravians explicitly and repeatedly mentioned in their reports. Occasionally, the
29 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 15, p. 8–13. missionaries also mentioned the 30 I found four letters from the directors presence of Carib people, who lived and five incoming letters from the colony to the directors related to this matter. Respectively: NL-HaNA, 32 MA, MissSur, inv. no. 43, ‘Land 1.05.05, inv. no. 14, p. 278; inv. no. 15, patent for land in Berbice, Suriname, p. 8–13; inv. no. 15, p. 21–28; inv. no. November 18, 1745’; NL-HaNA, Digital 15, p. 39–44; inv. no. 80, p. 178–189; duplicates of the ‘Dutch Series’ of the inv. no. 83, p. 117–121; inv. no. 83, p. National Archives of Guyana, 1.05.21, 123; inv. no. 83, p. 126–128; inv. no. 83, inv. no. AZ.1.7, p. 120–121. p. 212–217. 33 Staehelin, 3–4; Staehelin, Die 31 Staehelin, 39–40. Citation in German: Mission Der Brüdergemeine, Teil “Sie haben mich im Rath weiter II. Zweiter Abschnitt: Blütezeit der um nichts gefragt und waren sehr Indianermission in Berbice 1748-1755, freundlich und hiessen mich wieder 3–4. gehen. Es war mir wohl in meinem 34 MA, MissSur, inv. no. 2, ‘Report of the Herzen und ward vergnügt und ging mission at Berbice, Suriname, 1738- wieder zu meinen Brüdern.” 1752’, p. 32.
18 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 FIGURE 1. Printed inset map of the Pilgerhut community at the Wieronje Creek. This inset map is portrayed on (Figure 2): Leiden University Special Collections (LUSC), Bodel Nijenhuis Collection (COLLBN) Port 63 N 52, ‘Berbice en Suriname Gelegen in Zuid-America 6 Gr. benoorden de Aequinoctiaal linie’.
farther away from the colonial map of Pilgerhut, made during or society. This seems to suggest that after the existence of the Moravian the Moravian missionaries were able community in Berbice (Figure 1). On to differentiate between different this map, more than forty houses groups of Indigenous peoples. are categorised as “Huizen van However, it is unclear to what extent Indiaanen” (houses of Indians), they were able to do so correctly. of which the majority are located The portrayal of a significant around the central “Gemeente-Huis” Amerindian community in Pilgerhut (community home). To what extent can also be found on a printed inset this is a trustworthy representation
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 19 ” of the actual Pilgerhut is difficult to the council, on the 13th of May 1749,
e l i g o n say. Strikingly, when the missionaries the directors wrote that they did wrote about the number of not understand why the oath was x t o f R Amerindian people living at Pilgerhut, not demanded from the Moravian they also briefly mentioned the fact missionaries; everyone except the that Governor Lossner was very Mennonites (whose exceptional happy with the converts. In the position dated from the early years archive of the Society of Berbice, of the Dutch Revolt), they stressed, however, I did not find any notice of should take the oath.36 Clearly, the this. It is plausible that if Lossner was directors were not aware of, and indeed pleased with the Amerindian not happy with, the position that the community at Pilgerhut, he did not Moravians had gained in their colony t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P communicate this to the directors in and the arrangements Governor A Amsterdam. Lossner had made. The cooperative Yet this growth of the relationship between the governor, e u l n | “ Moravian community did not council, and missionaries made it go unnoticed. When a ship with possible for the latter to obtain their M a r i e K passengers would arrive in the own plot of land and to peacefully colony of Berbice, it was customary establish a growing religious for the governor to report this in community. This, however, was about the minutes of the council meeting, to change with the arrival of a new which would be sent to the directors governor. in Amsterdam. This way, the latter was notified that on the 24th of October 1748, several passengers, ARISING CONFLICTS AND of which some were Moravian CONFRONTATIONS missionaries, had arrived in the colony. The minutes of the council Several days before the say that the passengers had sworn directors wrote their critical message the oath of allegiance. However, on the actions of the council, regarding the newly-arrived Moravian they had fired the incumbent passengers, the council wrote that Governor Lossner due to his they were exempt from swearing repeated disagreements with the the oath: “according to custom, no superintendent general of the oath of allegiance is required, but Company's plantations, appointing their word that they will behave as a faithful citizen and inhabitant here”.35 Reacting to the minutes of op hun lieder woord van sich als getrouwe burger ende inwoonders alhier te sullen gedraagen”. 35 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 99, p. 36 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 1, p. 15–20; 20. Dutch citation: “van dewelke NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 16, p. 26– volgens het gebruyk geen Eed van 31; NL-HaNA, 1.05.21, inv. no. AG.1.1, p. getrouwigheijd word gevergd, maer 157.
