Colonialism in the Margins: Cultural Encounters in New Sweden and Lapland (The Atlantic World)

COLONIALISM IN THE MARGINS

THE ATLANTIC WORLD Europe, Africa and the Americas, 1500-1830

EDITORS

Wim Klooster (Clark University) Benjamin Schmidt (University of Washington)

VOLUME IX

COLONIALISM IN THE MARGINS Cultural Encounters in New Sweden and Lapland BY

GUNLÖG FUR

LEIDEN • BOSTON 2006

Cover illustration: New Sweden Tapestry, commemorating the arrival of Swedes in America. Tapestry designed by Kurt Jungstedt and woven in Aubusson, France, for the celebrations of the colony in 1938. With kind permission of the American Swedish Historical Museum, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

ISSN 1570–0542 ISBN-13: 978-90-04-15316-5 ISBN-10: 90-04-15316-0 © Copyright 2006 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands

CONTENTS

List of Illustrations ......................................................................

vii

Preface ........................................................................................

ix

Acknowledgements ......................................................................

xi

Introduction ................................................................................

1

Chapter 1. Power on the Periphery ........................................

17

Chapter 2. Interaction in the North ........................................

40

Chapter 3. Swedish Overseas Expansion ................................

88

Chapter 4. Rightful Owners—The Swedish Colony and Indian Land ............................................................................ 100 Chapter 5. Two Kinds of Middlemen .................................... 139 Chapter 6. Strangely Kept and Protected .............................. 171 Chapter 7. Alignments—The Interim Years ............................ 221 Chapter 8. Stories—Swedish Colonial Encounters in a Comparative Perspective .................................................... 247 Bibliography ................................................................................ 279 General Index ............................................................................ 293

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figures Figure 1. Frontispiece Schefferus’ The History of Lapland, 1674 ........................................................................................ Figure 2. Saami Man Worshipping Effigy, Woodcut ............ Figure 3. Anthropomorphic Club ............................................ Figure 4. Fort Trinity ................................................................ Figure 5. Lenape Family .......................................................... Figure 6. Campanius’ Lenape Catechism .................................. Figure 7. Commemorative Stamp ............................................

29 79 163 177 186 191 272

Maps Map 1. Map 2. Nova Map 3. Map 4.

The Lappmarks in Sweden ........................................ 43 Virginia, N. Angliae, N. Hollandia, Sveciae .......................................................................... 91 Lindeström’s Map of the Delaware River ................ 103 New Sweden and Lenapehoking ................................ 133

PREFACE

To some extent, this is a book of a kind that is not written anymore. It grew out of my dissertation work in the 1980s on Swedish policies towards indigenous peoples and how these policies were influenced by the colonial experiment in America.1 My point of departure was that there has been no serious treatment of Sweden as a colonizing power. In fact, the dominant view had it and still maintains that Sweden was not a colonial power and as a consequence, the New Sweden colony has been treated as a curious aside and never placed in the same context as Swedish expansion elsewhere. My hypothesis was that colonization in the North and in America were two expressions of Great Power ambitions that place Sweden firmly within the context of European colonialism, but also represent the two outstanding examples of Swedish encounters with indigenous populations. Comparing the two areas seemed logical. Since I wrote the dissertation, much has changed. Postcolonial influences have challenged the notion of hegemonic colonial projects. The searchlight is aimed at how identitied formed in complex relations between colonial centers and colonized peripheries, how discursive practices shaped formations of “white” and other racialized identities, and at discussions about dominance and hegemony. However, there is also a concern with economic, social, and sexual exploitation, and with physical and cultural violence. Frederick Cooper summarizes the postcolonial aspiration as a will “to confront the power behind European expansion without assuming it was all-determining and to probe the clash of different forms of social organization without treating them as self-contained and autonomous.”2 Neither “Europe” nor the “colonies” were monoliths and a simple dichotomy between “us” and “them” tends to elide the multitude of expressions that took shape in the processes of colonial encounters. Frederick 1 Gunlög Fur, “Cultural Confrontations on Two Fronts: Swedes Meet Lenapes and Saamis in the Seventeenth Century (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oklahoma, 1993). 2 Martin Daunton and Rick Halpern, eds., Empire and Others. British Encounters with Indigenous Peoples, 1600–1850 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999), 1–14; Frederick Cooper, “Conflict and Connection: Rethinking Colonial African History,” American Historical Review 99 (1994): 1517.

x

preface

Cooper and Ann Stoler criticize both historical and anthropological writing for assuming that colonial expansion was a unitary process and suggest that neither “discipline has sufficiently explored how the rulers of empire reexamined their own hegemony and altered their visions when faced with cleavages within their own camp and challenges from the people they were trying to rule. Colonial regimes were neither monolithic nor omnipotent.”3 The questions that interest researchers have therefore moved from a focus on colonial policies to a study of discourses and production of categorizations and their consequences for lived experience. Likewise, a realization of the significance of gender for any understanding of colonial relations has emerged and profoundly challenged a traditional focus on political and diplomatic history moved by male actors. No doubt, new and different challenges are waiting around the corner to remake the field of historical study. To a great extent I have been influenced by these trends, yet the present study also retains its original interest in Swedish interactions with indigenous peoples, primarily from the perspective of the Swedish administrators and officers. I believe there is need for study of Sweden’s colonies and that it needs to be done by confronting both previous explanations and omissions. I see its usefulness primarily in a larger context concerning European colonialism and its heritage today—a heritage that takes shape in mental constructions of “us” and “them,” and that confronts present-day nations and peoples with difficult political, economic, and cultural issues regarding land ownership and use, selfdetermination, and cultural survival.

3 Frederick Cooper and Ann Laura Stoler, eds., Tensions of Empire. Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World (Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press, 1997), 6.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I owe a great debt to people who encouraged me to believe in this book through its various phases. My dissertation advisers, Arrell M. Gibson and William T. Hagan, provided both encouragement and invaluable guidance. Stellan Dahlgren remained a knowledgeable discussion partner throughout the research stage and in subsequent years. Dag Blanck, Eva Österberg, Ulla Maria Fur, and Cheryl Jones Fur have generously read, and reread, various versions of the manuscript and offered insightful comments. My thinking has also benefited from opportunities to present parts of the study at various conferences and seminars, such as the Atlantic History Seminar at New York University, under the auspices of Karen O. Kupperman, and at the 2004 New Sweden History Conference, held in Wilmington, Delaware. Research was made possible through a research fellowship from the American Association of University Women, and time to rework the manuscript has been funded by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (The Swedish Tercentenary Foundation), as well as my department at Växjö University. I am also grateful for assistance from helpful staff at Riksarkivet and Kungliga Biblioteket in Stockholm, Uppsala University Library, and De la Gardiegymnasiet in Lidköping. This aid notwithstanding, shortcomings and inconsistencies in the text are all my responsibility. My greatest thanks go to Cheryl Jones Fur for unstinting support and enthusiasm for all my projects throughout the years.

INTRODUCTION

In 1638, the Swedish Crown sponsored a colonial venture to the region of the Delaware River on the east coast of the North American continent. The colony, New Sweden, did not remain long in Swedish possession. In 1655, Dutch troops invaded the territory and nine years later the English seized control. The colony had served as part of Swedish attempts at maintaining status as a major power in Europe. Swedes remained in the region preserving a distinctly Swedish identity well into the second half of the eighteenth century. Subsequent historians hailed the Swedish relations with the Native peoples of the Delaware valley as unusually friendly and peaceful. Such Eurocentric evaluation did not take into account the consequences of white colonization for the Lenapes, the people who inhabited the shores and tributaries of the south Delaware River. The meeting with Europeans eventually forced most Lenapes to embark on a long trek that ended for some in present-day Oklahoma and for others in Ontario, Canada. This book focuses on Swedish encounters and subsequent relations with Lenape and to some extent Susquehannock Indians. It is a topic that has held an enduring fascination for Swedes ever since the end of the Swedish colonial attempt in North America. In literature published about the colony and throughout commemorations, from the celebrations in Minneapolis in 1888 to the 1988 festivities in both Sweden and eastern America, friendly relations with the Indians have been a theme.1 Historian Nils Ahnlund stirred up a debate in 1937 when he suggested, in a presentation to the Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography, that Sweden was a weak and deficient colonizer. This outraged his listeners, who viewed seventeenth-century Sweden as a powerful nation. However, his comments regarding Swedish-Indian relations were unlikely to cause critique: That the Swedes have had a good hand with the natives is an old, and in terms of our national sensitivity, satisfying notion, which fortunately can be maintained, particularly if one looks at the larger picture . . . 1 For 1888, see Dag Blanck, “History at Work: The 1988 New Sweden Jubilee,” The Swedish-American Historical Quarterly XXXIX:2 (April 1988): 5–20.

introduction

2

New Sweden was always spared the furious Indian feuds of the kind that the larger Dutch establishment was exposed to.2

Ahnlund managed to portray Swedes as both active and dominant in that they “had a good hand with the natives,” and meek and passive as they were “spared the furious feuds.” These assertions worked together to produce the same conclusion—Sweden was a “good” colonizer. This dual approach, mild and strong at the same time, reverberated throughout the commemorations of 1938. The Crown Prince Gustaf Adolf said in his address from aboard the M.S. Kungsholm: The relations of the Swedish colonists to the Indians were always friendly. By treating the native tribes in a humane manner they won their friendship, and I think this policy explains why the Delaware Valley did not have the sanguinary Indian wars experienced in other colonies.3

US Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, expressed similar sentiments, although he began with laudatory comments on the strength of the Swedish Nation and its “great military leader, Gustavus Adolphus.” Strength, skill, and power resonated through his description of the Swedish colonizers and he added that although the first to arrive were men accustomed to war “no violence marked their arrival. Without threats, without force, following the manner of just men they chose the land they needed . . . No Indian wars, no savage massacres, mar the annals of New Sweden on the Delaware.”4 New Sweden and the peaceful relationship between Swedes and Indians served both to demonstrate Swedish power as a colonizer and its special democratic and humanistic principles. This way of thinking seemed to me to be incongruous. My understanding of Swedish expansion in Europe during the seventeenth century did not lead me to envisage a particularly peaceful kingdom. Swedish military forces wreaked havoc during the Thirty-Year War and to Russians, the Swedes were known as those who burn

2

Nils Ahnlund, “Nya Sverige. (Delaware). Föredrag i Svenska Sällskapet för antropologi och geografi Vegadagen 1937,” Ymer 4 (1937): 269. 3 Gustaf Adolf, Crown Prince of Sweden, in Observance of the Three Hundredth Anniversary of the First Permanent Settlement in the Delaware River Valley 1938 (US Gov. Printing Office, 1940), 21. 4 Cordell Hull, in Observance, 23–25.

introduction

3

houses and churches.5 I needed to understand if and why Swedish relations with Indians had been unusually amicable and how the memory of these interactions had been perpetuated. As I searched for a framework in which to place this study, I noticed that all previous writings on the subject compared Swedish colonial policies with those of other European colonizing powers. I saw one dimension that was missing—Swedish encounters with other indigenous peoples in colonial settings. The consolidation of the Swedish kingdom in the sixteenth century and the remarkable expansion during the seventeenth century brought Swedes into contact with many different peoples and cultures. In one other place did that involve an attempt at consolidating a presence in a region previously occupied by a people that had not yet been incorporated into the European world system. This place was Lapland, or Sápmi, the land of the Saamis in northern Scandinavia. The Saamis, a people practicing a mixed economy of fishing, hunting, and reindeer management, had occupied parts of the forests, lakes, and mountains for centuries. Early on in the seventeenth century, Swedish kings desired a clear passage to the Arctic Sea for strategic reasons and trade. Later, the forests of north Sweden took on significance for shipbuilding and iron production and dreams of silver and other precious metals grew in the minds of policy makers. Swedish authorities considered the Saamis to be subjects of the Crown since they paid taxes, and subsequently decided to control and educate them. This contact, analogous in time with the venture in north America, offers an important perspective in evaluating Swedish colonial policies in the Delaware region. So important in fact that a comparison allows a deeper understanding of the Lenape-Swedish interaction, which a comparison between Swedish and other colonial actors will not achieve. The study of Swedish-Saami interaction thus forms a backdrop for this exploration of Swedish-Indian contacts. Swedish relations with these peoples show similarities as well as significant differences. More importantly in this context, Lenape and Saami responses to Swedish presence display both similarities and differences.

5 Kimmo Katajala, “Early Modern People(s) in the Borderlands: Linguistic or Religious Definitions of ‘Us’ and ‘Other’,” in Border Crossings: Territory, History and Memory in North and East Europe, ed. Madeleine Hurd (forthcoming Stockholm: Gondolin, 2006).

4

introduction

Local Swedish officers and colonists had to adjust to those responses. Developing this framework did not prove as simple a task as I had imagined. The Saamis have received considerable attention by Swedish scholars. In their work, it has been impossible to ignore the impact of Swedish contact on Saami subsistence and culture patterns. However, while a number of studies have been devoted to the establishment of Swedish settlement in the north, and to the culture, religion, and language of the Saamis, few studies have discussed the Swedish presence in terms of colonial relations in the region. Even fewer have attempted to assess the general picture of Saami encounters with the kingdoms of Sweden, Denmark-Norway, and the Muscovite Duchy. In the process of constructing a background, I found that the Saamis’ experiences with European colonization deserve deeper study. It is not something that can be done within the framework of this book, but my hope is that this work may encourage other scholars to go deeper into that history. Also, I found no similar stories about special friendships emanating from this northern encounter. Maybe they are there, but in Swedish historiography, silence is the dominant discourse. The emphasis of my study is to investigate the economic, political, and cultural interaction in New Sweden against the background of developments in Lapland. Out of the comparison between the materials left from these encounters grew the fabric and organization of this book. First and foremost appeared the physical space of the land on which these peoples met and over which the Swedes negotiated and sought dominion. Land and ideas about ownership and use are fundamental issues in all relationships between indigenous populations and colonizers. Secondly, trade emerged as the primary economic activity bringing peoples together in these geographical locations. Control over trade routes, customs, and prices were of paramount importance for colonial instigators. However, it was equally significant for the Saamis and Indians and no doubt served as a powerful incentive for peaceful interaction. Finally, I became alerted to the breadth of every day interaction that transmitted cultural practices and interpretations in areas such as religion, disease and health, and law. The Swedish state emphasized the vital importance of missionary and educational activities throughout the century. Broadly, the focus of this book is on cultural encounters regarding land ownership, trade relations, and spiritual ways of life. I set out with a somewhat naive desire to seek to understand the

introduction

5

actual encounter between people from two distinctly different societies. Background reading certainly suggested significant differences in social organization between Sweden and Lenapehoking (the land surrounding the Delaware River where Lenape Indians lived). While Sweden was a complex society in the sense that its interlocking hierarchies controlled a large area under the management of a small elite, the Lenape people lived without such an aggregate and controlling center. Swedish history is richly researched and offers materials shedding light on administration, economy, and religious thought. Written sources even give clues to self-reflections and analyses of society. By contrast, the material on the Lenapes gives no such inside perspective. Instead, it is through descriptions of behaviors and organization that we must try to infer thought-patterns and beliefs. While differences at first may be the most striking, it is possible that the individuals compelled to deal with one another on the banks of the Delaware River had several things in common. Sweden and Lenapehoking were certainly different in terms of scale and organization, but their people shared the experiences of limitation which nature and environment imposed upon them. Negotiating life involved for both peoples a direct and inseparable connection between spiritual and physical worlds. Both peoples conceived of themselves as standing in a relationship with spiritual forces, an affiliation which had to be tended in the correct manner for the respective nations to prosper or for the individual to have success in farming, trading, or warring. The Swedish state could muster much larger material resources, but its future well being was still viewed in terms of an intimate connection between God’s grace and human duty. Sweden made the first move in the contact, with its decision to mount a colonizing expedition up the Delaware Bay. An unanticipated outcome, perhaps, was the intense necessity to deal with, negotiate with, and adjust to an alien Indian people. Lenapes, with little actual experience of European settlement, cannot have known the changes and challenges it would involve. Both peoples arrived at the riverside encounter with their own expectations, drawing from their own cultural stores in their attempts to control, handle, and understand all the implications of their meeting. The book begins with a brief introduction to Swedish society, and in particular to the views that were promoted regarding Saamis and Indians. It provides an intellectual setting for the policies suggested by various ministers and administrators, but it does not go far to

6

introduction

explain the actual experiences and consequences of encounter. Next follows an overview of Swedish-Saami contacts, where the significance of the issues discussed above are outlined. This leads into the more detailed study of interactions between Swedes and Indians regarding land, trade, and cultural exchanges in New Sweden. A next to last chapter focuses on the years after Sweden lost the colony, a period of supreme significance for the growth of the mythology surrounding the colonial venture. The final chapter draws out the lines of comparison and proposes an interpretation of the stories of peaceful encounters.

Colonialism and cultural encounters Suggesting that Sweden in the seventeenth century was a colonizing power is not uncontroversial. On the contrary, most historical overviews make clear that this is not an appropriate designation for the kind of expansion that occurred either in the north of the continent or in adjacent regions surrounding the Baltic Sea. New Sweden is more likely to be described as a colony, but its brief existence and scant impact seem to suggest that it did not confer upon Sweden the status of colonial power. Regarding Lapland, integration or internal colonization has more often been suggested as appropriate descriptions for the policy pursued by the government. The argument against discussing these two expansionary thrusts as colonization hinges on two interrelated ideas growing out of a general definition of colonization. This definition stipulates that colonization involves a sustained effort at controlling from a geographically distant home a new political organization that had been created by invasion or settlement.6 This definition can be interpreted to mean that colonization involved prolonged attempts by a group of people to settle and control a land area economically and politically. Successful colonization would lead to the establishment of institutions which determined the use of resources and imposed the cultural values of the colonizing group. Consequently, although New Sweden was a colony, Swedish activity in North America barely warrants the name of colonization,

6 See i.e. Jürgen Osterhammel, Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview (Kingston, Jamaica: Ian Randle Publishers, 1997), 10–11.

introduction

7

primarily due to its briefness in time and the minimal success of the project. In northern Sweden, Saamis and Swedes had long co-existed and since at least the fourteenth century the Saamis had paid tributes or taxes to Swedish or Norwegian kings and lords. During Sweden’s Great Power epoch, it is more appropriate to speak of attempts to integrate the Saamis into the realm on Swedish conditions and sometimes with the use of force, than to term it colonization. Swedish colonies were thus either too marginal or atypical to place Sweden alongside such proper colonial powers as Spain, England, or Holland.7 Daniel Lindmark discusses the terminology in relation to missionary and educational programs directed at the Saamis and finds that by using the term colonization in its strict meaning of cultivating new land and establishing new settlements, colonial power relations are obscured in Swedish research concerning Lapland. Describing Swedish expansion as an inner colonization makes it possible to view Saami country as an inherently Swedish territory. If one decides to define Sápmi as a part of the Swedish kingdom, then one simultaneously opts out of the possibility of placing the Swedish policy in Sápmi in a colonial context. Then the development in ’the Swedish Lappmarks’ inherently differ from the colonialism other European colonial powers practiced on other continents. Lindmark chooses to view the Swedish presence in Sápmi as an expression of colonialism because to do so is to admit that “the relationship between Swedes and Saamis has always been assymetric.”8 Acknowledging this asymmetry does not mean that one believes that all power was located within the colonializing culture, that colonial relations developed along a linear path, or that it is possible to draw neat lines between peoples and cultures. On the contrary, this study strongly suggests that power is unevenly and variously dispersed and that the colonizer was not in control of the 7 See three basic university texts in history: Göran Behre, Lars-Olof Larsson, Eva Österberg, Sveriges historia 1521–1809. Stormaktsdröm och småstatsrealiteter (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1985); Harald Gustafsson, Nordens historia. En europeisk region under 1200 år (Lund: Studentlitteratur, 1997); Sven Lilja, Europa Sverige Världen. Europeisk integration och expansion 1500–1800 (Lund: Studentlitteratur, 2001). Regarding the limited interest in historical research concerning Swedish colonialism, see Gunlög Fur, “Ädla vildar, grymma barbarer och postmoderna historier,” Historisk Tidskrift 4 (1999); Hanna Hodacs, Converging World Views. The European Expansion and Early-NineteenthCentury Anglo-Swedish Contacts (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2003), 19–26. 8 Daniel Lindmark, “Utbildning och kolonialism. Svensk skolundervisning i Sápmi på 1700-talet,” Tidskrift för lärarutbildning och forskning 3–4 (2004): 14 (my translation).