20 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 M a r i e K Jan Frederik Colier as his successor. the first months after his arrival, Colier
Accompanied with detailed wrote extensively on the missionaries e u l n instructions, Governor Colier arrived and his actions against them,
th | in Berbice on the 28 of September while referring several times to the “ A to inform Lossner of his dismissal. resolution of the directors issued a t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P Apparently, the directors, who had couple of days after his appointment. been dissatisfied with Lossner’s The central issue in the policy, were afraid the former conflict between Governor Colier governor would flee from the colony, and the Moravian community as they explicitly instructed Colier was the demand by the local and to ensure Lossner would be held metropolitan authorities that the accountable in Holland, “if necessary latter had to fulfil their civil duties. by placing him under arrest”.37 The This meant taking the oath of arrival of Colier in Berbice had allegiance, paying capitation for both significant consequences for the themselves and the Amerindians x t o f R relationship between the local and living at Pilgerhut, and participating e l i g o n metropolitan colonial authorities and in the civil militia, which included
the Moravian missionaries, with the carrying weapons. Whereas under ” latter being increasingly confronted the government of both Waterham with suspicion, hostility, and and Lossner the local authorities restrictions. The above-mentioned were satisfied with the promise of the resolution from the directors, written Moravians to be loyal citizens, both on the 13th of May 1749, could Governor Colier and the directors be seen as a turning point after in Amsterdam did not allow for the which local colonial authorities in Moravians to be an exception to the Berbice spent increasing time and rule. Interestingly, such a privilege effort on the Moravian community was granted to the Moravian at Pilgerhut. By far most of the missionaries in Suriname. In 1740, preserved documents from the after negotiating with Moravian Society of Berbice on the Moravians representatives, the directors of the – both from the directors and the Society of Suriname decided that local colonial officials – were written concerning both the oath and the during the years of Colier’s term as civil militia, the Moravians would be governor of Berbice.38 Especially in treated in the same manner as the Mennonites – something explicitly turned down by the directors of the 37 Plakaatboek Guyana (PG), 1670-1816, Huygens Institute,
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 21 ” Society of Berbice.39 Whereas the civil were expected to swear the oath.
e l i g o n status of the Moravian missionaries However, the minutes of the meeting was undisputed in the first eleven reveal that the missionaries were x t o f R years of their presence in Berbice, not willing to do so, referring to the it had now become a reason for customary practice under Governor Colier and his council to repeatedly Lossner and stressing the fact summon Moravian missionaries to that they had lived peacefully in the council meeting and demand the colony for eleven years now.41 their obedience. When the council made clear that The first confrontation the order came from the directors between the Moravian community in Amsterdam, whose message and Governor Colier occurred only a they read aloud, the missionaries t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P couple of days after the latter arrived requested “to be considered and A in Berbice. In his first letter to the treated as the Moravian Brothers directors, Colier stated that he had who are in Suriname, and regarding e u l n | “ “instructed the bailiff to immediately the arms trade to be allowed to be go to all Moravian brothers who considered as the Mennonites”.42 M a r i e K are in the colony” and to tell them For the Moravians, this reference to in the name of the council and the the situation in Suriname was a very directors “to appear here on the next logical one, as the missions in both Tuesday, being the 7th of October, at colonies were very much interrelated: the ordinary meeting to take the Oath several missionaries who came to of Allegiance”.40 It is striking that only Pilgerhut in the second half of the two days after his arrival in the colony 1740s were coming from Suriname. Colier summoned the Moravian This perspective is also visible on missionaries before the council a printed map of the eighteenth- meeting. This strongly suggests century Moravian missions in Berbice that was he instructed to do so by and Suriname (Figure 2). The the directors in Amsterdam, who were unhappy with the agreements made between the missionaries and 41 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 102, p. Colier’s predecessors. As instructed, 102–107; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. six of the now twelve missionaries 104, p. 22–28. The same event is also mentioned in a missionary ‘diary from living at Pilgerhut appeared at Pilgerhut’, which describes a similar the council meeting, where they course of the event: Staehelin, Teil II. Zweiter Abschnitt, 30–36. 42 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 102, p. 102–107; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. 39 Staehelin, Die Mission Der no. 104, p. 22–28. Dutch citation: Brüdergemeine, Teil I.: Erste Missions- “versoekende soo aangesien und Kolonisationsversuche in en gehandeld te worden als de Suriname 1735-1745, 108–9. Moravische Gebroeders die te 40 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 102, p. 101– Suriname zijn, en aangaande 102; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 104, p. Wapenhandel te moogen werden 19–22. geconsidereerd als de menoniten”.