8

introduction

process. But it argues that Swedish expansion formed part of European colonial expansion and shared in the development of a colonial mentality that would have significant consequences for Saami and Lenape, as well as Swedish, culture and politics in the centuries to come. What did occur on both continents were extensive contacts between two (or more) different cultures, each with its own integral economic organizations, judiciary systems, and religious worlds. It is the meeting, interaction, and conflict between these which are the focus of this work. Culture, as I use it, refers to the complex ways in which humans make sense of their existence in their particular environment and time. The way we think culture is naturally ideological in nature, but the way we act out culture is both a materialist and idealist process. In this way, culture contains both production and reproduction, economic structures and subsistence patterns, social organization of power and classes, as well as religion and ideas and fears. I differ from those who understand culture as a unified concept; neither do I want to limit culture to the way people think about their community. Rather, cultures contain various interpretations and are fraught with contested meanings as a result of material as well as spiritual and ideological conditions and inequalities. American anthropologist Patricia Albers writes compellingly about “the cacophony of individual agency, action, and expression” that exists and resounds within “a series of shared constructs, albeit not always consensual, that make up not only the languages and worldviews in which we think and voice our ideas but also the social formations and material orders in which we realize and engage our actions.”9 Thus, Marx’s theory of the dialectic of history is a part of 19th century German culture, and so is Hegel’s idealist dialectics. The fierce debates concerning their interpretations fit into the same culture. This also means that I do not view Marx’s theory of history— or anybody else’s—as an absolute existing outside its cultural context. Neither do our concepts of such things as “history” or “God.” My use of culture, by necessity then, leads to a relativistic and constructionist standpoint. This, of course, may be challenged. What should one do with common human experiences such as death, sex,

9 Patricia C. Albers, “Marxism and historical materialism in American Indian History,” in Clearing a Path. Theorizing the Past in Native American Studies, ed. Nancy Shoemaker (New York and London: Routledge, 2002), 116.

introduction

9

or laughter? Those are indeed features known to all human societies (and the same may hold true for god and history) yet they are not, in themselves, indicative of cultures. What is indicative, is how human collectives make sense out of these conditions—or find them senseless. So are the artifacts associated with them, their meanings, as well as more or less clearly formulated practices. However, these practices are not always conscious, and that is where encounters between cultures play a significant part. Anthropologist Eric Wolf writes that “an analytic history could not be developed out of the study of a single culture or nation . . . human populations construct their cultures in interaction with one another, and not in isolation.”10 I believe that it is precisely in the encounter that cultures become most visible. Both to people themselves and to historians who look back to construct their own meanings for past cultures. Anthropologist Robert Grumet argues that “all encounters between strangers move ideas, people, and things across cultural divides.” This creates uncertainties that “make contact a volatile phenomenon whose causes and consequences are neither predictable nor controllable.”11 This does not mean that we should view cultural encounters as a meeting or clash between two unified systems. Rather, cultural encounters occur on many levels and often also aggravate or place in stark contrast the divided interpretations which members of one and the same culture hold. The meeting and confrontation between European cultures and indigenous communities becomes the prism through which cultural alterations and adaptations, in all the societies involved, may be focused. Marshall Sahlins has utilized this cultural clash in his analysis of Hawai’ian contact with James Cook’s expedition. He postulates that the purpose with cultural patterns is to recreate traditional roles and institutions. But the world, in this case represented by the unexpected meeting with another culture, does not need to follow the logic by which certain humans imagine it, and the end result is that “burdened with the world, the cultural meanings are thus

10 Eric R. Wolf, Europe and the People Without History (Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press, 1982, 1997), ix. 11 Robert S. Grumet, Historic Contact. Indian People and Colonists in Today’s Northeastern United States in the Sixteenth through Eighteenth Centuries (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1995), 8.

10

introduction

altered . . . and the structure is transformed.”12 Sahlins, in this argument, views structural change as a result of cultural transformation, with “the world” as a given. I do not believe that the relationship has to be uni-directional. Instead, cultural alterations can also be the result of structural change, such as has been described from Saami communities in connection with the development of an extensive form of reindeer herding.13 “The world” itself, in Sahlins’ text meaning the encounter with another culture, must also be analyzed. I therefore build on Sahlins’ theory of cultural transformation and attempt to add a reciprocal dimension to the parts involved. Societies, posits Carolyn Merchant, are formations made up of reciprocal relationships which interact dynamically. If viewed this way, rather than as homogenous entities, then can the “process of its breakdown and transformation to a new whole be described.”14 This seems similar to the idea expressed by Ramón Gutiérrez when he discusses culture as “a system of multivocal symbols, the meaning of which is frequently contested.”15 However, this way of looking at culture and social structure is by no means readily accepted by all historians or anthropologists. It may be equally common to view culture as “an integrated whole; an idealized body of customs, belief, and values acquired and differentially shared by humans as members of society.” Viewed this way, with an emphasis on integration, change in one realm of culture would lead to adjustments in other areas “so that equilibrium is maintained.”16 Such a view of cultural harmony seems to me unsuited to the often conflictual realities of cultural encounters, as well as threatening to increase a sense of timelessness and ahistoricity of culture, a state often imputed to

12

Marshall Sahlins, Islands of History (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985),

138. 13 Lennart Lundmark, Uppbörd, utarmning, utveckling (Lund: Arkiv avhandlingsserie 14, 1982). 14 Carolyn Merchant, Ecological Revolutions. Nature, Gender, and Science in New England (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1989), 4; Wolf, People Without History, 3. 15 Ramón A. Gutiérrez, “A Gendered History of the Conquest of America: A View from New Mexico”, in Gender Rhetorics. Postures of Dominance and Submission in History, ed. Richard C. Trexler (Binghamton, New York: Medieval & Renaissance Texts & Studies, 1994), 63. 16 Stephen R. Potter, Commoners, Tribute, and Chiefs. The Development of Algonquian Culture in the Potomac Valley (Charlottesville and London: The University of Virginia Press, 1993), 4; Gutiérrez, “A Gendered History,” 63.

introduction

11

oral culture and indigenous peoples. Ann McClintock has noted that the “prefix post- . . . reduces the cultures of peoples beyond colonialism to prepositional time. The term confers on colonialism the prestige of history proper; colonialism is the determining marker of history.”17 Just consider the terms used to divide historical time: precontact, pre- and post-colonial, peoples without a history, and so on. In most historical narratives change begins with the arrival of literate, colonial peoples into harmonious, stable cultures who have remained the same since time immemorial. In order not to subordinate all other cultures—and histories—to that of Europes’, Dipesh Chakrabarty calls for a stance which makes it possible “that the world may once again be imagined as radically heterogeneous.”18 Thus, it is important not to forget that internal factors also influence cultural change. Since the custom for so long has been to ascribe to indigenous communities no regenerative power of their own an emphasis on cultural contact runs the risk of becoming another way of asserting that change came with the white man. Anthropologists stress that change “is not some outside stimulus to which a culture responds; it is an autochthonous movement that relieves pressure inside the social system, in the process establishing new structures, new possibilities, new patterns of stress and antagonism.”19 Cultural patterns seek more than just to recreate tradition.20 Therefore, I want to add the perception of historical myths and rites as a way to “remember the future.” Native Americans, as well as Saamis, perceived history as circular, unfolding through continuing repetitions. Some of these repetitions required a certain amount of human ritual activity. This meant that certain situations reoccurred yearly and for these one could and ought to plan with the aid of myths and

17 Anne McClintock, Imperial Leather. Race, Gender and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest (New York and London: Routledge, 1995), 11. 18 Dipesh Chakrabarty, “Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History: Who Speaks for ‘Indian’ Pasts?” in The New Historicism Reader, ed. H. Aram Veeser (London: Routledge, 1994), 361–363. 19 Peter Newcomer, foreword to The Cheyenne Nation. A Social and Demographic History, by John H. Moore (Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1987), xvii–xx. 20 Jacques Le Goff, History and Memory (New York: Columbia University Press, 1992), 57–58. Goff comments that among oral cultures “[C]ollective memory seems to function in these societies in accordance with a ’generative reconstruction’ rather than with a mechanical memorization.”

12

introduction

rituals. In this manner, people “remembered” some of the events that were going to occur and within the framework of this knowledge one dealt with new or unique events (similar to the manner in which a driver is better equipped to parry an unexpected impediment on a well known road than on one traveled for the first time).21 Defense for and maintenance of traditions need not be viewed as retardation or a desire for stagnation, but instead as attempts to retain the “maps” which make it possible to find one’s way in a new environment. To destroy a people’s cultural reservoir of memories means to erase their capability to “remember ahead.” The future becomes a journey into an un-coded morass. This “body of ideas” construct a map, Albers suggests, that serves as “points of reference when negotiating various domains.” But Albers cautions against conflating the map with the territory, the map is not “the territory where the work actually unfolds.” The two must be analyzed apart in order to understand how they intersect. In doing so, it may be possible to envisage how colonization “created grounds for innovation and change but also resistance and continuity.”22

A Note on Sources Our sources are often frustratingly silent, especially on the point of internal Indian or Saami occurrences. It is easy to interpret this as lack of action, lack of change. It seems as though change or even conflicts only occur or erupt when they come into contact with Europeans. A viewpoint emphasizing the independence of indigenous agency, subject to constraints imposed by other groups and cultures just as would be true of European actions, leads to a perception of conflicts and conflict-solving as inherent aspects of native cultures. Conflicts and mediation formed significant parts of encounters between historical actors from similar as well as different cultures. The material concerning this period is rich but one-sided and varies from official reports and letters to travel diaries and missionary accounts. The character of the available material influences not 21 Cf. Caroline Rody, “Toni Morrison’s Beloved: History, ‘Rememory,’ and a ‘Clamor for a Kiss’,” American Literary History 7:1 (Spring 1995), 101. 22 Albers, ”Marxism,” 116, 117.

introduction

13

only the structure of the following chapters but most significantly the possibility of analyzing different actors. Any attempt to understand the histories of colonized peoples is hampered by the fact that Swedes or other Europeans wrote all the documents at our disposal. Every now and then a Lenape or a Saami was quoted, and glimpses of indigenous life and interpretations shine forth. Sometimes statements or actions emerge apparently unaltered, but the greater part of the picture is filtered through the minds and pens of alien observers. Anthropological studies of Lenape and Saami culture are vital for the reading of these sources. Such knowledge helps the historian to seek the background and motivation for Indian and Saami actions. The lack of indigenous sources remains a problem since Lenapes or Saamis are described through the eyes and mind of someone foreign, and often hostile, to their culture and economy. Knowing that makes it possible to discount some of the distortion, letting the picture appear of people acting and responding in fashions that made sense to them, and sometimes also to their adversaries. I have employed a methodology of reading anomalies in the material as windows into the workings of culture and cultural encounters. They prompt the researcher to seek an understanding of seemingly random or inexplicable comments in the material, and ask why certain things have been noted down, while others are obscured. The writing down or production of a written document is closely connected to the exercise of power. Within a society in which the majority are illiterate, or have little access to the process of writing, the written word is connected with a social dominance which enhances control over knowledge. It becomes more difficult for those without access to writing to keep information away from the elite. Thus, writing and printing in the seventeenth century was essentially elitist, and, to use an anachronistic term, un-democratic, while oral communication by its nature remained more accessible and less possible to control. Indians recognized this aspect of the written record and did not readily accept its validity or claims to dominance. Rather it was a contested notion, one that caused debate and tension. In 1684, Louis Hennepin wrote of one exchange with Indians: “We told them that we know of all things through written documents. These savages asked, ‘Before you came to the lands where we live, did you rightly know that we were here?’ We were obliged to say no. ‘Then you don’t know all things through books, and they didn’t

14

introduction

tell you everything’.”23 Another aspect of oral cultures which have an impact on our use of written sources is the fact that words take the shape of an action.24 Words are seen as having an enormous power in themselves. Thus, a curse is not harmless and the power in a name directly influences the bearer of that name. This perception of the power of words had a major influence on what Indians or Saamis would tell Swedish or other European contacts, and on the meaning and context of such verbal interactions as diplomacy and trade. *

*

*

The seventeenth century has been the object of many studies in both Swedish and American historical research. The policies of the various European powers that attempted to colonize the Americas have also received much attention. In this area, New Sweden deserves study. The colonial venture occurred during the expansive era of European colonization and shared many of the aims of its European neighbors. No previous study has focused on Swedish-Indian relations in New Sweden, and this contact, therefore, forms the major part of this study. The comparative inclusion of a chapter on SwedishSaami relations is warranted in order to see the relevance of the experiences in the small, seemingly limited Swedish colonial venture. The differences and the specific historical experiences of this particular colony are therefore of value in creating a more complete picture of the meeting between Europe and North America. The choice to add a comparative perspective to the account of Lenape-Swedish relations revealed, contrary to my expectations, the strength and possibilities of independent actions by those encountering the colonization attempts and the relative weakness and insecurity of the colonizer. This conclusion suggests that the past is more varied, and less linear than our hindsight may suggest. Our knowledge of an “outcome” as we may see it influence us to look for the causes which led to a particular development. Sometimes we are swayed to perceive this end as more or less predetermined. We know that Sweden (and other nation states) today control Saami homelands, and we know that the Lenapes no longer determine the events 23

Exhibition review, The Journal of American History 80:1 ( June 1993), 191. Walter J. Ong, Orality and Literacy. The Technologizing of the Word (New York and London: Routledge, 1982). 24

introduction

15

of human interaction along the Delaware River, thus we are tempted to look for indigenous weakness and European strength. We lose contact with the sense of peoples in past times to whom their future was no less inevitable than our own seems to us today. However, we lose also sensitivity for the enormity of the devastation which has occurred in the lives of Lenapes and Saamis. Independent, self-determining, culturally intact peoples have become domestic dependencies in two economically, culturally, and religiously dominant nations, and as a consequence today wage struggles to maintain dignity and cultural continuity, as well as economic subsistence. This work originated with the questions asked by many Swedes and quite a few others: “Did the Swedes treat the Indians better than their European neighbors? Why were relations so peaceful in the colony?” The questions may seem trivial, but they are not. They reveal both tremendous insecurity about our past as white colonizers, but also how entrenched we are in believing that good and bad—both—originate with “us.” I have a glib answer to these questions: It was peaceful in the colony because the Indians treated the Swedes so well. The more serious answer is in the following pages.

CHAPTER ONE

POWER ON THE PERIPHERY

Sweden as a colonizing power in the seventeenth century At the peak of military power, Sweden boasted an army that rivaled any in continental Europe. Children in Austrian and Czech territories turned frightened eyes towards the door at night, fearing the approach of Swedish troops and likening them to ogres of quite the same magnitude as demons and devils. Military expansion left a vast trail of devastation across villages and cities in the northern and northeastern regions of the European mainland. Victorious leaders brought loot back to estates in Sweden, remaking stolen objects into national treasures, while the soldiers—often mercenaries—and their following ransacked the countryside through which they passed. On the political stage, Swedish regents and councilors attempted to establish laws and statutes throughout new areas added to the realm through conquest. Sweden also sought its place among rivals in its colonization practices. Yet, the country was sparsely populated and predominantly agrarian and such a society could not in the long run support one of the most impressive armies in Europe. This tension between desires of expansion and limited means forced Swedish regents to develop intricate strategies to attract foreign investors who could take advantage of Sweden’s natural resources. Colonization, internal and abroad, became a means of augmenting the state as it did among so many of Sweden’s European rivals and allies. Moreover, colonization, colonial policies and practices brought Swedes into direct contact with peoples who practiced other political, social, and religious systems. Sweden—on the northern fringes of the continent, vast in area but sparsely populated—seems an unlikely candidate for great power status. Yet, for the major part of the seventeenth century Sweden vied with England, Russia, and Brandenburg/Prussia for dominance over northeastern Europe. As a consequence, Sweden’s entrance on the colony-seeking scene was predictable, yet an anomaly. How could such a poor nation support the weight of colonization, either internally

18

chapter one

or across the seas? At the beginning of the seventeenth century, the nation consisted of present-day Sweden minus the southern provinces of Skåne, Blekinge, and Halland, which all belonged to the rival power of Denmark-Norway, and of Finland, which remained part of the Swedish realm until 1809. Later in the century, expansionary wars extended the borders to include large areas in the Baltic region, Poland, and northern German principalities. Desire for strategic territorial expansion also led to attempts to augment the influence of the Swedish crown in the north of Scandinavia. Thus Sweden was and became a large nation in surface, with a small, scattered and unevenly distributed population. In the 1630s, Sweden and Finland together had only about 1.25 million inhabitants.1 Seventeenth-century Sweden was predominantly an agricultural country. More than ninety percent of the population lived as peasants in or around country villages. The overwhelming part of the production went into subsistence, while local trading between townsfolk and peasants provided the goods that could not be produced on the land. The peasant village was the principal unit and it commonly consisted of several farmsteads clustered together around a church with interlocking parcels of land in nearby fields, marshes, and woods. Towns were relatively few and far apart, but many of them grew as a result of the Baltic trade. The largest of these was Stockholm, also the capital, situated on several islands on the east coast of the Swedish mainland. Founded by King Gustavus Adolphus, Göteborg on the western coast soon developed into an important harbor and center for commerce. Merchants and other townspeople were few, but wielded an important influence on the economy of the country. Yet in comparison with other European nations Sweden’s towns were small and held little political sway.

1 This chapter only provides a brief overview of Sweden in the seventeenth century designed for those unfamiliar with this history. My ambition has been to base it on works in English whenever possible. Apart from the works cited in the pages, I also refer the reader to Michael Roberts, The Swedish Imperial Experience, 1560–1718 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979); David Kirby, Northern Europe in the Early Modern Period. The Baltic World 1492–1772 (London: Longman, 1990); Jan Lindegren, “The Swedish ‘Military State’, 1560–1720,” Scandinavian Journal of History 10 (1985); Stewart Oakley, Scandinavian History: 1520–1970. A list of books and articles (London: Historical Association, 1984), Michael Roberts, Gustavus Adolphus: A History of Sweden, 1611–1632, 2 vols. (London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1958); A.F. Upton, “Sweden,” in Absolutism in Seventeenth-Century Europe, ed. John Miller (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990).

power on the periphery

19

European visitors often derided Sweden for its lack of refined culture and the comparative simplicity of the aristocracy. Many viewed the Swedish peasant as poor and superstitious. Danish envoy, Peder Galt, in the 1620s described humble houses and wretched food, roads in deplorable condition, and a countryside where hunger ruled. Such descriptions should be viewed with the understanding of the purpose of the reports and may say as much about the author as about the objects of observation. However, there were noticeable differences between Sweden and its continental rivals. The nobility were few by European standards, barely making up more than one percent of the population. At the beginning of the century, the Swedish aristocrats scarcely distinguished themselves from the more wealthy members of the peasant class. Their austere appearance and habitation not only failed to impress foreign observers, but increasingly the nobility itself began to see it as a problem. With increased territorial expansion followed a need to forge a national economy which could support such policies, as well as an ideological commitment to “civilize the nation.” Continental European nobility, particularly French, appeared superior and the Swedish aristocracy sought ways to emulate their cultural mores. Developing the nation as a whole was to be achieved through the emphasis on trade and manufacture and the creation of towns, under the leadership and influence of the nobility.2 Depending on the exploitation of their land and labor, peasants were divided into three different categories. At the beginning of the seventeenth century roughly one-third of the land was so-called skatteland (tax land) to which freeholding peasants had title while paying taxes to the Crown. Another third were tenants of the Crown and paid rent directly to the Crown. The last third were tenants of the nobility and used land owned by the aristocracy and payed rent to them as landlords. On average, the actual tax and rent burden did not vary significantly between peasants of different categories. By 1654, this allocation had changed through royal donations, so that two-thirds of the farms paid rent to the aristocracy. An increasing 2

Nils Runeby, “Barbarei oder Zivilität? Zur Entwicklung einer organisierten Gesellschaft im 17. Jahrhundert,” in Europe and Scandinavia: Aspects of the Process of Integration in the 17th Century, ed. Göran Rystad (Lund: Esselte, 1983), 205–206; Margareta Revera, “The Making of a Civilized Nation. Nation-Building, Aristocratic Culture and Social Change,” in The Age of New Sweden (Stockholm: Livrustkammaren, 1988), 103–131.

20

chapter one

number of peasants probably became landless during the course of the century. Yet, it is important to note the comparatively strong position of the Swedish peasantry in relation to other countries. In general, peasants retained rights to their lands and farms, even when donations changed ownership conditions. Peasants also played a significant part in the local administrative and judicial units, the ting, and had political influence as one of the estates in the diet. Apart from such farmed land, the country contained large forests and mountains to which ownership had not yet been determined or contested. Land surrounding villages were held as commons and the large forests covering more than sixty percent of the entire territory remained to a significant part uninhabited. These areas became increasingly interesting to the Crown during the course of the century as the production of metals such as copper and iron increased.3 The seventeenth century saw the beginning of an integrated world economy, to the extent that large parts of the globe experienced directly or indirectly the influence of an international exchange of goods. Within Europe, the Netherlands and England emerged as the greatest powers based on their economic activities. Amsterdam developed into a commercial center and great amounts of capital flowed out over Europe, not least to the Nordic countries. The rise of the United Provinces, later the independent republic of the Netherlands, as a maritime power gave its community of merchants and mariners both political and economic influence. The economy of the Dutch Republic expanded rapidly until the last quarter of the seventeenth century, unscathed by the crises which caused the economies of the rest of Europe to stagnate. As leading merchant carriers in Europe, the Dutch early on formulated the policy of freedom of the seas. Such strategies fit in well with the early capitalist structure of the Netherlands, but brought them into conflict with surrounding nations which claimed principles that were more mercantilistic. Denmark, 3 Lindegren, “The Swedish ‘Military State’,” 320; Stellan Dahlgren, “Estates and Classes,” in Sweden’s Age of Greatness 1632–1718, ed. Michael Roberts (London: Macmillan, 1973), 106, 120–121; Sven A. Nilsson, De stora krigens tid. Om Sverige som militärstat och bondesamhälle, Studia Historica Upsaliensia 161 (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1990)—with an English summary, also reproduced as “Imperial Sweden: Nation-Building, War and Social Changes,” The Age of New Sweden, 25. In 1683, the Crown laid claim to all the northern forests through an edict concerning the great forests. This was a clear break with earlier policy. See Tomas Cramér, “Right of the Same to Land and Water,” in Lapponica. Essays presented to Israel Ruong May 26, 1963 (Lund: Studia Ethnographica Upsaliensia XXI, 1964), 51.

power on the periphery

21

for instance, demanded toll from Dutch ships passing through the sound of Öresund. Within this system, which from the point of view of Europeans could be regarded as a world economic system, Sweden held a position on the semi-periphery. Sweden depended economically on the Netherlands, but emerged as a political and military power which challenged Holland’s domination. Success in this effort hinged to a great extent on the ability to command the Baltic trade, which the Dutch considered the most important region of commerce. Amsterdam sent several fleets to Öresund in the period 1645–61 to operate on the side of the Nordic power which seemed the weakest. After 1660, Sweden emerged as the greatest threat and Dutch naval power supported Denmark in the wars with Sweden, first in 1658–60 and then in 1675–78.4 An expansionary Swedish policy had begun already in the midsixteenth century, one ambition being to take control of the trade routes to Russia. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, Sweden found itself at war with Poland, Denmark, and Russia. King Gustavus Adolphus, more renowned for his exploits during the Thirty Years War, commenced his reign (1611–1632) by successfully concluding the campaigns against these nations, giving Sweden control of the entire Baltic Coast unto the German principalities. The Netherlands’ great strength as a commercial center hindered, as well as aided Swedish trade ambitions. This led to a search for trade connections with England. Advances in 1651–52 resulted in a treaty of friendship between Sweden and England in 1654. The Dutch-English war (1652–54) undoubtedly encouraged the English to view Sweden as an appropriate ally. Trade expansion continued to be an important objective for Swedish policy, but it was not the only motive for the more or less incessant wars carried on between different constellations of enemies in northern and eastern Europe. As mentioned above the 4 Stellan Dahlgren and Hans Norman, The Rise and Fall of New Sweden. Governor Johan Risingh’s Journal 1654 –1655 in its Historical Context (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1988), 1–2; Violet Barbour, Capitalism in Amsterdam in the 17th Century (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1976), 52–55, 111–131, 136; Jonathan I. Israel, Dutch Primacy in World Trade, 1585–1740 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 6, 74–79, 90, 93–95; C.R. Boxer, The Dutch Seaborne Empire, 1600–1800 (London: Hutchinson, 1977), 5–6, 43, 90–91; Jan De Vries, The Economy of Europe in an Age of Crisis, 1600–1750 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), 21, 91–93, 116–120. For Sweden’s position see Immanuel Wallerstein, The Modern WorldSystem I (New York: Academic Press, 1974), 312–313 and The Modern World-System II (New York: Academic Press, 1980), 179, 217–218.

22

chapter one

land controlled by the aristocracy increased during the middle of the century, primarily due to royal donations. Aristocratic desire for land, however, could not be met in Sweden and war was a method of augmenting feudal land holdings. Extending the borders of the nation also became a necessity in order to pay for the expenses of warfare, since the scene of war was expected to sustain the troops. Once wars ended, new areas also contributed land which could be donated to officers and creditors in return for financial and other backing during the war effort. Absurdly then, war became an end in itself for states like Sweden. To a great extent, Sweden became a “military state” where the demands of war and the needs of the army were allowed to influence the entire structure of society and the distribution of resources.5 The costs of supporting the armies were overwhelming. Sweden’s primarily agrarian economy had a production of which only a small part could be turned into military use. The Crown struggled continuously to furnish items that could be used in international payments. To this end, the Crown strongly encouraged the mining and manufacturing sector. Sweden boasted a number of outstanding assets and therefore became an appealing field for foreign investment. Among these advantages were abundant mineral resources, inexpensive labor, ample waterpower, and substantial quantities of fuel. To these, the Crown now added liberal privileges for manufacturers. These advantages attracted Dutch and German merchants and manufacturers such as De Geer, Rademacher, and Momma, who became responsible for a remarkable upsurge of Swedish mining. During the first half of the century, Swedish copper from the mine at Falun practically held a monopoly on the European market. Later in the period, iron replaced copper as the most important ore and Sweden became for a while the world’s largest producer of copper and iron, which also led to self-sufficiency in armaments. England

5 Nilsson, De stora krigens tid, 273–274, 278, 284–286; Sven Lundkvist, “The Experience of Empire: Sweden as a Great Power,” in Sweden’s Age of Greatness 1632–1718, 30; Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 17; Wallerstein, Modern WorldSystems II, 214, 217. Wallerstein points out that Sweden also temporarily prevented England from taking over the Dutch position in the Baltic as the latter declined. See Lindegren, “The Swedish ‘Military State’,” 330–335, who has argued most succinctly for an interpretation of Sweden as a state entirely determined by the demands of war; cf. Michael Roberts, The Swedish Imperial Experience, chapter I.

power on the periphery

23

became dependent on Swedish (and Russian) imports as she was unable to increase her own production to necessary levels until the end of the eighteenth century.6 The Crown formed the center of influence and force, as in most other European nations, but until the arrival of formal absolutism in the 1680s, royal power was limited in accession charter and by law. In addition the råd (council of the realm), the Riksdag (diet), and the four estates (peasants, burgers, clergy, and nobility) had executive and legislative powers. The regents exercised a highly personal form of power, just as they took direct command in war (with the exception of Queen Christina, who nonetheless employed her prerogatives as regent at home). During substantial periods, the kings (and queen) were under age and regencies consisting of high-ranking nobility ruled the country during the minority. The most influential of these men was Axel Oxenstierna, close associate of Gustavus Adolphus and guardian for Christina. His work to build up a permanently organized administration set its mark on the years leading up to royal absolutism at the end of the century. Oxenstierna acted forcefully to develop trade and commerce, and established a special College of Commerce in 1651. He held the conviction that the only way Sweden could maintain its position as a great power was through becoming a commercial power as well.7 As the Swedish kings and regents moved to mobilize vast armies and strove to take a place among the powerful nations of Europe, an ideology of control and dominance increasingly vied with practices of arbitration and consensus in the interactions between rulers and subjects. In this context, the ting (local assemblies and district courts) assumed great importance, as did the Lutheran church. The meetings 6

Lindegren, “The Swedish ‘Military State’,” 309–313; Roberts, The Swedish Imperial Experience, 49; Anders Florén, Disciplinering och konflikt. Den sociala organiseringen av arbetet: Jäders bruk 1640 –1750, Studia Historica Upsaliensia 147 (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1987), 2; De Vries, Economy of Europe, 107–108 points out the importance for the Swedish iron industry of Dutch know-how and capital, as well as aid from Dutch distributors; Wallerstein, Modern World-Systems II, 204–206, 208–211. Wallerstein points out that as long as the Dutch did well, so did the Swedes; B. Boëthius, “Swedish Iron and Steel, 1600–1955,” The Scandinavian Economic History Review VI:2 (1958), 150–151, shows that Swedish iron exports rose from 6,500 tons in 1620 to 17,000 tons in 1650 and exceeded 30,000 tons in 1700. 7 Nilsson, De stora krigens tid, 279–280, 288–291; Lindegren, “The Swedish ‘Military State’,” 307–308. Political interests could also cut across the lines dividing different estates, and the above is only a simplified depiction of the political structure; Roberts, The Swedish Imperial Experience, 100.

24

chapter one

at the ting dealt with matters of a general fiscal and administrative nature, as well as adjudicating civil and criminal cases. These local assemblies also served as forums for interaction between the Crown (or its servants) and the subjects of the realm. New extraordinary taxation, for instance, could not be levied without agreement from the local assemblies, or from the representatives of the estates in the Riksdag. This gave the peasants a certain, though naturally limited, amount of influence on decisions concerning their lives and subsistence. Monarchs and councilors remained aware of the risk of rebellion or disturbance due to the burden of taxation and conscription, and sought to establish the legitimacy of the Crown’s demands.8 Characteristic of the Swedish state during the seventeenth century was the growth of a control system that included a centralized bureaucracy, regional administration by county governors, courts increasingly constituted of men with legal training, and, as a very significant part, the representatives of the state church. This administration of the nation remained a strong and continuous influence throughout the period. New organizational and disciplinary measures were added to aid in the process of developing an empire. A system of higher courts was installed, and universities expanded. However, it was the Church that came to hold the most important position in the civilization efforts within the country. Since Sweden’s establishment as a national state in the mid-sixteenth century the Lutheran church had been the only recognized church and the king himself was its head. Church organization came to play an increasingly important role in ideological as well as fiscal control. The clergy were required to record all those obliged to pay taxes, and all those that moved between villages, thus giving the authorities an accurate picture of the supply of potential soldiers. The control aspect of Church registers increased with the Ecclesiastical Law of 1686. However, the main objective of the registers was to aid and record the eradication of Catholic and non-Christian beliefs and practices among the parishioners. Focusing the control instruments of State and Church is but one perspective on Sweden in this period. Historians have also identified in the practices of arbitration and negotiations in local secular and religious courts an ideal of consensus that could take the edge off disciplinary demands. Taxes were contested and adjusted, peasants protested the conscription into the armies, and courts often 8

Lindegren, “The Swedish ‘Military State’,” 322–323, 332–333.

power on the periphery

25

served as arbitrators. This also created a situation rife with crisscrossing practices and demands that for a long time allowed for the continuation of pre-Reformation practices and beliefs. In spite of severe penal codes and increasing efforts at control, popular forms of worship and superstition remained. Foreign visitors as well as pastors deplored the use of magic and the existence of superstitious customs. The evidence suggests however, as in other European nations, a growing difference between popular culture and that of the upper classes.9 The role and responsibilities of the nobility underwent great changes during the century as well and many members of the aristocratic elite emphasized that it was their task to educate and civilize the peasant population. One of these was Per Brahe d.y. (the younger). His ideas are of interest since he was a personal link between the efforts to colonize in North America as well as in the northern parts of the Swedish realm. Brahe, who held the position as minister of justice (riksdrots), was also governor of Finland. He wrote extensively on his travels in the eastern section of the kingdom and expounded on the deficiencies he found and suggested strategies for development. He regarded the Finnish-speaking peasants, living far from the coasts where Swedish was spoken, as deplorably lacking in civilized manners, not because of any constitutional defects, but due to a lack of contacts abroad and proper influences from educated individuals.

9 Ibid., 334–335. Far from all clergymen sided with the authorities. Many supported the peasantry in their opposition to conscription and taxes. Dahlgren, “Estates and Classes,” 115–116; Hilding Pleijel, Hustavlans värld. Kyrkligt folkliv i äldre tiders Sverige (Stockholm: Verbum 1970), 7–8, 164, 172; Runeby, “Barbarei oder Zivilität?” 205–206; Peter Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe (London: Temple Smith 1978). Much of recent historical research regarding the seventeenth century questions the extent and severity of the disciplinary program and emphasizes the balance and arbitration evident in most interactions, and cautions against assuming that church and state always served the same interests. These are persuasive findings; however, I argue that the evidence for an ideology of social discipline is there and becomes quite pronounced in state sponsored ventures into adjacent and overseas territories. See i.e. Eva Österberg, “Bönder och centralmakt i det tidigmoderna Sverige. Konflikt—kompromiss—politisk kultur,” Scandia 55:1 (1989), 73–91; Eva Österberg and Sølvi Sogner, ed., People Meet the Law. Control and Conflict-Handling in the Courts (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 2000), esp. chapter 7; Eva Österberg, “Gender, Class, and the Courts: Scandinavia,” in Crime History and Histories of Crime. Studies in the Historiography of Crime and Criminal Justice in Modern History, ed. Clive Emsley and Louis A. Knafla (Westport, Conn., and London: Greenwood Press, 1996), 59–60; Malin Lennartsson, I säng och säte. Relationer mellan kvinnor och män i 1600-talets Småland (Lund: Lund University Press 1999), 333–352.

26

chapter one

The absence of civility was evident in their licentiousness, lack of respect for authority, complaints against their superiors, and preference for their own ways “which they value as the highest good.” They also maintained a pattern of alternating gluttony and starvation, which Brahe considered inexcusable shortsightedness on their part. They did not love labor above all, but worked hard as long as needed and then proceeded to enjoy their leisure. Finally, he noted that they had a great interest in religion but were subject to great superstitions. Brahe, in his program for improving the civility of this people, emphasized increasing centralization of state and church control and the establishment of a school system. This would bring the erring people to greater obedience and give them a Christian attitude towards work. What Brahe described was a deep-seated conflict between disparate conceptions of time, signifying different modes of production. Similar views and programs would also follow from the meeting with Saamis and Indians. The connections between the uncouth Finns and the Saamis were clear in the literature of the time. However, Brahe also extended his concern to the colony in America, and expounded upon the instructions to the Swedish governor in New Sweden. These demonstrate a similar approach, and a similar sense of obligation, in relation to Saamis and Native Americans. Brahe represented the view that the nobility should be living examples for ordinary people both in their official administrations and in the restraint of their personal lives. Similarly, the representatives of the Lutheran orthodoxy taught the virtue of discipline emanating hierarchically from God, to the King, and to every family father. As Brahe did, church leaders believed education to be the supreme method by which to bring all citizens to the correct worship. Violence, however, was at times both acceptable and advisable. This derived from the orthodox view of the collective relationship between God and the nation. Individual idolaters threatened the whole nation with God’s wrath and thus it was the responsibility of the State to punish all wrongdoers. Heavy punishment awaited those who neglected to visit church on Sundays, and the religious life of each individual became regulated in every detail.10 10 Nils Runeby, “Ett fostrat folk,” in Braheskolan under fyra sekler, ed. Gunnar T. Westin (Stiftelsen Braheskolan på Visingsö, 1980), 13; Runeby, “Barbarei oder Zivilität?” 211; Pleijel, Hustavlans värld, 30–34, 207; Karl Fahlgren, Hädare och kättare i Norrland under vår stormaktstid (Umeå: Botnia, 1969), 11–12; Bill Widén, “Stormaktstidens prästerskap och lapparnas mytologi,” Historisk Tidskrift för Finland (1961): 154, 163.

power on the periphery

27

“Of Various Qualities . . . More Inclined Towards Bad than Towards Good” The Swedish political and cultural elite—generally the same individuals—by no means remained unaware of the existence of Saamis in the north and American Indians across the ocean. They were heavily influenced by continental ideas and representations concerning the peoples encountered in the New World. By the mid-seventeenth century, the image of the “Indian” had already acquired the characteristic of a prism for a critique of civilization among learned men in Europe. The Saamis living in the far north came under scrutiny as an exotic people who could also be employed in comparisons between nature and society, yet their actual presence in the Swedish realm forced a more critical evaluation of their behavior as subjects of the Monarch. The discourse concerning these other peoples turned from scant interest towards increasing exoticization during the course of the century, yet both images and actual encounters with Indians and Saamis often resulted in a verdict of barbarism. The following is an overview of the development in Sweden of ideas concerning Saamis and Indians during the course of the seventeenth and early eighteenth century. Swedish nobility and scientists followed the continental custom of collecting exotic objects from various parts of the globe (sometimes as part of war booty) as well as from within the country’s borders. During the second half of the seventeenth century, the greatest collector of all was Count Magnus Gabriel De la Gardie, who as part of his activities encouraged the study of Lapland’s nature and culture. His call for collections of a variety of descriptions and objects concerning the Laplanders (Saamis), in which he explicitly linked Saamis and Indians, led to the first monumental work on Saami culture, Johannes Schefferus’ Lapponia. This work, in part aimed at refuting continental propaganda claiming that the Swedish army employed Saamis to use witchcraft against their enemies, was first published in Latin in 1673. It was primarily aimed at an international audience and was quickly translated into English, German, French, and Dutch—but not into Swedish until nearly three centuries later! Schefferus, born in Strasbourg and from 1648 professor of rhetoric at Uppsala University, based his account on narratives and descriptive contributions from a number of pastors with experiences from the Lappmarks. Another collector of note was Count Carl Gustaf

28

chapter one

Wrangel who at his castle Skokloster displayed objects from around the world, with North American Indian artifacts among the most exotic treasures. Such displays served to enhance the collector’s own status, and in the case of Wrangel, were an important part of his strenuous effort as recently knighted to earn a position among the established aristocracy. Wrangel may also exemplify the highly romanticized view of American Indians which had already begun to take shape in higher circles in Sweden when he participated in courtly costume parties where the aristocratic guests dressed up as Indians.11 During the course of the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries a limited number of works appeared in Sweden, and in Swedish, describing travels to previously unknown parts of the world. Peter Lindeström, a military engineer who accompanied Governor Johan Risingh to New Sweden in 1654, was determined to take advantage of the fascination with the exotic. Towards the end of his life he conveyed his notes and memories of the almost two years which he spent in the Swedish colony to prose and in 1691 dedicated the work to the young king Karl XII, in the vain hope of generous remuneration and successful publication. Yet another effort to draw on the interest was made by Thomas Campanius Holm, who arranged notes from his grandfather, Johan Campanius who served as pastor in New Sweden 1642–1648, with assorted tidbits from other voyagers to the American continent. His book Kort Beskrifning om Provincien Nya Swerige uti America Som nu förtjden af the Engelske kallas Pensylvania is a mesmerizing concoction, as were most of that which was written at the time, of acute observation and myth. Both works, just as the accounts that Schefferus built his description on, can be used as sources to encounters between Swedes and the peoples in Lapland and North America, but they must also be appraised as part of a growing trend towards exoticization and distancing of these peoples.12 11 In English as The History of Lapland, wherein Are shewed the Original, Manners, Habits, Marriages, Conjurations, &c. of that People (Oxford, 1674); Arne Losman, “Skokloster— Europe and the World in a Swedish Castle,” in The Age of New Sweden, pp. 85–102; Wilhelm Östberg, ed., Med världen i kappsäcken. Samlingarnas väg till Etnografiska museet (Borås: Etnografiska museet, 2002), 16–21. 12 Regarding the descriptions of Indians, Swedish authors frequently referred to texts by English, French and German writers. For analysis of these see Gordon M. Sayre, Les Sauvages Américains. Representations of Native Americans in French and English Colonial Literature (Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press 1997); Margaret T. Hodgen, Early Anthropology in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1964) discusses European perceptions of ”others” and places the work of Linneaus in a European context. His work

power on the periphery

29

Fig. 1. Frontispiece Schefferus’ History of Lapland, 1674 Frontispiece for Johannes Schefferus’ The History of Lapland, published in English in 1674. The image is a copperplate engraving. While the ethnographic objects, such as the drum, skis, sled, and reindeer, show a connection to the Saamis, the people pictured are modeled on continental European images of strangers. Note especially the beard on the man to the right. Reproduction: Repro- och fotoenheten/Kungliga Biblioteket. (The Royal Library, National Library of Sweden)

30

chapter one

Swedish writers faithfully followed continental examples in their form and content. Typically, depictions of both Saamis and Indians contained chapters such as “Wedding, church- and feast ceremonies,” “Concerning their houses and dwellings,” “Concerning their diet and procurement of foodstuffs,” “Concerning their heathen idolatry and superstition.” Negative descriptions flourished. Tobias Biörck, among the foremost proponents of this tradition, in 1731 finished off his description of the Susquehannocks, who the Swedes called Minquas, with the verdict: “For the rest, in all things there is so much that is deficient in them.” Andreas Sandel, pastor in Wicacoa congregation in New Sweden in the beginning of the eighteenth century wrote: “They . . . keep no diet. . . . They do not use tables or chairs. They do not have houses but only huts of bark during the summer.” Over and over, Swedish observers reiterated that Indians in general and sometimes Saamis did not live in specific places, did not keep regular meal times, did not cover their bodies, and did not have kings and governments. External traits carried enormous weight in the assessment of inner qualities. Thus, we find page after page depicting Indian and Saami clothing and hairstyles. Face and body paint, tattoos, the custom of shaping hair with the help of animal fat, decorations from feathers, shells, quills, or metals were noted in detail. In conjunction therewith followed judgments. “They paint themselves in all kinds of ways in the face with all kinds of colors, so that they look inexpressibly horrible, when they think themselves to be adorned in the best manner,” declared Peter Lindeström about the Lenapes. Rites and ceremonies which resembled Swedish ones were hailed as laudatory. The Saami custom of clearly regulated marriage contracts was described in detail and with obvious respect. Johannes Tornaeus, pastor in the northern district of Torneå, emphasized the marital fidelity he had found proof of and held up the care spouses showed for each other as an example to be followed. Yet, to his horror he found licentiousness among unmarried men and women to be common and not considered sinful. Promiscuity was by all descriptions frequent also among Lenapes and Susquehannocks. Peter Lindeström wrote, with just a hint of fascination, that “these Indians are a bestial people and have their intercourse together with and the travels of his disciples lie beyond the scope of this study but it came to have a lasting influence on later perceptions of indigenous peoples in all corners of the world. See Gunnar Broberg, Homo sapiens L. Studier i Carl von Linnés naturuppfattning och människolära (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell 1975).