22 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 FIGURE 2. Printed map of the three Moravian missions in Berbice and Suriname (marked green), from left missionary communities, all three to right: the Pilgerhut community below the inset map of Pilgerhut (see Figure 1), the mission along of them highlighted in green, were the Corentyne river, and the mission along the Saron literally part of the same picture. river. The government buildings Fort Nassau and Fort The directors in Amsterdam, Zeelandia of Berbice and Suriname respectively are marked red. LUSC, COLLBN Port 63 N 52, ‘Berbice en the governor, and the council in Suriname Gelegen in Zuid-America 6 Gr. benoorden Berbice, however, thought differently; de Aequinoctiaal linie’. Copies of the same map can they did not regard the relationship also be found in the Moravian Archives: MA, DP Collection of Drawings and Prints, inv. no. f.051.1.a–b. between the Society of Suriname and the Moravian missionaries as a point of reference for their own policy, and they persisted in their demands. As the six missionaries were still refusing to take the oath, they were temporarily brought outside, for the council to deliberate on the situation. The governor used this moment to
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 23 ” bring up a new, but according to contact and interactions between
e l i g o n him related issue: the influence of the Moravian missionaries and the the missionaries on the Amerindians Indigenous population were never x t o f R living in the colony. perceived as a problem before the directors had sent Colier to The Lord Governor told the the colony, this had now suddenly Council to have been told that become an issue of careful attention by some practice they people for the governor, who shared his are holding up the Indians of worries with his superiors in the this country, which is detrimental Dutch Republic. to the colony and the private In subsequent years, the persons because of the service issue of the oath – and the civil t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P which those Indians are required duties in general – remained A to do.43 a subject of conflict. Only after Governor Colier promulgated a e u l n | “ Next, the bailiff was asked resolution in 1752 stating that all how many Amerindians he had seen missionaries had to swear the oath M a r i e K at the residence of the missionaries, and that they would be banned from to which he replied that he had the colony if they refused to do so, seen several white persons and the majority of the missionaries took Amerindians, both men and women, the oath.45 The obligation to pay who preached and sang together. the capitation money seemed to be At the end of the meeting, Colier less a matter of contention, given decided that he would inform the that already at the beginning of the directors about this and ask them year 1750 the Moravians paid their whether the Moravians were allowed dues over the year 1749.46 This was to continue to live in Berbice. In the not the case with the requirement to meantime, he prohibited them to participate in the civil militia, which “hold meetings” and to “delay Indians prompted the captain of the civil who owe any service”.44 Whereas the militia, Joseph Dietzscholt, to write a letter of complaint to the governor and the council in 1751. Although 43 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 102, p. the “Moravian brothers […] have 102–107; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 104, p. 22–28. Dutch citation: “Den themselves answered ‘we will behave Heere Gouverneur aan den Hove like obedient citizens’”, Dietzscholt gesegt ter hoore gekomen te zijn dat zij lieden door eenige practijcque d’indiane van dit land op houden, ’t dienst schuldig sijn oponthoud te geene naadeel geeft aan de colonie verleenen”. en particulieren door den dienst 45 Staehelin, Teil II. Zweiter Abschnitt, dewelke die Indianen sich hebben 4; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no 1, p. verplicht te doen”. 242–244; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 44 Idem. Dutch citation: “onder verbod 16, 195–197. van geene vergaderige te mogen 46 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 110, p. 369– houden ende geen indianen den elke 374.
24 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 M a r i e K wrote, no weapons and ammunition made it clear to the governor and were found with them during his the council that they still wanted e u l n inspection – something that was the resolution from the 13th of May
| considered part of participating in the 1749 to be implemented. Otherwise, “ A civil militia.47 The importance of the they stressed, “our authority will be t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P issue of the civil militia is remarkable, greatly weakened”.48 Whereas in 1741 as even in the sparsely populated the directors had never heard of the colony of Berbice the Moravian presence of the missionaries in the missionaries would not make a colony, leaving a lot of room for the significant contribution in terms former governors Waterham and of manpower. Why, then, had the Lossner to make agreements with the strict enforcement of the Moravian Moravians, they had now taken an missionaries’ civil duties become active role in the colonial relationship such an issue for both the local and with the Moravian community. In metropolitan colonial authorities? the same year, one of the directors, x t o f R From the resolution of the 13th Jacob Boulé, was sent to Berbice e l i g o n of May 1749 onwards, the directors “to bring the mentioned Colony 49 of the Society of Berbice played on a better footing”. In 1751, after ” a significant part in the evolving having received letters from Boulé conflict with the Moravians. This saying that the “so-called Moravian was, for one reason, because of brothers are trying to back out on their contact with the local colonial their duties”, the directors repeated authorities and their influence on their call for the implementation of how they – especially the governor their earlier resolution.50 Furthermore, – reacted to the presence of the the directors themselves had contact Moravian missionaries in the colony with the Moravian missionaries, when of Berbice. In a resolution from the latter directed their request for November 1750, at a moment when a treatment similar to the situation the conflict on the issue of the oath in Suriname to the directors. The was still unsolved, the directors request, signed by Anth. Buyn
48 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 16, 102– 47 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 110, p. 106. Dutch citation: “onse authoriteit 80–81. Dutch citation: “Moravische zeer word verswakt”. broeders […] hebben deselve tot 49 PG, the 2nd of September 1750, andwoord gegeeven wij sullen ons ‘Jacob Boulé wordt naar Berbice gedraagen als gehoorzame burgers”. gezonden als gedeputeerde van de For the regulation considering the Staten-Generaal’; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, mandatory armament of civilians see: inv. no. 219, p. 153–156. PG, the 9th of July 1750, ‘Controle 50 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 16, p. 108– van de verplichte bewapening van 116; NL-HaNa, 1.05.05, inv. no. 1, p. burgers door officieren van de 131–141. Dutch citation: “zogenaamde burgerij op alle plantages in hun Moravische broeders zig aan de divisie’; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. verschuldigde pligten op de colonie 219, p. 93. tragten te onttrekken”.
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 25 ” and Lodewijk Wijs51, addressed all passports, that they were obliged
e l i g o n three mentioned aspects of the civil to take the oath, Dehne and Beutel duties: the oath of allegiance, the themselves thought that they could x t o f R capitation, and the participation in continue on the same footing as the civil militia with the obligation when they left the colony in 1747. The to carry weapons. Discussing the two missionaries, having missed the request in their meeting, the directors previous conflicts and confrontations decided not to grant an exemption with the governor, had a different on all three points – a decision they understanding of what it meant to communicated to the local authorities take the oath. In contrast to the first in Berbice.52 confrontation between Moravian As was the case in 1748, missionaries and Governor Colier at t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P the arrival of two Moravians in a meeting of the council, this time, A the colony in 1751 led to renewed the latter was not willing to let the colonial attention for the position Moravians go easily. When Dehne e u l n | “ of the missionaries in the colony. and Beutel refused to fulfil Colier’s The arriving Moravians, Dehne and demands, the council decided “that M a r i e K Beutel, had already been in Berbice they must leave this colony at the first from 1738 and 1740 respectively, opportunity, no later than with the but both went to Europe for several first from here departing ship”.54 years in 1747, after which they then Shortly before this decision returned to Berbice. Governor Colier was made, while Dehne and Beutel mentioned their arrival in a letter to were waiting outside, another group the directors, in which he also stated was also summoned at the council that the missionaries were expected meeting: thirty-three Amerindian to take the oath of allegiance at the captains were called to account for next meeting of the council. However, the actions of some Amerindians Colier added, “I have already noticed providing shelter and help to runaway that they will not want to do this” – slaves, while they were supposed expecting yet another confrontation.53 to hand them over directly to their Although Dehne and Beutel owners. Directly after the Amerindian were already told by directors in captains left the meeting, the bailiff Amsterdam, who granted them their was asked by the governor whether he had seen many Amerindians with the Moravians, to which he answered 51 Sometimes also spelled as ‘Weiss’. that “there were about three hundred 52 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 1, 150– 153; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 16, 126–129; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 1, 157–159; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 54 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 109, p. 16, 130–132. 152–157. Dutch citation: “dat zij met 53 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 108, p. de eerste geleegentheijd uijt deese 26–30. Dutch citation: “dog heb ik colonie moeten vertrecken, en dat al gemerkt dat sij deselve niet sullen ten uijttersten, met het eerste van hier willen doen”. vertreckende schip”.