power on the periphery

31

father, mother, brother and sister like irrational brutes, no one knowing rightly who is the father of the child.”13 The Swedish crown and Church worked together to implement increasingly stricter policies regarding sexual practices among the population of the realm. In fact, acts against regulations on sexual practices constituted the largest number of criminal cases brought before the courts in the seventeenth century. Both pre- and extra marital connections were prosecuted with growing vigor with the ultimate aim of upholding hierarchical relationships within the family and between the sexes as a model of the all-embracing association between God and the state. In this effort, arguments borrowed from encounters with other cultures could be used as tools. Comparisons with native sexual practices served to distinguish between civilized and uncivilized behavior, as well as demonstrate the necessity to monitor the behavior of the mass of uneducated Swedish subjects. Officials in the New World did not fail to point out inadequate morality among their own and other European colonials. This technique of using encounters with non-Europeans to lecture one’s own people is particularly apparent when words or sermons were placed in the mouths of Indians. Erik Biörck, pastor in Christina congregation 1696–1714, who agonized over the weakness of his fellow Swedes quoted Indian acquaintances as saying that their aversions to Christianity stemmed from seeing Christians “drink, make noise, fight, murder, commit adultery, steal, lie, cheat, be greedy, merciless, unjust and overlook such sins.” Although each one of these charges could be supported through references to historical sources, the accusation was primarily of an internal European concern. The language itself suggests that it was a Swedish construction, perhaps 13 On the development of early anthropological descriptions see Hodgen, Early Anthropology, 168, 178–194. Examples of chapter headings from Samuel Rheen, En kortt Relation om Lapparnes Lefwarne och Sedher, wijdSkiepellsser, sampt i många Stycken Grofwe wildfarellsser, in Bidrag till kännedom om de svenska landsmålen och svenskt folkliv 17:1 (Uppsala, 1897); Olaus Petri Niurenius, Lappland eller beskrivning över den nordiska trakt, som lapparne bebo i de avlägsnaste delarne av Skandien eller Sverge, in Bidrag till kännedom 17:4 (Uppsala, 1905); Tobias Eric Biörck, The Planting of the Swedish Church in America, Translated and ed. by Ira Oliver Nothstein (Rock Island: Augustana Library Publications 19, 1943), 33; “Andreas Sandel to Jesper Swedberg, 28 June 1714,” in Andreas Sandels dagbok 1701–1743, ed. Frank Blomfelt (Uppsala: Erene Bok & Musik AB, 1988), 81; quote from Peter Lindeström, Geographia Americae with an Account of the Delaware Indians, Translated by Amandus Johnson (Philadelphia: The Swedish Colonial Society, 1925), 193, 196. A better translation of the Swedish original would be to substitute “soulless beasts” for Johnson’s “irrational brutes.” Johannes Tornaeus, Berättelse om Lapmarckerna och Deras Tillstånd, in Bidrag till kännedom 17:3 (Uppsala, 1900), 46; Schefferus, History of Lapland, 14.

32

chapter one

with some foundation in Indian observations, but more obviously a didactic method of directing criticism at Swedish countrymen and women.14 In a similarly pedagogic vein, bishop Jesper Swedberg used a quote taken from French philosopher and bishop Pierre Daniel Huet, once briefly a guest at Queen Christina’s court, to illustrate the need for reform in Sweden. These wild and terrible caribian Americans violently accuse our Europeans’ for their greed and often rebuke them kindly and wisely: ‘What is the purpose, brother? Or what do you seek? Would not the earth, this good mother, who nourished your ancestors, also feed you . . . Behold, here I am and other heathens and my fathers, they have lived beautifully, and we do the same . . . Our health is strong, our bodily strength reliable, and we live long lives. You on the other hand are weak, emaciated, fragile and shortlived’.15

The quote is interesting as an expression of how ideas about American Indians were used to comment on European life. Even though given in the form of a quote, it is difficult to imagine an actual Indian expressing himself in this manner, describing himself as heathen. It is more probable that Huet based the quote on observations which revealed European inability to manage in the American wilderness. Pastors and missionaries reported about the manners of the wild Indians in such a way as to inspire moral edification among their own people. The writers used Indian critique of European lifestyles, frequently reported as responses to cultural or religious conversion attempts, as moral stories aimed at the self-reflection of their readers. Descriptions of Indians and Saamis were not necessarily false, but selective observations served as much to support an idea of civilization as to offer useful and unbiased knowledge. Particularly interesting in this regard are the varied reports of purported nakedness. Some evaluations of what constitute nakedness are surprising and understandable only if we see the concept of nudity as symbolic for

14 Jan Sundin, För Gud, staten och folket: brott och rättskipning i Sverige 1600–1840 (Stockholm: Institutet för rättshistorisk forskning, 1992); People Meet the Law, 274. For a criticism of Swedish colonial morality, see Reuben Gold Thwaites, ed., The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents: Travel and Explorations of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France, 1610 –1791, vol. 39: 1647–48 (Cleveland: Burrows Brothers, 1896–1901), 135. Biörck is quoted from Jesper Swedberg, America Illuminata (Stockholm: Proprius Förlag, 1985), 70. 15 Swedberg, America Illuminata, 71.

power on the periphery

33

the contrast between civilization and savagism—a distinction it became particularly important to maintain on the fringes of the civilized state, such as in the American colonies or in the forbidding northern reaches of the realm. That Susquehannocks, wearing “only 1/2 ell wide piece of cloth . . . Just as a bather,” were considered naked might be understandable. But what was one to make of the Saamis who lived in the harsh climate of the North? Yet Schefferus notes that it is a fact worthy of our attention that they sleep naked under their pelts during both summer and winter! Nudity figured prominently among the conditions of savagery which could be viewed as proof of the Scriptural doctrine of the Fall. Thus, as a metaphor for a state of degeneracy it was more valuable than as a concrete description. As a by-product, however, the concern with nakedness spurned observations of native material culture which might otherwise have gone unrecorded.16 With time the image of a savage, barbarian wild man clarified. Even before the actual contact between Swedes and Indians, the former employed the term vildar or wild men for the latter. The original image associated with this word probably derived from an ancient concept of the wilder Mann in Germanic lore. This mythical figure lived a life of amoral self-fulfillment in the wilderness, ignorant of God and morality. He was described as naked, covered with hair, a being in-between human and animal. The idea of the wild man in the forest has much in common with the concept of the Ignoble Barbarian, which formed the counterpart of the Noble Savage. Both stereotypes emerged out of the earliest descriptions the first European visitors wrote of Native Americans in the Caribbean. In the eyes of many European writers the Noble Savage became the image of an individual unspoiled by civilization and existing in a natural state. He embodied the yearning for lost innocence and the simplicity of life before the Fall and lived by an ethic that somehow preceded and was superior to Christianity. However, some travelers’ accounts were impossible to combine with the Noble Savage-image and stories of contradictory behaviors developed into the idea of the Ignoble

16 Hodgen, Early Anthropology, 378; Karen Ordahl Kupperman, Indians & English. Facing Off in Early America (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2000), 49–53; “Printz to Brahe, April 12, 1643,” in Amandus Johnson, The Instruction for Johan Printz, Governor of New Sweden (Philadelphia: The Swedish Colonial Society, 1930), 150; Schefferus, History of Lapland, 90.

34

chapter one

Barbarian. These accounts construed Indians as savage beasts, characterized by a lack of goodness, moral purity, and righteousness, and purported cannibalism testified to the depth of their depravity. Accordingly, based on the selective evidence travelers presented, a Noble Savage lived in harmony with his natural environment, while the Ignoble Barbarian somehow shared all of the vices of European civilization without any of its benefits. Members of the Swedish colony and interested parties in Sweden could have been, and some obviously were, familiar with Sebastian Munster’s Geographia universalis, printed in 1550 as one of the most respected works on Geography. Amerigo Vespucci’s fanciful descriptions of his travels were translated into German. It is likely that Swedish nobles and intellectuals learned of them from their intimate contacts with Germany. King Gustavus Adolphus and his officers had access to several early seventeenth century works on Geography and Cosmography. Much of this contained only hearsay and vulgar generalizations drawn from Columbus’ experiences in Central America. The interest in the new people grew throughout the century and works by well-known writers such as Pierre Daniel Huet and Louis Hennepin also reached Sweden. Both stereotypes concerning New World inhabitants may be detected in Swedish notions and writings. The epithet vilde (wild man) contained both the image of the noble and unadulterated natural man and the abominable barbarian. This notion influenced both Swedish attitudes and vocabulary when describing Indians.17 An early example of the romanticized conception of the Noble Savage living in an unspoiled state can be read in a reverent letter the young student Johan Paulinius sent to his older friend Johan Risingh upon the latter’s departure to New Sweden in 1653. Paulinius extols the virtues he expects Risingh to find in the indigenous inhabitants and polemicizes against the notion of barbarians, “whom I suspect from deceitful vanity have been shown as more cruel than they are in reality. As they are in possession of the same reason, which inculcates in us milder and more lofty sentiments.” Education 17 Robert F. Berkhofer, The White Man’s Indian. Images of the American Indian from Columbus to the Present (New York: Vintage Books, 1978), 7, 13; Margaret Rubel, Savage and Barbarian. Historical Attitudes in the Criticism of Homer and Ossian in Britain, 1760 –1800 (Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company, 1978), 12–15; Sayre, Les Sauvages Américains, 124–129; Jan-Öjvind Swahn, “En värld av rikedom och monster,” in Det Nya Sverige i landet Amerika. Ett stormaktsäventyr 1638–1655, ed. Rune Ruhnbro (Höganäs: Wiken Förlags AB, 1988), 124–125.

power on the periphery

35

would undoubtedly bring them to perfection. The meeting with the Indians will also afford Risingh a glimpse of living history, since the former still live as “our first parents”: Because they lived in the same manner in the forests among the dens of the wild animals, they walked around naked in the same manner, or with only a smaller part of the body covered, and similarly they eventually discovered agriculture, driven to this by necessity or led to it by reason. Instead of iron they used sharp rocks. With various colors and with a wonderful artistic ability [they] combined bird feathers [that] substituted for paintings. And finally, since they each day have made ever greater progress, they have finally reached they pinnacle of culture, where we are now.18

With such prospects, there could be no doubt concerning what to expect and the Indians would only benefit from the exchange. Such expressions of optimistic progressions from lower to higher states are not common from this period and foreshadow enlightenment concepts of development stages. However, Paulinius in his emphasis on the edifying influence of Swedes on Native Americans joins other writers who saw the spread of civilization as the best justification for colonization. Other men thought it doubtful if humans designated as savages could possess the same mental faculties as educated Europeans. Many judged that language constituted the ultimate proof of intellectual capacity. Consequently Peter Lindeström could write concerning the Lenape tongue “that it is a poor language, that one word may have many meanings.” Schefferus concluded about Saami speech that it appeared to have been construed from neighboring languages, particularly Finnish, even though there existed certain words that were uniquely Saami. This allegedly derivatory character of the language served as a sign of inferior intelligence. Other scholars, on the other hand, exerted themselves to prove that Saamis and Indians were capable of improvement. Experiences from the Saami school in Lycksele showed, according to Olaus Petri Niurenius who was one of its masters, “that their mental gifts are not below that of other Swedes, if they are nurtured through education and usage.” This argument is an important contribution to one of two identifiable lines of thought concerning where to place the “other” peoples which 18 Erik Gren, “Ett bidrag till Nya-Sverigeminnet. Johan Paulinius’ avskedsbrev till Johan Risingh 1653,” Lychnos (1938), 398.

36

chapter one

developed during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Those who argued that Saamis and Indians were endowed with less capacity than European peoples foreshadowed racist theories. But, as in Niurenius statement above, their arguments were not allowed to stand unchallenged. Pastors and missionaries frequently advocated the basic similarity between Saamis, Indians, and Swedes. The possibility of various human species threatened the biblical dogma that God had created Man in his own image at one specific moment. Nowhere in the Bible could one find hints that God, at a different time and on another continent, had created other human beings with other (and lesser) qualities. To suggest such a thing amounted to blasphemy! The entire concept of missionization and the connection between religious conversion and civilization built on the belief that the savages were educable. In the hopes of proving this, missionaries made efforts to compare the savages with “civilized” peoples of past ages. They sacrifice to their gods, wrote Niurenius, “like other peoples not counted as barbarians, such as Greeks, Romans and others.” Thomas Campanius Holm made careful efforts to assert that Indians belonged to the human race when accounting for their myths of origin. These were of course, in his view, fables but one could find in them traces of the biblical history. “Such and several strange and unreasonable Legends exist among the barbarians themselves concerning their origin; from which one cannot learn anything specific instead one leaves them and go to the Christians who have been there and associated with them to see what their opinion of it may be.” The following inventory of the views of the “Christians” suggested that the Indians were probably of Jewish extraction and had possibly come from Asia. Holm quoted his grandfather, Johannes Campanius, who attempted to demonstrate the Jewish heritage through a comparison between the Hebrew and Lenape languages.19 Other Swedes, and their European contemporaries, digested reports of cannibalism and allegations that the new peoples they encountered knew nothing about God but worshipped the devil with loud

19

Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 203; Schefferus, History of Lapland, 72–74; Niurenius, 11, 20; Thomas Campanius Holm, Kort Beskrifning om Provincien Nya Swerge uti America Som nu förtjden af the engelska kallas Pensylvania (Stockholm, 1702, reprinted in facsimile in 1988), 112; Berkhofer, White Man’s Indian, 34–38; Hodgen, Early Anthropology, 407ff; Kupperman, Indians & English, 79–86. That Indians were descendants of a lost tribe of Israel was a popular theory among seventeenth century European colonists.

power on the periphery

37

shouting and vulgar dancing, and drew the conclusion that these were indeed savages. They were inclined to agree with Lindeström’s conclusion: “In short these Indians are people of various qualities and more inclined towards bad than towards good.”20 For those who had drawn such a conclusion, it seemed relevant to question whether Indians and Saamis really belonged to the same human species as did Europeans. It would take at least another half century, however, before the idea of different human species took hold. Ironically, it was through the influence of another Swede, Carolus Linnaeus, that the human genus was divided into two species with several subspecies. In this division, Saamis and Indians became firmly lodged on a lower and less human niche than their white Swedish neighbors.21 While some struggled with the question of whether Saamis and Indians were truly human, there existed another line of argument. Schefferus concluded his survey of idolatrous beliefs among the Saami with the observation that “there remain severall tracks of Superstition and Idolatry, wch require no small time to be wore out; as we see in severall of the meaner sort, not only in Swedland, but in Germany, France, and other Countries, where there is found much of the old superstition.”22 In the descriptions on which Schefferus based his opus, frequent mention is made of distinctions between poorer and richer Saamis.23 The sensitivity to status distinctions or differences concerning wealth and rank can also be discerned in the descriptions of Indians. Peter Lindeström remarked how the Indians when they adopted European clothing had no sense of its propriety and value in signifying rank. They would, even the sachems, purchase coats made of pieces of red and blue duffel which resembled the garbs worn by orphans in Stockholm. The Indians “vulgarly dancing, howling, and shouting” and asserting that “they are a free people, subject to no one, but do what they please” behaved not as an alien species but rather like the uneducated, uncivilized peasants in remote areas of the Swedish realm such as the Finnish inland or Lapland.24 20

Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 192. Hodgen, Early Anthropology, 413–425; Broberg, Homo Sapiens L., 153–253. 22 Schefferus, History of Lapland, 35. 23 Rheen, 62; Niurenius, 7, 13, 26; Johannes Ferdinand Körningh, Berättelse om en missionsresa till Lappland 1659–60, Nordiska Muséet, Acta Lapponica IX:1 (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1956), 47; Nicolaus Lundius, Descriptio Lapponiae, in Bidrag till kännedom 17:5 (Uppsala, 1905), 10, 41. 24 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 199; “Printz to Brahe, April 12, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 151; “Printz to Oxenstierna, April 14, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 153. 21

38

chapter one

Per Brahe reported from Finland, that the people in the inner parts of the northern territory had hardly moved from a state of nature to one of civilization. They lacked self-control, lived for the moment, and obstinately declared their preference for their own way of living. This deplorable state, as we have seen, Brahe firmly believed could be corrected through education, centralized state and church control, and through the good examples provided by the nobility. These people, just as the Indians and Saamis, were “barbaric” but could with the aid of good teachers be brought to “civility and culture.” These same principles, Brahe recommended, would be applicable in relations with the Lenape Indians. “Above all things exert yourself in instructing the poor, erring people . . .,” he instructed New Sweden’s governor Johan Printz and added that the savages should be “instructed as children.” Furthermore, he urged Printz to pay attention to appearances: “Outward ceremonies will do much with such savage people.” Leading the Indians or Saamis or Finns to a life of civility and culture meant establishing a hierarchy and placing them at the bottom, not because they were not human, but because their actions proved they were humans who by God were ordained to fit into the lowest category in order to perform their function in the organism of human civilization. There is good reason to conclude that this was the dominating attitude towards American Indians during the latter half of the seventeenth century. Swedish administrators and travelers consistently compared the Indians they heard of or met with Saamis or with people of “the lower sort” in Europe.25 Such a comparison also worked in the reverse. Swedish aristocrat Bengt Oxenstierna in a provocative argument against the Baltic nobility charged that the latter had maltreated the natives of Livonia in the same manner as “the Spanish had proceeded against the wretched and simple Americans.”26 25 Nils Runeby, “Barbarei oder Zivilität?” 209–213; “Brahe to Printz, November 9, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 155–156; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 198–199; Nils Jacobsson, ed., “Magister Andreæ Hesselii anmärkningar om hans resa till Amerika och vistande där 1711–1724,” Svenska Linné-Sällskapets Årsskrift 21 (Uppsala, 1938), 116; Biörck, Planting of the Swedish Church, 133; cf. Karen Ordahl Kupperman, Settling With the Indians. The Meeting of English and Indian Cultures in America, 1580–1640 (Totowa: Rowman and Littlefield, 1980). Kupperman argues that “neither savagery nor race was the important category for Englishmen looking at Indians. . . . The really important category was status,” 2. 26 Quoted in Alvin Isberg, Karl XI och den livländska adeln 1684 –1695 (Lund: Lindstedts Universitetsbokhandel, 1953), 223.

power on the periphery

39

Men—and presumably women although they are rarely present in the historical documents—brought with them to the encounter a vacillating approach to their Indian or Saami neighbors. On the one hand they were likely to describe them as barbarians, lacking in many of the traits and virtues connected with civilized life, while on the other, Swedes found themselves dependent upon their knowledge and aid and referred to this capacity as superior to their own. Yet these concepts varied considerably between different social groups and changed with time and with experiences of encounters. While the noblemen and higher officers who were placed in charge of the Swedish colony or Saami administration had access to the ideas of their time concerning these peoples and did not differ significantly in their views from their European counterparts, the colonists from the Swedish or Finnish backwoods were unlikely to have known about the literature of encounters. Unfortunately, the sources allow only conjectural suggestions of their preconceptions, based on the actual day-to-day contacts which developed between them and Indians and Saamis. The same, of course, is true for the concepts Lenapes and Saamis held concerning Swedes and other Europeans. We therefore must begin with a halting picture of the ideas and perceptions each side brought to the encounters in the northern forests and on the banks of the Delaware River. It is with these restrictions in mind that we must turn to the concrete problems of encounter with which Swedes and their Saami and Indian counterparts of different estates and positions had to deal.