26 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 M a r i e K Indians there”.55 Likely, the fact that interactions as beneficial for the those issues were discussed after colonial administration. The colonial e u l n one another at the same meeting relationships with Amerindian
| was no coincidence. For Colier, the populations, and especially the “ A concerns regarding the presence Arawaks, were of great importance t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P of the Moravian missionaries in his for the Dutch. Instead of regarding colony on the one hand, and the the contacts of the Moravian importance of the Amerindian groups community with those groups as a for the oppression of the majority possible contribution to the Dutch enslaved population, on the other cause, Colier and his superiors hand, were very much connected. worried that the influence of the Already when Colier mentioned the missionaries would be at the expense arrival of Dehne and Beutel in the of their own desired influence over colony, he ended his message for the Indigenous peoples. During both the directors by saying that “it was confrontations at the council meeting, x t o f R to be wished that those people had Colier asked the bailiff to provide e l i g o n never come to this colony, attracting him with more information on the
all Indians under the Pretext of missionary community. According ” Religion”.56 to the bailiff’s remarks and the documentation of the missionaries themselves, the Pilgerhut community “I FEAR WE WILL LOSE ALL attracted many Amerindian people – INDIANS” as visitors, residents, and Christians. A Moravian diary even describes a From the very first moment visit from a delegation of Amerindian he arrived in Berbice until the people coming all the way from the very last moment he wrote to the Orinoco river in Spanish colonial directors on the situation in the territory west of Essequibo.57 This colony, Colier expressed his worries influx of different Amerindian groups about the interactions between visiting the Pilgerhut community the Moravian missionaries and the must have been a striking event various Amerindian groups living at for the local colonial authorities as or visiting Pilgerhut. It is clear that well as the planters living near the he, as well as his superiors in the missionaries. As the alliances with Dutch Republic, did not regard these the Indigenous populations were vital for the colonial society of Berbice, in particular for the maintenance of the 55 Idem. Dutch citation: “dat wel omtrend institution of slavery, Governor Colier drie hondert indiaenen daer waeren”. 56 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 108, p. did not lose sight of the events taking 26–30. Dutch citation: “’t waare te place at the Moravian community. wenschen dat die luyden nooit in deese colonie waaren gekoomen, trekkende sij onder Pretext van Religie 57 Staehelin, Teil II. Zweiter Abschnitt, alle de Indiaanen naar zig”. 38.
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 27 ” Even when, years later, a new Berbice, Essequibo, and Demerara,
e l i g o n governor had arrived in the colony, only when the institution of slavery who came to be on much friendlier came to an end under British rule in x t o f R terms with the Moravian missionaries, 1833, and when the military aid of their relationship with and influence the Indigenous populations was no on the Amerindian populations longer needed, did this dependency remained a very important concern. cease to exist, and the Amerindians During the seventeenth then retreated away from the colonial and eighteenth centuries, as a societies.60 consequence of increasing European The strong position of the colonisation, the various Amerindian Caribs and Arawaks in Berbice is groups living in the region of the visible through their easy access t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P Guianas – the Arawaks, the Caribs, to gifts and guns. Faced with their A the Waraos, and the Akawaios – dependency on Amerindian allies became more intertwined with and times of European competition e u l n | “ European powers both through over Amerindian favours, the Dutch trade relationships and military needed to enlarge their investment M a r i e K alliances.58 Although both Europeans in the indigenous alliances.61 This and Amerindians became more included reaffirming the alliances and more dependent on each other with gifts and guns. Moreover, as the centuries progressed, it in threatening to lay down their was especially the former that was agreed-upon tasks such as capturing highly dependent on the military runaways, the Amerindians aid of the latter – both concerning strengthened their bargaining their rival European powers and position. Not all inhabitants of the majority enslaved population. the colony, however, treated the In the eighteenth century, this Indigenous populations as important was certainly true for the Dutch actors who needed to be kept as colonies of Berbice, Essequibo, and friends, something the metropolitan Demerara. In Suriname on the other and local colonial authorities tried to hand, after the seventeenth century, prevent by issuing several ordinances Amerindian groups remained largely and instructions to protect the at the margins of the colony – both position of their Amerindian allies.62 politically and geographically.59 In
Dutch Atlantic, 1680-1815 (Leiden: 58 Neil Lancelot Whitehead, Leiden University Press, 2018), 143. “Ethnic Transformation and 60 Hoonhout, Borderless Empire, 42. Historical Discontinuity in Native 61 Hoonhout, 37; Kars, 267. Amazonia and Guayana, 1500- 62 PG, the 20th of October 1736, 1900,” L’Homme 126/128 (1993): ‘Waarschuwing de Amerindianen met 292, 297–98, http://dx.doi. rust te laten’; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. org/10.3406%2Fhom.1993.369641. no. 219, p. 32–33; PG, the 3th of June 59 Gert Oostindie and Wim Klooster, 1749, ‘Instructie voor Gouverneur Realm between Empires: The Second Colier’, second instruction point 12;
28 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 M a r i e K It is also important to note that not feeling of unease concerning the all Indigenous people were seen mere fact that the few Moravian e u l n as important or valuable allies that missionaries attracted and converted
| needed to be pleased with gifts or tens or hundreds of Amerindian “ A protected against the violence of people. Because the aid of the t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P planters: Amerindian slavery was Indigenous allies was a necessity for part of the colonial slave society of the colonial authorities, and because Berbice and the so-called ‘red slaves’ most of the time cooperation “was were frequently bought from Carib or by no means a forgone conclusion”, Arawak groups. The colonial officers, this interaction was seen as a threat however, trying to avoid provoking a for the colony.64 The Amerindians, conflict, always attempted to make they feared, were influenced by sure no people of allied groups were the Moravians. On the other hand, bought as slaves.63 there was a more specific concern This concern for the regarding those Amerindian people x t o f R relationship with their much-needed who were part of the Pilgerhut e l i g o n allies played a central role in the community, namely that they would
position and attitude of the local not carry out their agreed-upon ” colonial authorities towards the duties. While “keeping a watchful eye Moravian missionaries. Noticing that on their behaviour”, Colier and the the Pilgerhut community attracted council did not fail to report all the a significant number of Amerindian possible “evil consequences of the people, Colier and his council so-called conversion of the Indians repeatedly expressed their worries by the Moravian brothers”.65 to the directors in Amsterdam. On In Suriname, where the the one hand, there was a general Indigenous populations were not as important for the colonial society as in its neighbouring Dutch colonies, NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 16, p. the local colonial authorities had a 64–86; PG, the 7th of October 1760, very different attitude towards the ‘Verbod de Amerindianen lastig te Moravian missionaries living in their vallen’; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 130, colony. Besides the earlier mentioned p. 23; PG, the 3th of September 1764, privileged status of the Moravian ‘Instructie voor Gouverneur Heyliger’, point 26; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. Church in Suriname regarding the 18, p. 218–224. 63 PG, the 21th of April 1746, ‘Verplichting van Amerindianen 64 Kars, 266–67. om voor ze Amerindiaanse slaven 65 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 111, p. aanbieden die aan de Gouverneur 27–30. Dutch citation: “een wakend te tonen’; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. oogh over hun gedragh te houwden”, no. 219 p. 105–106; PG, the 7th of “de kwaade gevolgen dewelke January 1751, ‘Verplichte registratie de soogenaamde bekeeringe der van gekochte Amerindiaanse slaven’; Indiaanen door de Moravische NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 219, p. gebroeders […] souwde konne te 166–167. weege brengen”.