CHAPTER TWO

INTERACTION IN THE NORTH

Swedish intrusion in the Lappmarks Was Sweden a colonial power in the seventeenth century? Or did expansion only mean the integration of contiguous territories? Did the Saami people of northern Fennoscandia face the challenges of external colonization, or merely Swedish attempts to integrate the northern reaches of the realm? To some extent, the answer to these questions depends on the vantage point of the observer. This chapter offers an account of what happened when Lapland became a part of the Swedish kingdom, both from the perspective of Swedish policy and of Saami actions in response to Swedish claims. During the opening years of the seventeenth century, King Karl IX and his counselors in Stockholm instigated a policy aimed at controlling the land all the way from the core settlement of the Swedish kingdom to the coast of the Arctic Sea as an extension of the already existing empire. To Saami people, it looked suspiciously like an invasion. In the 1740s, over a century later, some Saami informants told the Swedish pastor Pehr Högström that “formerly their ancestors were the owners of all of Sweden; but that our forefathers have driven them away and over time have confined them more and more.”1 It is still a riddle where the Saamis came from as they took advantage of the receding ice sheet to move into the Scandinavian Peninsula. It is possible that they took an eastern route, migrating from the area of Ural in present-day Russia. Or they may have followed the emerging Norwegian coastline and entered from the north. Human beings have certainly lived in the north so long that immigration must have occurred along ice-free corridors at the last stages of the latest ice age. Archaeological material shows evidence of mobile hunter-gatherers who lived as far south as what is now central Sweden 1 Pehr Högström, Beskrifning Öfwer de til Sweriges Krona lydande Lapmarker År 1747, Reprinted in facsimile in Norrländska skrifter nr 3 (Umeå: Två Förläggare Bokförlag, 1980), 39.

interaction in the north

41

and date back to the Stone Age. The remains from this period typically consist of dwelling sites with flaked stone artifacts of primarily quartz, quartzite and slate, asbestos ceramics, so-called lake graves, as well as pitfalls for moose (Alces alces) and reindeer (Rangifer tarandus). The southern boundary for pitfalls closely corresponds with the southernmost discoveries of prehistoric skis. The art of skiing is thought to have developed in the Fenno-Ugric area—a useful and logical means of transportation in this country, as any contemporary visitor can affirm. Whether these sites are evidence of Saami ethnogenesis is a matter of debate, but it seems safe to say that there was a distinct Saami ethnic population from at least Scandinavian Viking Age (AD 800–1000) and that they are an indigenous population in the inland regions of northern Sweden, Finland, and Norway. It is also clear that these groups of mobile hunters and gatherers had long been in contact with more agrarian proto-Norse cultures. Contacts and some interaction between these groups evolved seamlessly over the centuries, thus making it impossible to speak of a first date of encounter.2 Sameædnam—the country of the Saami—encompasses the vast area comprising northern Scandinavia and adjacent land on the Kola Peninsula in Russia and stretches from approximately the 62nd to the 71st parallel. Despite its arctic location, the climate is not as forbidding as might be expected due to the presence of the warm Gulf Stream off the Norwegian coast. In the northernmost part daylight is absent for up to seven weeks in the winter, while the height of summer offers seventy-five days of continuous sun. The country spans four ecological regions that differ in climate and vegetation. One 2 Ørnulv Vorren and Ernst Manker, Samekulturen (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1976) is a thorough and useful way into this topic. See also Hugh Beach, Reindeer-Herd Management in Transition (Uppsala: Uppsala studies in cultural anthropology 3, 1981); Samerna i Sverige (SOU 1975). More recent excavations have put the time back and added a more critical analysis of the ethnogenesis, see Ingrid Zachrisson, “Saami Prehistory in the South Saami area,” and Lars Forsberg, “Protosaami Bronze Age in northern Scandinavia,” in Readings in Saami History, Culture and Language III, ed. Roger Kvist (Umeå: Miscellaneous Publications from the Center for Arctic Cultural Research 14, 1992); see also articles by Juoko Vahtola, “Den medeltida befolkningens etniska sammansättning i norra Österbotten;” Lars Ivar Hansen, “Konstruksjonen av etniske og religiøse skillelinjer i landskapet;” and Thomas Wallerström, “De historiska källornas ‘folknamn’ som analysenheter,” in Stat, religion, etnisitet: rapport fra Skibotn-konferansen 27.–29. mai 1996, ed. Bjørn-Petter Finstad, Lars Ivar Hansen, Henry Minde, Einar Niemi, Hallvard Tjelmeland, Universitetet i Tromsø, Senter for samiske studier 4 (Tromsø, 1997).

42

chapter two

region consists of the eastern forest expanse stretching from the Kola Peninsula, through northern Finland and Sweden. Another area is comprised of the northern and western coastal region, which faces the Arctic Sea and the North Atlantic with their islands, peninsulas, and deep fjords. Between these two regions lies the immense plateau of Finnmarksvidda, consisting of an open landscape, low mountains, wide valleys, and birch forests. The Scandinavian Peninsula is divided by a mountain range with adjacent foothills separated by deep valleys and narrow lakes stretching east to west. The main part of the area claimed by the Swedish state in the seventeenth century contains vast forests and alpine heights. The mountain range is characterized by great differences in altitude and sharply differentiated vegetation zones. The high alpine region in the West, the foothills further south and the forest area in the East form distinctly separate areas which serve as grazing regions for reindeer during summer, spring, and fall.3 In this country, height above sea level is the most important determinant for the climate and a significant line of demarcation is the tree line. It is of great importance for reindeer herding, but was vital also for hunters. The tree line—år’da—marked the border of the alpine region. The reindeer had their breeding ranges there and on protected patches where the snow first melted in spring, the calves were born. Just below the tree line lay stretches of birch woods, shielded from the wind by the mountainsides, where humans found firewood and protection from the harsh weather. The water systems of deep valleys with rivers and lakes naturally bounded the country and formed borders between Saami villages. Further east and north, below the tree line, extended enormous pine forests, marshes, lakes, and rivers of the interior. Here were wet lands with expanses of open meadows, grass clad riverbanks where early summer flooding deposited fertile soil, and drier pine areas where reindeer lichen (Cladonia rangiferina and Cladonia alpestris) abounded. In the seventeenth century, this region was rich in fur bearing animals, birds, and fish.4 3 Samerna i Sverige, 379f; Phebe Fjellström, Samernas samhälle i tradition och nutid (Stockholm: P.A. Norstedt & Söners Förlag, 1985), 18–21; Vorren and Manker, Samekulturen, 31; for term sameædnam, see Högström, Beskrifning, 4. 4 Fjellström, Samernas samhälle, 18–20; Israel Ruong, Samerna i historien och nutiden (Stockholm: Bonnier Fakta, 1982), 13–14; Filip Hultblad, Övergången från nomadism till agrar bosättning i Jokkmokks socken (Stockholm: Acta Lapponica XIV, 1968), 77; Ørnulv Vorren, “Samisk bosetning på Nordkalotten, arealdisponering og ressursut-

Map 1. The Swedish Lappmarks Map of the Swedish Lappmarks and major market places during the second half of the seventeenth century.

interaction in the north 43

44

chapter two

It is not surprising that the people inhabiting this enormous area differed in habits, language, and physiognomy. Linguistically it is incorrect to refer to Saami speech as one language. North Saami and south Saami languages are so distinct that the speaker of one will not understand the other. The languages belong to the FinnoUgric group but their development is also a matter of great debate among philologists and ethnographers. Saamis could be tall or short, dark or blond, and make a living out of fishing, reindeer herding, or hunting. Religion, language, and dress distinguished Saamis from non-Saamis, but subsistence practices, economy and settlement patterns differentiated Saami populations from one another. Some distinctions were there before the arrival of a noticeable Swedish authority in the country, while—as we shall see later—others were, if not created, at least aggravated by Swedish policies. It is extremely difficult to make population estimates for this period. The Saamis were in the majority in Lapland throughout the century, except in the coastal towns, where Swedes lived. The entire region, apart from the coastal strip, was divided into so-called Lappmarks, each inhabited and used by several villages. Lule lappmark is the lappmark which has received most scholarly attention and tax records from the end of the seventeenth century suggest a population of 1500 Saamis and some thirty non-Saamis. A seventeenth-century source estimates the total number of Saami families in the region under Swedish sovereignty to be slightly under 1000, which would render the number of individuals at least 6000–10000.5 nytting i historisk-økologisk belysning,” in Nord-Skandinaviens historia i tvärvetenskaplig belysning, ed. Evert Baudou and Karl-Hampus Dahlstedt (Umeå: Acta Universitatis Umensis 24, 1980), 238–247. For a description of the abundance of wildlife, see Niurenius, 15. 5 Three hypotheses have been put forward regarding Saami language development. They argue for 1) a proto-Saami population speaking a different language who changed their speech when they came into contact with Finnish, 2) Finns and Saamis living in close proximity borrowed words from each other thus explaining the similarities between the languages, and 3) both Saami and Finnish developed from an earlier common language, named Frühurfinnisch by its proponents. See Fjellström, Samernas samhälle for a discussion of this debate, 113; For population estimates, see Hultblad, Övergången, 119–122; Västerbottens läns landsböcker med verifikationer 1671–1700 [hereafter VLL] (Riksarkivet, Stockholm); Rheen, 56. Rheen’s estimate is too low, which is obvious when compared to statistics from Lule lappmark, but it is the only number we have. Using his figure, assuming that each family unit paying tax to the Crown consisted of between 6–12 persons, leads to a total of no less than 6000. See also Håkan Rydving, The End of Drum-Time. Religious Change among the Lule Saami, 1670s–1740s (Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis 1995), 42–43.

interaction in the north

45

“Now the Lapps are divided into two parts, Mountain Lapps and Spruce Lapps. The mountain lapps are very rich both with reindeer, silver and copper, on the contrary spruce lapps who live closer to Swedish people are not so rich.” Thus Nicolaus Lundius, a parish clerk of Saami origin described the differences between Saami groups in the Swedish area. He penned his description in the 1670s, but this division between people who lived mostly in the mountains, and those found in the forest belt separating mountains from coast land, is evident throughout the period. In fact, six different Saami groups may be identified based on their economy, but mountain and spruce, or forest, Saamis dominated in the area the Swedes claimed. Lundius went on to characterize the mountain Lapps as more vigorous, while he called the forest Saamis “very light and not so energetic.”6 The wild reindeer constituted one of the cornerstones in the forest Saami economy, the hunting of which was so vital that the land was divided among villages according to hunting areas. These territories lay, as a rule, along the oblong lakes. The division of land depended on three factors, the occurrence of wild reindeer, the prevalence of beaver in the rivers and lakes, and the abundance of fish. The forest Saamis, semi-nomads basing their subsistence on these three factors, moved seasonally in circular motions following the reindeer and the run of the fish. The wild reindeer were caught throughout the year using various methods, the oldest being the use of pits. In midwinter hunters stalked animals to where they huddled in the snow and then silently set up traps along the paths. Then dogs were sent in to frighten the reindeer who ran in all directions and were caught in the snares or killed with spears or arrows. The Saamis had also begun to use guns which they bought from Swedish and Norwegian merchants. These were not used to take animals with precious skins, since the bullet would destroy the coat. Particularly sturdy spears were used to hunt bear, the most prestigious prey of all. The bear

6 Lundius, 10; Rydving, End of Drum-Time, 43–46. In addition to forest and mountain Saamis, coastal or sea Saamis lived along the Norwegian coast. They made their livelihood by fishing, stock-farming, and boat building for which they were famous. In many ways these subsistence strategies did not differ much from the Norwegian population’s. Norwegian mountain Saamis were fewer and poorer than their Swedish counterparts, and they added to their subsistence by hunting, fishing, and working for Norwegian farmers. Rydving also identifies Saami farmers—rare before 1700—and poor itinerant Saamis as distinct groups.

46

chapter two

was held to be a sacred animal and the chase, killing, and preparation of the meat surrounded by rules and sacred rites.7 Hunting fur-bearing animals was primarily a winter occupation while fishing belonged to the summer. Male hunting parties representing all the families in the village chased reindeer and beaver. The catch was then divided among the households according to tax burden. The old and the infirm received a full share. Reindeer caught outside the communal hunt belonged to the hunter alone, but no matter how or when it was caught, all beavers had to be shared with the whole village. Beaver pelts were particularly attractive as trade items in the early seventeenth century and also formed part of the tax payment in certain areas. Village custom regulated the hunt so as to avoid over-hunting. Each family kept some tame reindeer that they milked and used for transportation. The families guarded the domesticated animals well and sometimes brought them onto islands in the lakes where people fished during the summer. The domesticated reindeer herds developed from tamed wild reindeer which were first caught and trained to pull and carry cargoes. Hunting of wild reindeer eventually led to the drastic decimation of wild herds.8 Mountain Saamis lived in an area delineated by mountains, rivers, and lakes and subsisted on an economy based on extensive reindeer herd management. These nomads followed their herds along their natural migrations in order to protect and use them properly as their primary economic resource. In early spring, the animals began to move from the forests in the foothills, where they had found protection during the winter, towards the high mountains. They would stay one month from mid-May on at the tree line where calves were born and continue towards higher altitudes as the mosquitoes became

7 Vorren, “Samisk bosetning på Nordkalotten,” 245; Vorren and Manker, Samekulturen, 104–107, 110; Schefferus, History of Lapland, 95, 98, 109; Lundius, 18–19; Niurenius, 19; Rheen, 43; Åke Hultkrantz, “Religion and Experience of Nature among North American Hunting Indians,” in The Hunters—Their Culture and Way of Life, ed. Åke Hultkrantz and Ørnulv Vorren, Tromsø Museum Skrifter, XVIII (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1982), 166–167. 8 Vorren and Manker, Samekulturen, 11, 110–111; Fjellström, Samernas samhälle, 40; Erik Solem, Lappiske rettsstudier (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1970), 87–91; Isak Fellman, Handlingar och uppsatser angående Finska Lappmarken och Lapparne III [hereafter Fellman III] (Helsingfors, 1912), LXV; Olaus Stephani Graan, Relation, Eller En Fullkomblig Beskrifning om Lapparnas Ursprung, så wähl som heela dheras Lefwernes Förehållande, in Bidrag till kännedom om de svenska landsmålen och svenskt folkliv 17:2 (Uppsala, 1899), 35.

interaction in the north

47

intolerable in mid-June. There they stayed until the end of summer or moved across the mountains to the Norwegian coast where the animals found lush grazing. In the early fall the move was reversed, back to the foothills for the winter. In the winter country, families who had traveled together with the herds would divide and spend the harsh season separately to ease foraging for their reindeer. With extensive herd management, the importance of the reindeer as a trade item increased. It involved a specialization on reindeer production and led to a growth in the dependence on goods from outside. Trade became vitally important. Owners could accumulate large numbers of reindeer. A source from the mid-seventeenth century mentions that one person could own as many as 2000 reindeer. The figure may be exaggerated but it is evident that reindeer owners could become wealthy and that the difference between rich and poor reindeer owners increased.9 The division between mountain and forest Saamis was neither absolute, nor constant over time. The groups interacted with one another and intermarried. Olof Graan, a pastor to Pite lappmark in the mid-seventeenth century, wrote that at times forest Saami women or children would travel with their reindeer up into the mountains and care for and milk the reindeer together with the mountain Saamis, while the men stayed to fish. The intensive form of reindeer herding, practiced by the forest Saamis, is the oldest. It is debated when and why the transition to extensive reindeer herding occurred, and to what extent Swedish pressures influenced this change. It is likely that the transformation to extensive herding practices began already before the increase in interest from the Swedish crown, but that taxation and other policies reinforced such a development. By the mid-seventeenth century, we have clear evidence that it had fully developed into a different subsistence mode than the intensive herding, fishing, and gathering economy. With differences in herding techniques came conflicts over land. The nomads, who followed their animals, broke the age-old patterns of borders between villages. The typical development was towards concentration of reindeer ownership in fewer and fewer hands. As the herds grew in size bitter competitions developed over grazing areas. Reindeer traveled across

9 Rheen, 23; Lundius, 10–11, 41; Fjellström, Samernas samhälle, 38–39; Vorren and Manker, Samekulturen, 33f; Körningh, Berättelse, 35.

48

chapter two

village boundaries, causing trouble in particular for the villages in the forest area, below the tree line.10 The village (sii"da) was the unit of reference for both mountain and forest Saamis. It consisted of households of extended families with children, often servants, children’s spouses, and aged parents. Families gathered together for yearly markets, but also during other times of the year in connection with the management of the reindeer. However, during major portions of the year, families moved and worked by themselves on the vast expanses of the northern forests and mountains, and among the forest Saamis men and women also spent parts of the year at separate tasks. At least one seventeenth century source mentions that the organization of the village observed kinship lines. The older hunting-gathering society was closely tied to a limited land area, and each village ruled over a specific territory to which they alone had the use rights. The leaders of the sii"da divided animals killed at communal hunts, closely watched over communally used land, and oversaw the payment of taxes. The governing body of the village also had judicial responsibilities and resolved disputes, usually through arbitration.11 Moving between villages occurred especially in connection with marriage, when it was common, particularly among the mountain 10 Graan, 35; Vorren and Manker, Samekulturen, 25; Vorren, “Samisk bosetning,” 235; Lennart Lundmark argues in Uppbörd, utarmning, utveckling (Lund: Arkiv avhandlingsserie 14, 1982) that extensive reindeer-herding developed as a response to pressures from the Crown, primarily through taxation. Tax demands caused poverty and pressure on the land, forcing the mountain Saamis to increase their herds in order to produce a commodity for sale and taxation (esp. 169, 173). Others, notably Fjellström, Samernas samhälle, suggest that extensive herding is of an older origin and that the influence of pressures during the early half of the seventeenth century have been exaggerated by Lundmark (71–72). Vorren, “Samisk bosetning” argues that the most important cause of the extensive form of herding was the decimation of the wild reindeer, forcing Saamis to control the herds. This occurred in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries as a result of hunting and pressures from the nation states. I regard it most likely that the transition to extensive herding practices began already before the increase in the Crown’s interest, but that taxation and other policies reinforced such a development from the seventeenth century onward. 11 Solem, Lappiske rettsstudier, 60–64, 80–86, 95, 97. Solem’s definition of family is more restricted than mine, and the inclusion of servants as well as aged parents is based on other sources, such as court records; Tornæus, 26–28, 45; Vorren and Manker, Samekulturen, 190–191; Vorren, “Samisk bosetning,” 237; Ruong, Samerna, 51; Israel Ruong, “Sami Usage and Customs,” in The Sami National Minority in Sweden, ed. Birgitta Jahreskog (Published for Rättsfonden by Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1982), 23–27; Rheen, 40; Graan, 64; on arbitration, see Karin Granqvist, Samerna, staten och rätten i Torne lappmark under 1600-talet. Makt, diskurs och representation (Umeå: Skrifter från institutionen för historiska studier 8, 2004), 211.

interaction in the north

49

Saamis, that a man lived with his wife’s family for at least one year after the marriage ceremony. Women and men had different but complementary tasks, and sources emphasize the mutual assistance they noticed between spouses. Women were both tailors and shoemakers. They fashioned all kinds of clothing and this task included making thread from sinews, spinning wool, knitting caps, stockings and gloves, and decorating vestments. Making blankets and ropes was also part of a woman’s work. Skillful sewing and clever patterns gave a woman a good reputation and were much in demand. Men’s work included all sorts of preparation of wooden utensils, as well as boats, sleds, boxes, spoons, and ladles. A man was expected to manufacture his own weapons, and decorate them. With them, he procured the needed meat through hunting and fishing, and men’s responsibility for this food extended to cooking. Men prepared all meat and according to some sources, it was also men’s exclusive task to serve fish food. Other sources, however, mention that women could cook both meat and fish if there was not a man present in the company. One explanation given for men’s rather unusual responsibility for cooking and preparing meat connects it with male prerogatives concerning hunting. Women should not be involved in anything which had to do with the hunt, since that was thought to endanger both them and the hunting fortune. However, women prepared other foods such as milk, cheese, and berries and women and men cooperated in a number of tasks, such as fishing, and feeding and caring for the tame reindeer. Among the reindeer-herding mountain Saamis both men and women traveled with the herds and participated in the milking. These tasks may at one time have been gender specific, but with increasing herds, cooperation became a necessity. The conditions in the forest villages were somewhat different. Fish was the staple for most families, but they were also dependent on meat from the hunt and berries picked during the summer. Some families owned a few tame reindeer that needed tending and during summer women and children would move up to the mountains while men stayed in the forest country to fish.12 Ownership seems to have been limited to personal effects and tools, while right to land and hunting/fishing grounds belonged to 12 Rheen, 13, 15, 19, 26, 57; Schefferus, History of Lapland, 100–101, 103–104, 106–107; Tornæus, 48, 50, 62; Niurenius, 13; Graan, 40, 52–54; Solem, Lappiske rettsstudier, 60–61, 68–69, 73.