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 29 ” oath of allegiance and the civil receive “a church, houses, and even 69 e l i g o n militia, in the 1750s and 1760s, the a salary”. Because the Maroons Moravians received permission to in Suriname had a very different x t o f R settle in different parts of the colony role in the colonial society than the for their missionary work. A couple Amerindians in Berbice – they were of years after missionary Dehne a threat rather than a vital ally – the was banished from Berbice, he was presence of Moravian missionaries sent to Paramaribo to revive the and their interaction with the mission in Suriname.66 Interestingly, Maroons was welcomed. the old Governor of Berbice Lossner When Colier had left the was involved in the negotiations colony of Berbice and was replaced between the missionaries and the by the new Governor Hendrik Jan t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P Governor of Suriname, Pieter Albert van Rijswijk in 1756, the issue of the A van der Meer, by emphasizing the relationship and interaction between positive influence of the Moravian the Moravians and the various groups e u l n | “ missionaries in the colony.67 This of Amerindians did not disappear view of the Moravians as an added from the colonial mind. Once back in M a r i e K value for the colony was fundamental the Dutch Republic, Colier wrote the for the attitude of Governor Van der directors of the Society of Berbice a Meer – as well as his successors – memoir on how to bring the colony towards the Moravian community into a “more flourishing state”.70 in Suriname. As Cronshagen shows One of the points he mentioned in her article, the local colonial was the presence of the Moravians authorities were satisfied with the in the colony and their relationship missionaries forming a “European with the Amerindian populations. frontier” between their plantations The “Indians”, he wrote, “must be and the Maroon communities by kept under subordination”. They fulfilling a diplomatic role for the must be told that “the mentioned colonial government.68 Several years Herrenhutters are not their chiefs”, after the Society of Suriname had but that the Government had granted permission for settlement, always retained power over them the role of the Moravians as colonial and the missionaries.71 According agents became even more explicit as the then Governor Crommelin asked the missionaries to establish 69 Cronshagen, 10. a community near the Maroons in 70 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no 223. Dutch Saramacca. In return, they would citation: “in een bloeyender staat te brengen”. 71 Idem. Dutch citation: “moeten ook wel onder subordinatie gehouden 66 Weiss, “De Zending Der Herrnhutters,” worden, en haar wel in te prenten dat 187–88. de gemelde Herrenhutters […] egter 67 Weiss, 188; Cronshagen, ‘“A Loyal hunnen opperhoofden niet zij maar Heart to God and the Governor”,” 7–8. dat het Gouvernement altoos deselve 68 Cronshagen, 9. magt over hen behoude als te vooren,
30 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 M a r i e K to Colier, who acknowledged the For the missionaries at Pilgerhut, importance of good understandings this refusal of granting passports to e u l n with the Indigenous populations, the their fellow Moravians was a final
| missionaries were standing between push to redirect their focus on the “ A the colonial administration and their new missions in Suriname. Not only t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P allies. He clearly had the feeling would the newly arriving people of a need for a restoration of the from Europe and North America go power relations between the colonial to Suriname instead of Berbice, but authorities, the Moravians and the at the end of the 1750s the Pilgerhut Amerindians. Given the strong community itself – both missionaries dependency of the colony on the and baptized Amerindians – largely Indigenous populations, however, it is resettled in Suriname territory. highly questionable whether his view After two decades of successful of the balance of power was close to missionary activities in Berbice, reality. the conflicting relationship with the x t o f R With the memoir and all other colonial authorities together with e l i g o n previous letters from Colier in mind, the increasing social unrest at the
the directors of the Society of Berbice plantations of the colony drove the ” continued their distrustful attitude Moravian missionaries to leave for regarding the Moravian community, Suriname. which they saw as an undesirable In contrast to the directors, presence in their colony. Thus, when Governor Rijswijk received the news the new Governor Rijswijk reported in about the plans of the missionaries one of his first letters to the directors to leave the colony as bad news. on his pleasant visit to the Moravian Being aware of the close relationship missionaries at Pilgerhut who, between the Moravians and some according to him, “seem to live there groups of Amerindians, Rijswijk wrote very quietly and simply”, the directors to the directors that if it were true rapidly replied that they were not to that the missionaries would leave be trusted.72 At the same time, they for Suriname, “I fear we will lose All made sure no more Moravian people Indians, at least two-thirds, which were admitted into Berbice, stating would cause irreparable damage, that “more than too many of those to Your Honourable and to the men were found on the colony”.73 whole colony”.74 Although the new
en dat de Herrenhutters daar aan selfs p. 11–13; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 2, onderdanig zijn”. 157–158. Dutch citation: “dat bereyds 72 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 124, meer dan teveel van die luyden op de p. 22–31. Dutch citation; “die colonie werden gevonden”. mijn voorkomen daar seer stil en 74 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 125, p. eenvoudig te leven”; NL-HaNA, 675–677. Dutch citation: “ik dat wij 1.05.05, inv. no. 2, p. 219–221. Alle de Indianen zullen verliesen, 73 NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 16, p. ten minsten twee derde, dat een 214–221; NL-HaNA, 1.05.05, inv. no. 17, inreparable schade zoude verwecken,
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 31 ” governor had a different view on the revolt – and the colonial society in
e l i g o n Moravian missionaries than both his general – was already visible in the predecessor and his superiors – he decades before 1763. In their reaction x t o f R did not see how “those people could to the presence (or absence) of cause us the slightest hindrance”75 – the Moravian missionaries and the he did have a similar concern for the interactions they had with various much-needed allies of the Society of Amerindian groups, the metropolitan Berbice. This time, however, it was and local colonial authorities were not the presence of the Moravians constantly focused on their much- that caused a threat to the colony, but needed allies. For the colonial society their plans to leave. In both cases, the of Berbice, maintaining access reaction of the colonial authorities to the cooperation of Indigenous t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P to the missionaries, and their strong groups was of vital importance. A focus on the Indigenous groups Instead of solely examining the interacting with the missionaries, Moravian missions in the Atlantic e u l n | “ tell us something about their own as either being part of a Moravian priorities, limits, and fears. global community or as missionary M a r i e K events in itself, the history of the mission in Berbice shows that it is CONCLUSION also part of the bigger story on the interactions and entanglements The Moravian mission in between Europeans, Africans, and Berbice came to a final end when the Americans in the early modern last missionaries living at Pilgerhut Atlantic world. Using the colonial fled the colony during the major slave archival material on the Moravian revolt of 1763. During this revolt, in community in Berbice, this article has which the colonial authorities were opened a new window through which on the edge of defeat, it was the this history can be investigated. It Amerindian military cooperation shows the colonial perspective on that played a central role. Without the interactions between European their help, “the Dutch colonial missionaries and Indigenous groups power likely would have failed” to while revealing the metropolitan and suppress the enslaved resistance.76 local authority’s priorities, limits, and The case of the Moravian mission fears. in Berbice shows that this important During the two and a half characteristic of the Berbice slave decades of the Moravian mission in Berbice, the relationship between missionaries and authorities was aan UWelEd Agtb en aande heele primarily defined by the (desired) colonie”. interactions of both parties with the 75 Idem. Dutch citation: “ik kan niet Amerindian populations. Whereas sien die mensche ons de minste in the beginning, this relationship hindernisse kunnen toebrengen”. was cooperative, which enabled the 76 Kars, 251.
32 Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 M a r i e K missionaries to establish a growing religious community, from the e u l n arrival of Governor Colier onwards,
| this had given way to conflicts “ A and confrontations. Because the t r a c i n g l I d s u e h P Moravians had religious objections to the demands of the metropolitan and local authorities and thus refused to fulfil the civil duties, some missionaries were banned from the colony. More importantly, explicitly calling them a threat to the colony, the decision was made to stop admitting new Moravian people into Berbice. In Suriname, there was x t o f R the opposite situation, where the e l i g o n Moravian missionaries were part of
the solution to the threat rather than ” the threat itself: they could keep the dangerous Maroon communities at a safer distance from the colonial plantations, the governor reasoned. The attitudes of the colonial authorities in Berbice and Suriname to the Moravian missions were thus very much influenced by their relationships with the Amerindian and Maroon populations respectively. It is in this way that the complexities of the colonial society of Berbice are reflected in the story of the short but successful mission of the Moravian Church on the northern coast of South America.
Global Histories: a student journal | VII - 1 - 2021 33