50

chapter two

the community, expressed in the sii’da. Hunting areas were portioned out to families who obtained use rights, which could be passed on to future generations. Both men and women owned reindeer, as well as private property in the shape of various movables, such as silver, copper, pewter, clothing, tools, and utensils. Women also owned rights to the land controlled by the village. However, it is unclear whether women had a part in the decision making of the sii"da. The sources are lamentably inadequate on the subject of Saami internal governance. The few clues suggest that adult men gathered to determine issues of importance for the whole village. Olaus Graan wrote that the oldest and wisest of the men assisted in dividing estates. Court records from the Lappmarks only mention men appointed as guardians or as arbitrators in inheritance battles. In the village council, the father or the oldest son represented the family. It is possible that a widow could have represented her “smoke” (household) if she had no sons or none of them had reached majority.13 Spiritually, women and men held diverse responsibilities of immeasurable significance for the whole community. The Saami pantheon consisted of several gods and goddesses with various, sometimes overlapping or competing powers. Goddesses, with names ending onáhkká, were believed to control the beginning and end of life. In general, men primarily worshipped male gods while women paid their respect to goddesses. Sáráhkká, however, proved an exception in that she, as the special protectress of “the woman, the home and the family,” received the devotion of both women and men and she was, in certain regions, foremost of all divinities.14

13 Solem, Lappiske rettsstudier, 80–84, 161–180; Rheen, 14, 40; Tornæus, 26–28; Graan, 35, 64; Court records from Lule lappmark 1656 (Dombok för Gävleborgs län, vol. 5, RA); Kittila 1658 and Ume 1659 (Dombok för Gävleborgs län, vol. 8, RA); Arjeplog and Enontekis 1666 (Dombok för Gävleborgs län, vol. 15, RA); Arjeplog 1700 (Dombok för Jämtlands län, vol. 3, RA). 14 Rydving, End of Drum-Time, 150. Rydving cautions that although there are reasons to believe in common basic structures over the entire Saami area it is wrong to assume that gods and goddesses were the same in all communities. The reports concerning female deities primarily originate from the South Saami area. Yet it is reasonable to hold that the gendered structure of deities existed throughout the region, although there may well be variations in the characteristics ascribed to these gods and goddesses; Louise Bäckman, “Female—Divine and Human. A Study of the Position of the Woman in Religion and Society in Northern Eurasia,” in The Hunters —Their Culture and Way of Life, ed. Åke Hultkrantz and Ørnulv Vorren, Tromsø Museum Skrifter, XVIII (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1982), 143–147, 150–151; The connection between women, health, and hearth has been reported also for

interaction in the north

51

Taxation and Land Ownership Saamis and Swedes had thus been interacting for centuries before the Swedish crown in earnest began to relate to this northern population as subjects. During the early modern period, the Crown had three areas of interest that involved Saamis and Saami lands. A strong economic interest included desires to benefit from trade across the northern region, to access exchange values to pay for the many exhausting wars, and to extract taxes from the inhabitants of the northern expanses. Taxes were also connected with political-strategic interests in claiming superiority for the Swedish crown all the way to the Arctic Ocean and across the immense plateau called Finnmarken. In competition for control between Sweden and Denmark-Norway, taxation of the Saamis became an important weapon which in turn led to Saami villages often experiencing two, or even three, yearly tax gathering expeditions. Up until a border agreement in 1751, when Sweden and Denmark-Norway agreed on where to draw the state line, this was an important aspect of Swedish policy towards the Saamis. Finally, there existed an interest in disciplining the Saami population, to convert them into Lutheran subjects through missionization, education, and legal intervention. Swedish historian Roger Kvist suggests the following division into phases in order to clarify the Crown’s interests toward the Saamis. An emphasis on territorial and fiscal policy signifies the period 1550–1635, followed by an intensified interest in mining and the discovery of precious metals in the years 1635–1673. This led to an active policy of colonization, seeking to encourage the growth of Swedish population in the region in the period 1673–1749.15 Already during the Middle Ages, traders sought contact and demanded tribute from the Saamis. The thirteenth and fourteenth centuries marked the beginning of trade between Saamis and birkarls. more northerly regions, i.e. Niurenius, 25, and Tornæus, 27; May-Lisbeth Myrhaug, I modergudinnens fotspor. Samisk religion med vekt på kvinnelige kultutovere og gudinnekult (Oslo: Pax Forlag A/S, 1997). 15 Roger Kvist, “Swedish Saami Policy, 1550–1990,” in Readings in Saami History, Culture and Language III, ed. Roger Kvist (Umeå: Miscellaneous Publications from the Center for Arctic Cultural Research 14, 1992), 63–67; Fellman, Handlingar och uppsatser angående Finska Lappmarken och Lapparne IV [hereafter Fellman IV] (Helsingfors, 1915), xxii; Erik Nordberg, Källskrifter rörande kyrka och skola i den svenska lappmarken under 1600-talet (Umeå: Kungliga Skytteanska samfundets handlingar no. 11, 1973), 47–48.

52

chapter two

These were farmers and merchants living along the Bothnian coast. In accordance with letters of royal privilege, they formed trading families with a monopoly on trade and taxation in the lappmarks. However, in spite of this royal sanction others continued to travel into Saami country to trade and take up tributes, notably Norwegians and Russians. The question of where Saamis should pay tax was a point of argument throughout the seventeenth century since Swedes, Norwegians, and Russians all considered taxation a proof of sovereignty over the area. The sixteenth century saw changes in the fiscal system in the entire kingdom, also in the north. King Gustav Vasa stripped the wealthy birkarl-families of their privileges and installed his own bailiffs. His son, Karl IX, restructured the fiscal system during his reign in the early seventeenth century. The tax was to be paid in reindeer and dry fish. This resulted in a heavy burden against which the Saamis protested, and the taxes were eventually lowered. But its form remained until 1695. This tax contained four parts: 1) the yearly rent, which consisted mainly of the old tax from the sixteenth century, 2) tithes—half of which went to Lapp priests, 3) haxepalkan—a tax to cover customs costs and transportation of goods to Stockholm, and 4) justice-rent—to help pay the costs of maintaining a court system in the lappmarks. The administrative control over the lappmarks increased with the establishment of fixed market places. At the same time, all trade outside of the market places was forbidden on the threat of the death penalty. At these yearly markets, all transactions between Saamis and the representatives of the Crown occurred. The tax was paid, trade conducted, and church business carried out.16 16 Fellman IV, xii, xiv, lxxix; Gunnar Westin, ed., Övre Norrlands Historia II [hereafter ÖNH II] (Umeå: Norrbottens och Västerbottens läns landsting, 1965), 34; Gunnar Westin, ed., Övre Norrlands historia III [hereafter ÖNH III] (Umeå: Norrbottens och Västerbottens läns landsting, 1974), 15–16; A. Raestad, “Lappeskatten og lappenes rettigheter i Norge for 1751,” in Festskrift til rektor J Qvigstad (Tromsø: Tromsø Museums skrifter II, 1928), 233ff; Gunnar Hoppe, Den äldsta fasta bosättningen i Norrbottens läns Lappmarker (Uppsala: Geographia no. 15, 1940), 4, 6, 8; Tomas Cramér, “Samernas historia vantolkad,” Die,ut 1 (1982): 20; Nils Enewald, Sverige och Finnmarken. Svensk Finnmarkspolitik under äldre tid och den svensk-norska gränsläggningen 1751 (Lund, 1920), 117–119, 129, 206–216; Steinar Pedersen, “State or Saami Ownership of Land in Finnmark?” in Readings in Saami History, Language and Culture II, ed. Roger Kvist (Umeå: Miscellaneous Publications from Center for Arctic Cultural Research 12, 1991), 73–74; See also Lundmark, Uppbörd, utarmning, utveckling, 88f, 166, 173 for discussions about sixteenth century taxation and its changes and impact.

interaction in the north

53

Swedish taxation policies and claims of sovereignty did not entail a denial of Saami land possession. On the contrary, taxes and strategic needs ensured that Saami possession of land was both accepted as a fact and relied upon in legal interpretation. According to seventeenth century concepts, tax payment formed the basis for land possession. Treatment of Saami claims in the district courts demonstrate that Saami rights to land and water were, until ca. 1750, a right of possession equivalent to the rights of peasants to taxland and as such enjoyed the full protection of the legal system. These rights included protection of possession as well as hereditary succession to land. The objects of these rights were taxlands and Saami villages. The taxlands belonged to individual Saami households, while the villages controlled land that was held in common and oversaw collective activities such as communal hunting and fishing. These lands were separated by legal boundaries as all other properties. NilsJohan Päiviö, who followed the records of the Labba family back to 1638, found that ownership to land was strong and included all forms of rights and protection. However, after the border settlement in 1751, Saamis began to experience an erosion of their rights. Issues regarding Saami land rights were increasingly removed from legal adjudication and instead became matters for district authorities to determine.17 This did not mean that Saamis and Swedes shared an understanding of land ownership or that they never clashed over the issue. Saami resistance to Swedish intrusion is evident. While the state upheld the land rights of Saamis in the Saami dominated area, one issue of contention could be described as a struggle over hierarchy. The Crown viewed itself as protector of its subjects, and in that capacity, the Saamis deserved equal protection. However, the Crown

17 Gunnar Prawitz, “Samernas rätt,” in Samernas skattefjäll III:I, appendix III (Stockholm 1966), 152, 154, 158; Kaisa Korpijaakko, Samerna och jordäganderätten 1 (Kautokeino: Die,ut 3, 1985), 154–155; Kaisa Korpijaakko, “Land Ownership Among the Saami of Sweden-Finland: Theory and Practice,” in Roger Kvist, ed., Readings in Saami History, Language and Culture III (Umeå: Miscellaneous Publications from Center for Arctic Cultural Research 14, 1992), 79–89; Nils-Johan Päiviö, Lappskattelandens rättsliga utveckling i Sverige (Kautokeino: Nordiska sameinstitutet Die,ut 3, 2001); Nils-Johan Päiviö, “Skattemannarätt eller Privilgium Odiosum,” in Samer och ursprungsbefolkningars rättigheter, ed. Bo Claesson (Göteborg: Rapport 6 från Värdegrunden Göteborgs universitet, 2003), 138–140; Tomas Cramér, “Right of the Same to Land and Water,” in Lapponica. Essays presented to Israel Ruong May 26, 1963 (Lund: Studia Ethnographia Upsaliensia XXI, 1964), 55–57.

54

chapter two

also expected the prerogative to determine changes in policy and this conflicted with Saami understandings of the relationship. The Saamis’ stature as subjects may also have been a compromise, at best. Oral tradition, as reported by one clergyman in Torne lappmark in the 1670s, maintained that the Saamis had resisted taxation initially and had “gripped their weapons, seeking therewith to defend their self-chosen Freedom, however, they could not achieve anything with that, and afterwards they were disarmed. Some people are supposed to have fallen on each side.” Seventy years later other Saamis told a similar story to claim that their ancestors had formerly owned all of Sweden, but Swedish intruders had expelled them from their land.18 Why did Saami people comply with Swedish fiscal and legal demands? It is clear that during periods of intensified Swedish interest in Lapland, such as Karl IX’s Arctic Ocean-policy, the pressures brought to bear on Saami communities were severe, as was the case in all corners of the realm. Administrative and military officers of the Crown carried out their duties with force if necessary. These acts were not unique to the relation to Saami land, and Saamis were exempt from some of the most oppressive measures, such as conscription, which befell the rest of the peasant population. Their exclusion from military obligations indicates that the integration of the Saamis as subjects in the realm was far from complete. Contemporary accounts held that Saamis were “useless” as soldiers. According to these sources, Saamis were easily frightened and squeamish, and money could not persuade them to enlist as soldiers. Johannes Schefferus offers the unlikely explanation that their fear of war was due to “their diet, which cannot supply good blood and spirits.” Violence and murder, as well as daring deeds, were not unknown to them, but it is probable that the autonomous Saami villages had no tradition of concerted action against a common enemy and had no leadership who could demand such action from their people. Samuel Rheen described their “natural inclination” and physical constitution in derogatory terms. Most of them were “useless in war, because among them there is no Manly courage, instead they are generally timid and faint-hearted: and although a few of them might enroll in the army for money, such happens rarely. But some are much inclined to commit murder in secret.”19 18 19

Tornæus, 25; Högström, Beskrifning, 39. Rheen, 61.

interaction in the north

55

There may have been good reason for Rheen and other Swedes to portray the Saamis as docile. War propaganda in continental Europe spread charges that the Swedish armies included Saami soldiers who used witchcraft against their enemies. Schefferus was explicitly concerned with countering that accusation. However, coupled with Saami statements of violent opposition to colonization it is clear that these comments expressed fear, or at least a concern that Saamis could not be trusted to perform in accordance with the regulations of the Swedish army. Whatever the reason, the accusation of cowardice stuck and became an integral part of later perceptions of Saamis.20 Beyond oppressive measures and demeaning comments, the Saamis may have seen other reasons to comply with some Swedish demands. While Swedes, Norwegians, and Russians vied for the Saami tax as a proof of sovereignty, the Saamis seem to have regarded the various taxes as a tribute to ensure their exclusive right to fish and hunt. Since taxation developed alongside trade contacts with the birkarlmerchants, it is likely that the Saamis also viewed the payment of taxes as a trade fee, one which guaranteed them the protection of the King. This was the understanding that one Saami host expressed to his Swedish visitor in the 1650s. He explained that each family paid 1/2 Riksdaler to the king and 1/2 to the pastor and in return the King granted permission to trade and protected them against encroachment. In 1687, Saamis from Kemi lappmark produced a letter from Karl IX, dated June 14, 1602, in defense of their supreme ownership in a conflict with Finnish settlers. The letter had originally been written to uphold Kemi rights against birkarl infringement. All Swedish subjects could appeal directly to the Crown for remedy against bureaucratic abuses. The Saamis clearly used this strategy and they frequently complained against leaseholders, bailiffs, and pastors who exceeded their authority and levied extra taxes or practiced extortion. Saamis usually appealed directly to the Regent, and the final verdict was often in their favor. The Saamis maintained a notion of direct treaty with the Crown; their agreement was with the Crown and they expected protection in return.21 20 Kvist, “Swedish Saami Policy,” 65–67, 75; Schefferus, History of Lapland, 12–13 (quote), 98; Lundius, 19. On violence and physical prowess, see Lundius, 8–9, 15, 33. On European propaganda, see Ingvar Svanberg and Mattias Tydén, Tusen år av invandring (Stockholm: Gidlunds bokförlag, 1998). 21 Tornæus, 24; Körningh, Berättelse, 27; ÖNH II, 281; Isak Fellman, Handlingar och uppsatser angående Finska Lappmarken och Lapparne I [hereafter Fellman I] (Helsingfors,

56

chapter two

Mid-seventeenth century Saamis resorted to at least three ways of enforcing their understanding of this agreement. Some of them threatened to move to Norway, they appealed to the Crown, or they brought their complaints to the local courts. The most powerful recourse, but also the most costly for themselves, was to threaten to move to Norway. Moving to the Norwegian side of the mountains meant that they left Swedish jurisdiction, and this gave the Danish king the opportunity to claim sovereignty. At the Torneå court in 1674, the Saamis were informed of a new tax. The bailiff described the tax as absolutely necessary and asked the congregation to approve it. The Saamis refused and explained that they were not capable of paying any new fees and preferred to remain with the old ones. If new taxes were levied on them, they all said they would abandon their home sites and escape to Norway. Swedish authorities continued to find these movements troublesome and in 1690, the bailiff Gotthard Strick wrote to the Norwegian governor at Vardö, asking his help to prohibit the Saamis from crossing the border without explicit permission, but he received no promise in return and there was little the officials could do. The tax records show in laconic terms that escaping to Norway was no idle threat. In 1667, not a single member of the Kaitum village showed up at the winter market at Jukkasjärvi. All had fled to Norway.22 Only mountain Saamis could employ this forceful weapon in the struggle against Swedish demands. The effectiveness of this threat grew out of the disputes over sovereignty between Sweden, DenmarkNorway, and Russia. Until 1751, the entire region called Finnmarken in reality belonged to no nation and remained contested ground. All three powers made opposing demands on the area and used the taxation of the Saamis as grounds for claiming sovereignty. Increasing 1910), 478: complaints against leaseholder Höök; Fellman III, 9: complaints against bailiff Arendt Graap; Nordberg, Källskrifter, 251–252: letter to Stellan Mörner, 1637; Kenneth Awebro, “Var samerna en maktlös grupp på 1600-talet?” in Kring Alkavare lappkapell, ed. Kenneth Awebro (Stockholm: Studia Laplandica 9, 1988), 14–19, 29; Göran Hallquist, “Samiska domstolar, samiska rättsfall,” in Samernas Vita Bok VI:1 (Stockholm: 1979), 91–92. 22 The records are full of such threats, Swedish fear of it, and examples of entire villages moving to the Norwegian side. See Fellman I, 164–165 (“Report to His Royal Majesty from the governor, Johan Graan, 1670”); court proceedings in Jukkasjärvi, 1669 in Fellman III, 7; See also Rheen, 68 for a comment on the cost involved in moving with one’s reindeer to Norway; on the Torne court 1674, Fellman III, 16; on Kaitum village, Lappmarkens silverbruk—GIX:1, 1637–1685, Riksarkivet (National Archives, Stockholm).

interaction in the north

57

interaction over time, as well as a growing desire to populate the country with Swedish settlers led Swedish authorities to develop more specific attitudes and policies towards the Saamis. Some of them came from an unexpected direction. During the 1670s, changes were proposed that proved particularly ominous for some of the Saamis. Johan Graan, governor of Västerbotten province and himself of Saami heritage, expressed great concern that the mountain Saamis would desert to Norway. He saw it as a security risk, since the Saamis could divulge military secrets to Denmark-Norway. He suggested several methods that he hoped would lead to prosperity and growth in the province. His main proposal was a “parallel theory” in which he outlined how the great forests could be used by both Saamis and settlers. According to his theory, the true reindeer nomads lived in the mountainous region and were vital for the defense of the country. However, Saamis living in villages in the forests resembled Swedish peasants and ideally should be made into regular farmers. Their mixed economy, he wrote, was compatible with farming. Graan suggested measures to influence settlers to move in and he encouraged the forest Saamis to be trained in the farming trades. Many of them, he suggested, could be found begging in the coastal areas, and Swedish authorities had long deplored this behavior. Begging may have been part of a seasonal subsistence strategy, or some Saamis may have been forced to such behavior by taxes and pressures from settlers. Whatever the cause, Graan emphasized a harsh attitude towards forest Saamis, indicating that they failed to execute their responsibilities as well as showed laziness. The mountain Saamis, who dutifully performed as reindeer herders, ought to be treated mildly so as not to cause them displeasure. Graan also suggested and began a project to survey all Saami lands for the purpose of control and taxation. This project was brought to fruition in the tax reform of 1695. It stipulated that the tax should be tied to the size of each Saami household’s land holdings. This system benefited the mountain Saamis by taxing land and not the reindeer on which they based their wealth. The losers were the forest Saamis who possessed no powerful tool on the scale of the threat of removal to Norway.23 23 Nils Arell, Rennomadismen i Torne lappmark—markanvändning under kolonisationsepoken i fr. a. Enontekis socken (Umeå: Kungliga Skytteanska samfundets handlingar, no. 17, 1977), 278–280 discusses how recurrent Swedish claims on the area were pressed in 1595, 1613, and finally in 1751; Graan’s proposal is printed in Fellman I,

58

chapter two

The choice of policy towards different Saami groups that the Crown and its representatives adopted can be seen as an example of a particular construction of reality. This had a lasting influence on relationships between peoples in the north. Graan’s proposed “parallel theory” sought to establish the position that Saamis and peasants were not competitors for land in the lappmarks, but used different resources. According to Graan, the Saamis did not need the forest for their reindeer but only areas covered with reindeer lichen. It was necessary to survey the land, he wrote, since “as long as that does not happen, and each and every Lapp’s property measured, then one can not know, which places could serve for settling Swedish people, where there is grass and deciduous trees, which the Lapps with their reindeer need nothing of.” Apart from being factually incorrect—grass contributes vital components to the physiological development of the reindeer—Graan’s suggestion emphasized two important contentions that became influential for all later developments in Saami policy. First, he linked the Saami to the reindeer so that the two, human and animal, became virtually indistinguishable. Second, he argued that persons were defined by their subsistence activities and not by ethnic markers.24 Society was envisioned as an organism in which each member played a special and unique part. The limbs were not interchangeable and if one limb did not do its designated work then the whole organism suffered. This simile helped explain the position and task of each group in society. These tasks involved both rights and responsibilities. This meant, for instance, that farmers on taxlands had full protection for their ownership including the right of inheritance, but they were also obliged to till the land to satisfaction. Failure to use it properly led to forfeiture of these rights. In this system, the Saamis were originally considered to be forest dwellers and reindeer herders. In Swedish doctrine their land title, held since time immemorial, 160–166; on Graan’s concern for security, see Fellman I, 164–165; Roger Kvist, “Review of Kaisa Korpijaakko,” Historisk Tidskrift 3 (1986), 367; on begging see Lundius, 38–39; as subsistence strategy see Åke Campbell, “Om lapparna i svensk folktradition och etnocentrism,” in Scandinavica et Fenno-Ugrica. Studier tillägnade Björn Collinder den 22 juli 1954 (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1954), 260; on the 1695 taxation system see Fellman IV, 276ff; ÖNH III, 60, 62; Gunlög Fur, “Skattelappfattiglapp? Kronan och samerna 1670–1700 med särskild hänsyn till skatteväsende och nybyggesverksamhet,” (unpublished paper, Department of History, Uppsala university, 1983). 24 Quote from Fellman I, 162.

interaction in the north

59

became a right held on condition that they practiced the “lappmark trades” (lappmannanäringarna) which included fishing, hunting, and reindeer keeping. “Peasants” were persons who devoted themselves to farming and husbandry. As long as the Saamis continued to fish, hunt, and keep reindeer, the Crown (the head of the organism) would guarantee full protection of these practices. What has been described as the Crown favoring the Saamis at the expense of the coastal Swedish population was really no more than maintaining its doctrine of each limb to its designated task. It is highly significant that only those Saamis who practiced the Saami trades were considered as “lapps.” If a Saami broke new land as a settler or took up animal husbandry, then he was no longer regarded as a “lapp” but became a “peasant.” “Saami” was not, from an administrative point of view, an ethnic or racial concept, but a technical term for the practitioner of certain trades. It is not known what it was that motivated Graan to expand on this understanding. However, his conception clearly diverged from what was rapidly becoming the dominant image from the end of the seventeenth century and onwards, which painted Saamis as exotic and constitutionally different from Swedes and other civilized peoples.25 The Crown wished to see and sought through administrative measures to achieve a clear-cut division between these practices as they were expected to lead to a strategic development and use of the lappmark region, as well as increase the tax base through a growing population. Thus, throughout the period in question Saami rights to land and water were upheld in courts against intrusion from settlers. However, the consequences of the division may be seen in the developments that followed the reform of the taxation system in 1695. This system benefited the reindeer herders, while the results for at least some of the forest Saami villages proved disastrous. A 25 Prawitz, “Lappskattelanden,” 4, 8, 29; Eibert Ernby, Adeln och bondejorden. En studie rörande skattefrälset i Oppunda härad under 1600-talet (Uppsala: Studia Historica Upsaliensia 64, 1975), 38–41 discusses limitations on the ownership of tax peasants and forfeiture through improper use; Kvist, “Review,” 67; Korpijaakko, “Land Ownership Among the Saami,” 85–86 exemplifies the nature of these rights and obligations in relation to those of the tax peasant; Korpijaakko, Samerna och jordäganderätten 1, 117; Arell, Rennomadismen, 37–40; ÖNH II, 281 and ÖNH III, 67 provide examples of the view that the Saamis were particularly favored; on Swedish views of Saamis see Gunlög Fur, “Svenskarnas uppfattning av samer från stormaktstiden till 1700-talets mitt,” in Främlingen—dröm eller hot (Stockholm: Nationalmuseum, 1996), 34–44.

60

chapter two

review of the tax records for the villages in Lule lappmark show a marked pauperization in the forest Saami villages in the decades following the 1695 change. In this way theory and outsiders’ views of Saami culture came to have a lasting influence on Saami policy, society, and on the understanding of Saami ways of life for later generations. Graan’s suggestions may have served to separate the interests of different Saami collectives, yet for a while this understanding worked to uphold Saami property rights. This would later change dramatically during the course of the eighteenth century, blossoming into racism and land loss.26

Trade and Commerce In the fall of 1634 a mountain Saami, Peder Olofsson, reported that he had found silver at Nasafjäll in the disputed area along the Swedish/Norwegian border. The discovery triggered feverish activity on the part of Swedish authorities, and mining began in the summer of 1635. Enthusiastic officials compared Nasafjäll with the West Indies and Sweden’s financial troubles were expected to diminish with each hammer blow. Sweden’s western neighbors also showed an interest in Nasafjäll. With the unsettled border between Sweden and Norway, the discovery of silver led to confrontations. The mountain must remain under Swedish control. Suddenly, Saami opinion of the location of the border became invaluable. In 1638, well aware of this fact, Swedish emissaries to a border conference brought 43 jars of Spanish wine, 225 jars of liquor, as well as tobacco and pipes to the assembled Saamis. Everything was consumed and—perhaps not surprisingly—the Saamis all bore witness to the fact that the border had always stretched west of the precious mountain! The story, in all its apparent hypocrisy, gives evidence of how important it was for the Swedish government to maintain good relations with the Saamis who inhabited the border country. But the mine continued to be a source of conflict, and in 1659, during open war between Sweden and Denmark, Norwegian soldiers on orders from Copenhagen, marched up the western slope, set fire to the works and burned it to the ground.27 During the years that followed, interest 26 27

VLL; Fur, “Skattelapp—fattiglapp?” On changes see Päiviö, “Skattemannarätt.” Janrik Bromé, Nasafjäll. Ett norrländskt silververks historia (Stockholm, 1923); ÖNH

interaction in the north

61

grew in finding other lodes in the North. Dutch prospectors found copper and iron in the Lappmarks and began leasing mines from the Swedish state. In 1660, another Saami, Jon Andersson, reported finding silver at Kedkevaare Mountain. If land policies during the seventeenth century generally included respect for Saami land ownership, the discovery of silver and copper in the mountains led to much less benevolent treatment. The Crown fervently sought precious metals and initially held great expectations for the silver and copper discovered in the north. The subsequent mining led to an interest in populating the area. The Crown offered prospective settlers freedom from taxes for thirty years, in addition to cows and seed-corn, as incentives to settle in the Lappmarks, but few took the offer. The Saamis initially viewed a minor influx of sedentary settlers as an advantage, as the scattered farmsteads offered relay stations for seasonal migrations as well as quarters for the old and infirm.28 The mining itself was a different story. Saami villages soon experienced the devastating effects of the mining enterprises. The success of the mines depended on a transport system that could take ore to the coast and supplies to the mines. The Nasafjäll works needed 300–400 barrels of grain yearly, and that, along with heavy ironware and other material, had to be hauled up the mountains to the Norwegian border. Transportation had to be carried out in the wintertime and the heaviest part of the work fell on the mountain Saamis in nearby villages belonging to the Arjeplog region who were drafted to take the silver from the mine to the village Silbojokk, where it was processed some forty miles away across treacherous terrain. The reindeer were the only pack animals that could endure the climate and the loads, and the Saamis were ordered to divide into groups that could be called upon to haul the freight. These Saamis were called hållappar (kept men) and the villages had to maintain a rotating schedule where each Saami was supposed to do three years in service for III, 3, 6, 11. One of the king’s councillors, Carl Bonde, was often quoted as saying that “One hopes here, with God’s help, that this will become the Swedes’ West Indies, just like the king’s in Spain.” 28 Campbell, “Om lapparna i svensk folktradition,” 257–258; Åke Campbell, Från vildmark till bygd. En etnologisk undersökning av nybyggarkulturen i Lappland före industrialismens genombrott (Umeå: Två Förläggare Bokförlag, 1982), 58. The Crown’s expenses for the extraction of metals in the north were in theory almost non-existent, as labor and transportation could be demanded from peasants and Saamis within the system of day-labor expected from all subjects on Crown land.

62

chapter two

the mine. Compensation consisted of freedom from taxes and some payment in kind of flour, woollen cloth, tobacco, salt, and liquor. In spite of the payment and despite threats of harsh punishments for avoiding service, many fled from these duties. Saamis regularly complained about mining officials and the duties. They also kept quiet about their knowledge of lodes of silver, copper, and iron. Jon Andersson, who revealed the existence of Kedkevaare, only did so in order to escape service at a mine himself. The conflict between the Saamis and the mine operators grew, and in 1670 Governor Graan suggested that it caused such a crisis situation in the lappmarks that the Saamis must be left alone or they would entirely abandon the country, with grave consequences for the defense of the border. Governor Graan’s recommendation was not followed until later and then only because experience proved the superior efficiency of employing external transport services.29 Conflicts surrounding the mining operations demonstrate the contradictory interests of the Swedish state. The mines needed Saamis as transport labor and as subjects for taxation, while the Crown also desired to keep the Saamis in the mountainous border region as an “early warning system” vis-à-vis the Norwegians. Periodically, the brutal treatment of men and women ordered to work for the mines led to large numbers of Saamis absenting themselves from the Lappmarks and seeking refuge across the border in Norway. In order to keep them in Sweden the Crown thus recommended a much “softer” treatment of mountain Saamis in particular and removed especially brutal mining directors. However, these early mining enterprises on the whole turned out not to be economically successful. Instead, the real economic gains in the North, both for the Crown and the burghers in the coastal towns, lay in the trade with the Saamis. The market place was a bounded physical space constituting the principal point of encounter between Saamis and Swedes. This specific

29 Bromé, Nasafjäll, 152, 155, 157f, 254f; ÖNH III, 28f, 39; Lundmark, Uppbörd, utarmning, utveckling, 167; See Kenneth Awebro, Luleå silververk. Ett norrländskt silververks historia (Luleå: Norrbottens museum, Bothnica 3, 1983), 183–230 for a description of one mine, its effects on Saami communities and their reactions. Awebro denies the stories of excessive cruelty against the Saamis that have been prevalent in histories of the mining ventures, but continues to describe the less spectacular, but equally devastating, hardships of the transport duties; Kvist, “Swedish Saami Policy,” 66–67; Fellman I, 160–166.

interaction in the north

63

market place institution was established under the reign of Karl IX. Market places lay on sites carefully chosen at accessible points in the lappmarks, places that had already been used for years by both Saamis and birkarl traders. What was new was that from now on these markets were meant to become centers of Swedish civilizing attempts, in addition to regulating and controlling the trade. Soon chapels grew up at the market places and trade became connected with religious and educational demands as well as judicial proceedings. By mid-century the yearly markets lasted for several weeks. At Åsele, Lycksele, Jokkmokk, Arjeplog, and Arvidsjaur the markets were held in January, while farther north, at Jukkasjärvi and Karesuando, markets assembled in February. Swedish laws stipulated that the Saamis were obliged to be present at markets during specified times of the year. Saamis appeared to view these markets as mixed blessings. On the one hand, the opportunity for trade and social events made them attractive, while the demands of church and court posed problems and dilemmas. Swedish officers frequently complained about Saami absences from the markets and Saamis regularly dissented about the market place organization. It is likely that the majority of Saamis considered the annual markets as necessary as well as profitable events to attend, but this did not stop them from absenting themselves if fiscal and religious claims became overwhelming. As stated above, the possibility of moving temporarily to Norway remained.30 Sources describe the Saamis as apt traders and their merchandise desirable. In the harsh Swedish climate—particularly severe during this century known as the “little ice age”—furs were a necessity as well as an important export item. Trade, and the preparation for it, took up a considerable part of the Saamis’ year. They participated in at least three different markets every year and, additionally, trade was carried on throughout the year between different Saami groups and villages as well as with the coastal population. The latter was prohibited as it threatened the Crown’s revenues, but no amount of legislation or threats seemed sufficient to curb those exchanges. This (from official Swedish perspective) extra-market trade held utmost

30 E. Poignant, Samling af författningar angående de så kallade lappmarksfriheterna (Stockholm: Ivar Hæggströms boktryckeri, 1872), 5–6; ÖNH II, 32–38; ÖNH III, 27–30; Nordberg, Källskrifter, 157–158; Gunnar Hoppe, En gammal marknadsplats i lappmarken (Stockholm: Meddelanden från Uppsala universitets Geografiska institution A 22–29, 1940), 6; Widén, “Stormaktstidens prästerskap,” 147; Rheen, 58; Tornæus, 62–63.

64

chapter two

importance for people living in the towns along the northern coast. These towns thrived on the export of tar, wood, dried fish, and furs. In addition, merchants in the coast towns maintained exclusive rights to trade with the Saamis at the annual winter markets. Representatives of these towns stressed the importance of this trade throughout the century. Trade routes also followed an east-west connection, linking the Norwegian coast with the Swedish and with Muscovy, and in this network Saamis assumed the role of middlemen.31 Trade took skill and personal contacts, and a system developed whereby the coastal merchants gave credit to the Saamis they traded with, a debt to be repaid the following year. To keep track of the credit given, a stick was notched with lines representing riksdaler. The stick was then cut in half and each party kept one half. The following year, traders met and matched up their sticks, and when the debt was paid, notches were carved off. Town traders brought along a varied supply of metal goods, tools, and cloth items. The Saamis purchased tools and weapons, such as guns, powder, knives, axes, fox traps, kettles, needles, and hemp. Linen and cloth, especially wool dyed in bright colors, were eagerly sought after items. Food necessities included butter, salt, flour, bread, and herring. The Saamis also traded eagerly for alcohol and tobacco. In return, the merchants received a variety of skins and hides from reindeer, bear, wolves, foxes (described as red, black, blue, and white), martens, wolverines, otters, moose, and squirrels. Coats, shoes, boots, and gloves made from reindeer skin sold well as did food products like milk, cheese, and dry fish. Set prices were agreed upon and certain items counted as certain values in Swedish riksdaler. The Saamis were well aware of prices elsewhere and “if they find out what one ell of cloth costs in Stockholm, they demand the same price in the lappmark.”32 Guns, bullets, and powder also formed part of the trade. Guns made in the weapons manufacturing town of Söderhamn were popular. Sometimes, however, Saamis preferred to buy in Norway if the price was better. Swedish authorities did not try to limit the trade in guns, 31 ÖNH II, 100, 133, 142; ÖNH III, 32–33; Nordberg, Källskrifter, 238, 262, gives examples of complaints at the courts held at Arjeplog in 1655 and 1659; Lars Ivar Hansen, “Handel på Nordkalotten ca. 1550–ca. 1750,” in Nordkalotten i en skiftande värld—kulturer utan gränser och stater över gränser, ed. Kyösti Julki (Rovaniemi: Studia Historica Septentrionalia 14:1, 1987), 216–217, 224–227, 229; Rheen, 58–60; Tornæus, 62–63. 32 Tornæus, 62–64; Rheen, 58–60; Körningh, Berättelse, 34.

interaction in the north

65

apparently the Swedes did not fear Saami hostility. Saamis were not an alien group as they had accepted status as royal subjects. There is no evidence that the Saamis ever organized forceful resistance against Swedish encroachment and the Swedes may have believed that they had sufficient military power to control them, encouraged by contemporary accounts that derided the Saamis for being useless as soldiers. Trade contacts, as well as all other interactions had a distinct gender dimension, even though that is only vaguely alluded to in the sources. Not only did women own reindeer, just as well as men, but they also produced many of the goods that changed hands at the various markets and made up a considerable part of the yearly tax payments. In the mountain Saami village of Tuorponjaur and the forest Saami village of Sjokksjokk, both located in Lule lappmark, women-produced items were far more frequent than those men made in the payment of the yearly rent, the tithe, and the haxepalka (customs fee). In fact, between the years 1671–1694 it was almost exclusively women’s products, such as shoes and gloves, that covered the tithe and the haxepalka. The yearly rent, however, mostly consisted of riksdaler and was paid in coins of copper or silver. The relative importance of coins and products varied between the villages, and in Tuorponjaur a majority of the taxes were paid in currency while in Sjokksjokk products (made by women) made up the largest portion of the tax payments. An increasing demand for currency payments by Swedish authorities forced a greater dependency on trade and in all likelihood over time served to lessen the importance of women’s work.33 For some, the trade with Norway was more profitable than the markets in Sweden. Saamis in Lule lappmark traveled to markets in Norway twice a year, one at midsummer and the other around All Saints Day. The trade there involved many of the same goods that changed hands at the Swedish winter markets. Price awareness encouraged Saamis to take their skins to Norway where they obtained better deals, often in silver which the nomadic Saamis particularly desired because of its value in relation to weight. Part of the trading in Norway involved cattle and sheep, which Saamis used for meat and sacrifices. The Saamis brought brass, copper, and wadmal (coarse

33

VLL; Fur, “Skattelapp-fattiglapp?” 20–21.

chapter two

66

woollen cloth) that they had purchased from Swedish merchants over to the Norwegian markets. There they exchanged these goods for black fox and otter skins and several types of dried fish, which were in turn sold at the next winter markets in Sweden. Thus, this trade linked the two northern coasts and afforded the Saamis an amount of control over the important east-west exchange.34 In between markets, Saamis in both forests and mountains traded individually with each other and the coastal population. Forest Saamis, often described as “poor,” added to their livelihood by selling cloudberries, lingonberries, blueberries, and crowberries to mountain Saamis. They also sold the fine part of the pine bark, which was a delicacy when mixed with milk. From their lakes, forest Saamis caught pike whose intestines were a necessary ingredient in the making of reindeer cheese. The mountain Saamis bought the intestines and then sold the cheeses back to their forest neighbors. The latter also gathered bird feathers and down and sold them to mountain traders who took them to Norway. Other saleable products were ropes, baskets, and objects (such as purses) embroidered with thin threads of pewter. The Swedish authorities did not approve of any off-market trade. Repeatedly, officers of the courts tried to ban such practices. Records from the court in Åsele 1659 proclaim that: the peasantry [Saamis] were seriously told and ordered . . . to sell their goods at the right market place, and not carry on trade in the countryside, as some of them do. Should anyone go against this, he shall be fined, and officers of the courts will be held responsible if they cannot hinder them from traveling down the country to trade.

In the records, there is a confusing connection between off-market trade and begging. “The Saamis were admonished that they should by no means travel down to the coast to trade or they will be fined, also they are forbidden to travel in the countryside begging.” Nicolaus Lundius, who was himself a Saami, wrote about these beggars who cause the Swedes much trouble. . . . They also work a lot for Swedish people, make sheepskin furs, make . . . fishing rope for the Swedes, and the Swedes carry a great fear for these begging Lapps since they also appear frightening, dark and ugly and threat-

34

Rheen, 59.

interaction in the north

67

ening the Swedes if I do not get this and that I will cause you much damage.

Many sources give evidence of interaction between the different population groups in the north, but Lundius’ statement also points to fear and caution as an element in these cultural encounters. Recurring entries of this nature indicate that Swedish authorities considered the contacts between the coastal population and the forest Saamis troublesome. References to poverty suggest that forest Saamis experienced pressure throughout the second half of the century. Evidence of coercion is also found in the tax records from the later part of the century. While Swedish policy was to tolerate the mountain Saamis, the forest Saamis’ trade contacts were curbed and punished. The parallel theory Governor Graan advanced suggests a reason for this dissimilar treatment. The governor and other officials expected the forest Saamis to become settled farmers, like the Swedish and Finnish colonists who were encouraged to move into the area. The farming trades were considered ideal for the forested region below the mountain range. Forest Saamis were to pursue their particular trades and strive to become more and more like ordinary peasants in Sweden, and in order to ensure this their itinerant habits had to be curbed.35 Several Saami villages vigorously opposed attempts to tie them to trade at specific market places not of their own choosing, while merchants in the various towns vied for the Saami trade. In 1655, burghers in Piteå testified that members of Lais and Gran villages had always belonged to the market at Arjeplog. The Saamis, however, preferred to go to Lycksele and no amount of persuasion or threat could make them trade at Arjeplog. Governor Frantz Krusbiörn supported Lais and Gran, recommending that “they be permitted, to freely seek the market in the lappmark, where they can best trade their goods . . . we do not want that they through any unreasonable or insulting force will be driven out of their usual lappmarks to others.” Likewise, Torpen villagers refused to travel to Arjeplog, preferring Jokkmokk, Wapsten-members chose to stay at Lycksele and 35 Rheen, 59–60; Lundius, 17, 32, 38–40; Fjellström, Samernas samhälle, 481, 503–505; Hansen, “Handel på Nordkalotten,” 238–241; Campbell, “Om lapparna,” 260; VLL, 1685, 1698, 1699; Fellman I, 163; Quotes: Nordberg, Källskrifter, 262: “. . . down the country to trade;” Nordberg, Källskrifter, 238: “. . . countryside begging;” Lundius, 38–39: “. . . cause you much damage.”

68

chapter two

not go to Åsele, while other Saamis assigned to Åsele just stayed away. Threatening them with fines had little effect.36 The desire to trade was undoubtedly the magnet that drew the different peoples together in northern Scandinavia. Samuel Rheen, pastor in Lule lappmark during the 1660s, remarked that Saamis in Lule, Pite, and Ume lappmarks generally knew quite a bit of Swedish and were eager to learn “in particular that which concerns trade and dealings.” Control of trade, as attempted in the establishment of market places, would be an important step towards integration of the Saamis into the Swedish state. That strategy may be seen in how trade, law, and religion were combined at the market places. It proved to be a slow process and Saamis strongly maintained their independence and control of trade routes and prices through defying Swedish laws regarding trade and through continued commerce with Norway and the coast. The mountain Saamis in particular served as middlemen in this coast to coast trade, and as such, were in a position to compare and control prices. Swedish observers could tell of Saamis who had become quite rich and who buried treasures of silver. Such fortunes were the results of successful bargaining, as the mountain Saamis experienced a period of economic prosperity based on the products from the intensified reindeer herding. Silver objects served all the needs nomadic traders had for investment in capital. They were easy to transport, possessed an enduring value, and would not be destroyed. Possession of silver objects, such as ornaments and spoons, also bestowed social prestige on the owner. The forest Saamis were not able to partake in this lucrative trade since they did not own enough reindeer to transport their goods from coast to coast. While Swedish authorities seemed unable to do anything about the movements of the mountain Saamis, they concentrated their efforts on the more easily pressured forest Saamis, and that is where the major conflict between cultures was evident during the latter part of the seventeenth century. As impoverished settlers from across the Gulf of Bothnia moved in to the Lappmarks in search of homesteads for their slash-and-burn cultivation competition over land and lakes increased. Small-scale, off-market trade and itinerant begging became ways to complement forest Saami household economy. Swedish authorities sought to curtail such

36

Nordberg, Källskrifter, 199, 201–203; 261–262.

interaction in the north

69

vagrancy, and encouraged sedentary farming practices through altered systems of taxation and regulations regarding the use of the great northern forests.37

Swedish law and Saami customs The Lappmarks are divided into three jurisdictions. The first is Anundsöö, or Ångermanne Lappmarks. The other is Uhmeå, Pitheå and Luleå Lappmarks. The third Torneå and Kemi Marks. These each have their particular Bailiffs, who on behalf of the Crown each year in the months of January and February, in the presence of the judge and the Pastor, collect from them their Taxes, and administer justice to each and everyone.38

In this way, Tornæus described the triumvirate of bailiff, judge, and pastor who represented the Crown of Sweden in every Lappmark. The establishment of a unified national legal system was considered essential for state power and extending that system formed an indispensable part of the Swedish efforts to integrate the North. The local courts, called ting, introduced at the market places as a tool for disciplining, nonetheless often seem to have functioned as forums for solving local conflicts. As in other parts of the country, written law combined with local custom. In all cases where written law did not apply, the courts were expected to rule according to local customs. Thus, Swedish practice allowed room for legal interpretations based on the practices of the original inhabitants of the land. At these yearly courts, a Swedish justice presided and was aided by twelve lay assessors. The judge was Swedish but the jury came to consist almost exclusively of Saamis in nearly all of the lappmarks. The lappmark area was divided into three jurisdictional districts. One southern including Ångermanna lappmark, one middle with Umeå,

37 Rheen, 52 (quote); References to Saami silver treasures can be found in Rheen, 13; Körningh, Berättelse, 47–48; ÖNH III, 517–519; Fjellström, Samernas samhälle, 481–486, 494–505. Fjellström points out that the Saamis apparently had used this form of silver investment since medieval times. For a thorough inventory of the silver treasures and the function of silver in Saami society, see Phebe Fjellström, Lapskt silver. Studier över en föremålsgrupp och dess ställning inom lapskt kulturliv, Skrifter utgivna genom Landsmåls- och folkminnesarkivet i Uppsala, ser. C:3 (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1962), esp. 220–222, 271–279; Lundius, 40; Vorren, “Samisk bosetning,” 253, 258. 38 Tornæus, 25–26.

70

chapter two

Piteå and Luleå lappmarks, and one northern district including Torne and Kemi lappmarks. This system resembled the one practiced in rural communities elsewhere in Sweden and courts intended similar law to be applicable to the Saami population.39 Court records are available from the district courts beginning at mid-century. A review of these records reveals that Saamis increasingly sought to settle disputes in court. In matters concerning land conflicts between villages, as when borders had been violated through illegal hunting, the courts invariably ruled according to traditional Saami law. Hunting in the forests, as an example, was allowed also on another village’s area on condition that a part of the catch, usually half, was turned over to the village or individual owning the land. This law applied only to Saamis. It was considered criminal if a Swedish or Finnish settler hunted on Saami land. Communal interest included the hunting for beaver and wild reindeer. Everyone in the village shared the take, also those who were poor, old, or infirm. No one, under any circumstances, could keep beaver to himself. Actions brought to the courts often focused on hunting and fishing rights. Saami villages in the forest area complained with growing frequency from the 1670s and on of illegal hunting, fishing, and settlement on their land, particularly in the northern district into which came impoverished Finnish settlers. Their slash-and-burn farming disturbed reindeer grazing and threatened habitats for martens and squirrels, two of the most important game animals. Other complaints included accusations against destitute Finnish peasants who stole food from storage huts and used force to gain access to fishing in Saami lakes. Saamis also commonly used the courts to settle their

39

A thorough discussion of the legal system in the northern lappmarks is found in Granqvist, Samerna, staten och rätten. Granqvist makes the point that in practice the northern districts developed differently as a consequence of the system of feudal grants, and due to the size and distances within the judicial areas, 4–5, 9–12; also Korpijaakko, Samerna och jordäganderätten 1, 13, 19; Prawitz, “Samernas rätt,” 5; Prawitz, “Lappskattelanden,” 29; Cramér, “Right of the Same,” 55; ÖNH III, 116–126; Tornæus, 25–26. For a brief overview of the Swedish judicial system in English, see Eva Österberg and Dag Lindström, Crime and Social Control in Medieval and Early Modern Swedish Towns (Uppsala: Studia Historica Upsaliensia 152, 1988), 25–32; for a comprehensive discussion of the courts in early modern Nordic countries see Österberg and Sogner, ed., People Meet the Law; Sundin, För Gud, Staten och Folket, 165–166; on the consequences of increasing legal professionalization and state influence see Marja Taussi Sjöberg, Rätten och kvinnorna. Från släktmakt till statsmakt i Sverige från 1500-och 1600-talen (Stockholm: Atlantis, 1996).

interaction in the north

71

own disputes concerning such matters as inheritances, encroachment, and theft.40 Karin Granqvist, who has studied the Torne lappmark court held at Jukkasjärvi market place, divides the proceedings into three parts. These consisted of announcements, cases brought before the court by the representatives of Swedish authority, and cases initiated by the Saamis. The largest number of cases, both criminal and civil, concerned property in one way or another, such as debts, thefts, and conflicts over fishing lakes. A significant number dealt with issues of a religious and cultural nature, in particular cases regarding sexual relations and idolatry. The court’s role as a channel of information from the authorities to the local population increased over the century as did the content, which more and more involved direct announcements of rules and regulations. In the cases involving issues of property and conflicts between different Saamis, the goal was arbitration and a resolution to which all parties could agree. This may well be an indication of a Saami cultural practice of conflict resolution that predated the introduction of the Swedish court system. However, Swedish rural courts show similar patterns of consensual decision making. Granquist argues that the Saamis may have used the courts for convenience, but not generally for the same reasons as the Swedish authorities did. The purpose of the cases that Saamis initiated was not to find out what had happened, but to seek a resolution to a dispute. Swedish law could also be an advantage in conflicts with settlers and intruders.41 Yet, in spite of these possibilities for consensual solutions, the Swedish court system also meant a complicated and intrusive challenge to Saami culture and self-determination. Two areas where Swedish officials were determined to restructure Saami society regarded sexual and religious practices. Representatives of the Swedish state initiated cases dealing with sexual offences and crimes against the Church and these often led to cultural conflict. In these situations,

40 Korpijaakko, “Land Ownership Among the Saami,” 82–83; ÖNH III, 120; Fellman III, LXIV–LXVI, 39–40; Solem, Lappiske rettsstudier, 88–89; Court records from Ume lappmark, 1640 (Dombok för Södermanlands län, vol. 4, RA); Lule lappmark, 1646 (Dombok för Örebro och Södermanlands län, vol. 13, RA); Arjeplog, 1652 (Dombok för Gävleborgs län, vol. 3, RA); Lule and Pite lappmarks, 1656 (Dombok för Gävleborgs län, vol. 5, RA). 41 Granqvist, Samerna, staten och rätten, 30–31, 102–103, 192–195; Päiviö, “Skattemannarätt;” Österberg and Sogner, ed., People Meet the Law, chapter 7.

72

chapter two

Saamis sought to avoid direct confrontation with Swedish officials or decrees. Instead, contentious cases were prolonged and stretched out over several years. One way to demonstrate the characteristics of these struggles is to look at the presence of women at the courts. Between 1639–1666, more than eighty percent of the women mentioned occur in connection with what was classified as sexual offenses. It becomes clear that if these women were excluded from the records the courts would be almost completely male affairs. It is highly likely that most of these women were young, the majority of them unmarried, that is they did not head a household of their own, and they were or had recently been pregnant. It is this last point that determines their presence in the records. It is likely that many of the cases of such sexual misconduct were reported to the court officers by pastors who had an opportunity to note women who were pregnant during the compulsory questioning on the catechism. However, also Saamis relayed various “rumors” of sexual liaisons.42 These cases suggest that we should not assume a unanimous Saami reaction to the Church’s regulations, nor underestimate the conflicts within Saami communities. However, most commonly Saamis sought ways to keep their relationships away from the scrutiny of Swedish authorities. Nicolaus Lundius, the chaplain of Saami origin, tells how the Ume-Saamis in particular feared their bailiff and that they discussed among themselves on their way to the market place what they should say about young women who had become pregnant during the year. This comment seems significant in connection with the figures mentioned above. Court records from throughout Sweden record an increasing, and in a European comparison unusual interest in regulating pre- and extramarital sex. In Swedish parishes women also appeared before the courts in large numbers as a consequence of their sexual conduct. However, to chastise sex before marriage was an edict emanating from the Swedish crown and church 42 I.e. Lule lappmark, 1684, and 1685 (Dombok för Västernorrlands län, vol. 5, RA); Härnösand Cathedral chapter Jan. 15, 1696 (Härnösands domkapitel arkiv: Protokoll 1693–1696, Härnösands Landsarkiv); Granqvist, Samerna, staten och rätten, 112; in one case there was an obvious reason for the Saami community to notify the bailiff: an unmarried man, Nils Larsson, was accused of sleeping with his cousin, a married woman. The punishment for her would have been death. Larsson, however, was also accused of cheating and stealing and “all the Lapps in the Lappmark demand to get him out of the way.” He was sentenced to death, but his cousin was not present at the proceedings, neither that year nor the following. Ume Lappmark, 1640 (Dombok för Södermanlands län, vol. 4, RA).

interaction in the north

73

and appears not to have been similarly punished in Saami society. Swedish authorities also determined what was to be regarded as incestual relations and such were punished with great severity. Therefore, we can discern a major conflict area between Saamis and Swedes, partly through Lundius’ statement, but also through indications in the material that in cases when the punishments were to be particularly severe, the guilty parties were absent and nowhere to be found. In 1646, Håkan Hermansson stood before the court in Ume lappmark and “was asked about the rumor that he should have slept with his blessed wife’s sister.” Hermansson denied this but the court was not satisfied with his response. However, “since the woman for whom he was reputed this time was not present, the case was suspended to next court session.” There are no further records pertaining to this case in later years. In the Saami village of Wapsten a rumor circulated that “Nils Mårtensson Lapp living in Wijhefiäll should have slept with his cousin . . . Torkill Olsson’s widow, Ingrid, and with her sired a child.” Again, nothing could be done about the situation: “These misdeeders were not now present, wherefore the bailiff was ordered to get them here to the next court.” And again, nothing came of this.43 The bulk of the cases or issues discussed at the lappmark courts did not directly involve women. The majority of cases brought before

43 Lundius, 21, 30; on the chastisement of sex among the Swedish population, see Marie Lindstedt Cronberg, Synd och skam. Ogifta mödrar på svensk landsbygd 1680–1880 (Lund: Lund University Press, 1997), 51–60; Gudrun Andersson, Tingets kvinnor och män. Genus som norm och strategi under 1600-och 1700-tal (Uppsala: Studia Historica Upsaliensia 187, 1998), 182ff; Sundin, För Gud, Staten och Folket. Among several recent Swedish studies regarding the early modern Swedish state Malin Lennartsson in particular makes the case that different groups held to and defended many different ideas, ideals, and practices surrounding marriages and sexuality. Based on her study of Cathedral chapter records in one region in southern Sweden she cautions against assuming that church and state always served the same interests, and argues that a unilateral description of the disciplining project misses the different consequences of new legal and religious practices for individuals of different categories. Up until 1686 the Swedish church maintained a more independent position vis-à-vis the state than in other Protestant countries and this also influenced the Cathedral chapter as a social arena for negotiating marriages and divorces. Lennartsson, I säng och säte, 333–352. In the northern reaches of the realm, however, church and state came together physically as well as ideologically with the establishment of market places where court sessions were held and chapels built and all secular and religious procedures were carried out simultaneously. Quotes from courts at Ume lappmark, 1646 (Dombok för Örebro och Södermanlands län, vol. 13, RA); Åsele lappmark, 1663 (Dombok för Gävleborgs län, vol. 12, RA).

74

chapter two

the courts appear to concern issues and conflicts where local agreement or arbitration was desired. These cases do not directly suggest Swedish legal intrusion into Saami society. This conclusion is strengthened by the observation that many decisions of the courts followed Saami customs. In fact, it appears as though the female presence at the courts is one of the clearest signs of conflict between Saami and Swedish customs during this period. Here we find evidence of a power struggle over Saami and Swedish cultural practices, focused on young women and men and their relationships. The primary concern was control over marriages and the manner in which they were entered into. The reason for women not appearing in the court records otherwise may be due to the division of labor in Saami culture, where some tasks were gendered and thus primarily performed by only one of the sexes. However, I find it just as likely reflect a conscious decision among Saamis to limit the extent of Swedish intrusion into the local life of Saami communities. The power struggle relating to heterosexual relationships also concerned the control over knowledge. Representatives of the Swedish crown and church constantly attempted to learn ever more about Saami societies and culture, while the latter appeared equally adamant in revealing as little information as possible. Georg Wallin, traveling on a mission from the cathedral chapter to Åsele lappmark in 1715, took down notes on Saami marriage practices and tried to find out more of the details. The Saamis were noticeably reticent in what they told him. A young man, Johan Pålsson Galli, was engaged to a young girl and Wallin commented that they did not seem to be able to keep away from one another: “Wherever he went, she went too, if he drank she drank, if he was staggering, so did she.” He noted that they seemed to be married according to Saami custom, but not Swedish, and he asked them if they spent the nights together. To this they answered “no, but she sleeps then with her parents. Moreover I asked if anyone would caution against that, no they said, but we would not dare to.” It is quite possible that the fear was related to discovery by the Swedish authorities. Caution also influenced the wife of another Saami man who Wallin approached about the man’s practice of using a drum. At the point when the husband, warmed by a drink, was about to divulge his secrets, his wife “interrupted his speech, and confounded his concepts.” Swedish authorities, in general, showed considerably more interest—or ability—to search for information regarding male practices in all facets of life,

interaction in the north

75

than female. The mostly single-gendered contact between Swedish and Saami men and the one-sidedness mirrored in the sources had consequences for Saami culture and history. This can be exemplified in the efforts to eradicate primarily male religious rituals and symbols. However, it is in the attempts to influence marriage practices and sexuality that women become visible, even though much of this concern was also leveled at men. Towards the end of the seventeenth century the interest in policing sexual behavior lessened, a trend also seen in the rest of the kingdom. But Church interest in controlling Saami marriages remained a central issue in the civilization program directed against Saami communities. In 1692 the cathedral chapter in Härnösand expressed in no uncertain terms its dislike of Saami customs and emphasized that the pastors must carefully inform the Lapps about the nature of marriage and what is essential for it For this purpose the Cathedral Chapter wants to enlist the aid of the civil officers that they in this case diligently strengthen the Lapps to [do] that which is in accordance with the decrees of God and the authorities in these situations, and thus give the pastors their support.

As in cases regarding offences against the Church it is clear how the various branches of the Swedish control apparatus worked in unison to alter Saami practices. Pastors, judges, and bailiffs were expected to cooperate in the effort of restructuring Saami culture in areas of household relations and worship. Saami women’s roles as well as men’s were altered in this confrontation between cultures and that in turn influenced Saami ways of life that had consequences for generations to come.44

44 There is still very little done on the rather extensive records from courts throughout Saami-land from the seventeenth century and on. Granqvist, Samerna, staten och rätten confirms my impression. She concludes that the “Sami did not perceive or use the court as the judicial arena it was intended to be, in a legal sense, but instead used it for their own ends,” 211; on the secrecy of Saamis regarding cultural practices, see Rydving, The End of Drum-Time, 151–153; quotes from “Resa till Årsilla Lappmark, Åhr 1715,” copy in Nordbergs arkiv 25:24 (Umeå University Library); Piteå landsförsamlings arkiv: Skrivelser från Kungl. Maj:t, Konsistorium m.fl. 1692–1768, J:I:1, no. 3 (Härnösands landsarkiv).

76

chapter two Mission and cultural conflict [O]ur Subjects and Lapps in Wäster Norlanden have until now known little of God’s word and their means of Salvation, but to the most part unfortunately lived as heathens and wild Men, practicing all sorts of heathen worship, for which our Forefathers Sweden’s highly praised kings have carried great Sorrow.

In 1640, Queen Christina expressed the concern of the Swedish crown for the spiritual state of the Saamis. She had reason to lament. God was the protector of the Swedish Empire; the monarchs must uphold the collective allegiance to the Almighty or else His punishment would strike the entire nation. In 1606–1607, her grandfather, Karl IX, in his drive towards the Arctic Sea, ordered the establishment of vicarages and churches in Ume, Pite, Lule, Torne, and Kemi lappmarks. Pastors were appointed to live there and encourage the Saamis to disavow their heathen superstitions. This was slow in coming, however, and it was the discovery of silver at Nasafjäll that led to a breakthrough for the parish organization in the lappmarks. Hopes of wealth insured what strategic and religious means had not. Axel Oxenstierna, the Swedish chancellor, exclaimed at the discovery of precious metals in the mountains that “since we have not been able to come there [the lappmarks] per pietatem, God draws us, opens doors, and shows us the way through a new silver mine, that we may come there per vitium avaritie.” Nasafjäll itself, with its great human cost for the Saami population nearby, proved to be a failure, but the church organization remained and became the prime arena for the conflict between Saamis and Swedes. Queen Christina spelled out the complementarity between avarice and spirit: “God who has blessed this Country with such a magnificent mine; He intends thus to help our subjects and Lapps out of the miserable condition in which, until this day, they have lived.” According to the Queen the best way to do this was to establish churches at the market places so that the Saamis might gather and visit the services as well as meet with other Swedes to trade and deal “and through such company, become more accustomed to Christian virtues.”45 45 Queen Christina is quoted in Nordberg, Källskrifter, 162, 163; Oxenstierna in Ingemar Öberg, Mission och evangelisation i Gellivare-bygden ca. 1740 –1770 (Åbo: Kyrkohistoriska arkivet, meddelanden 7, 1979), 6 ( pietatem = piousness, vitium avaritie = vice of greed); Öberg, Mission och evangelisation, 5–7; Poignant, Samling av författningar, 5, 8; Nordberg, Källskrifter, 151.

interaction in the north

77

One might think of the work of the Swedish state church, particularly after the turn towards orthodoxy in the latter half of the century, as one giant effort at creating conformity. The newly Swedish regions of Halland and Skåne were submitted to extensive programs of Swedification, while Swedish bureaucracy and administration dominated in the Baltic and German states. Internally, the civilizing influence of court and church were felt in every Swedish parish. The clergy appointed to the northern parishes were presented with the task of teaching the Saamis a regular devotional life based on church attendance on major holidays, participation in communion and baptism, marriages consecrated by the Church, and on learning Luther’s Little Catechism. No other measure could compete with education for efficacy, but in some situations in order to protect the collective, force and violence was sanctioned and advisable. Twenty-seven points of instructions to pastors in Arjeplog and Silbojokk illustrate the expectations of the clergy. The pastors were required to question every Saami as to his or her knowledge of the catechism before allowing them to take communion. Saamis should be taught morning, evening, and meal prayers, and the pastor must visit the Saami villages as often as he could throughout the year. During these visits, he collected one squirrel skin per Saami as a tax used to build living quarters for the pastor. He had a duty to fine all those who cohabited prior to marriage, showed up intoxicated during the Sabbath, or did not attend church on the major holidays. However, to be truly successful in reaching the hearts of Saamis many pastors realized that two things were necessary: 1) Saamis must be addressed in their own language by someone who knew their culture, and 2) effort should be directed at young people since the old could not be taught anything new and would remain “without sense.” The influence of Saami elders had to be broken and the surest way to do that seemed to be to remove young Saami boys from their presence by enrolling them in boarding schools. As early as 1606, sixteen Saami boys were forced, against the will of their parents, to go to Uppsala to study theology. The result was hardly encouraging. Some of the boys escaped on the way while others maintained “their wild manners and the greater part of them have been very inclined to drunkenness . . . so that through them very little has been achieved in the planting of Christianity.” The Cathedral chapter held hopes that Saami pastors would have great influence among their own people and therefore sought, through threats and enticement, to encourage

78

chapter two

Saamis to learn a rudiment of theology. Until 1717 seven or eight Saamis, mostly from forest Saami villages, were appointed pastors. After that, the numbers dwindled, partly due to the fact that the authorities considered the experiment with Saami clergy as something of a failure. Instead, they increasingly concentrated on convincing Saami families to send at least one son to school. Following the advice of Nicolaus Petri Niurenius, vicar in Umeå and pastor to the lappmarks in the 1620s, and under the auspices of the powerful member of the royal council, Johan Skytte, Skytteanska skolan (the Skytte school) was inaugurated in Lycksele in 1632. It remained the only school for Saami boys during the century. Other forms of control involved a refusal to accept Saami names. The names written down in tax or church records were Swedish versions of Saami names, and patronymics were created by adding -son or -dotter (son or daughter) to the father’s name. Saami names like Ande, Anti, or Anda became “Anders” in the Swedish records, and Pavva or Pagge made into “Paul.” This practice was not unique in relation to Saamis; the Finns suffered the same form of linguistic dominance.46 It soon became evident that the civilization program lacked success. Pastors and investigators reiterated similar stereotypical accounts of triumph laced with detailed descriptions of failure. Legal minutes told the same story. In spite of the educational assault, most Saamis did not become Christians, not even in an outward sense. With the help of Christian education, wrote Johannes Schefferus after half a century of concerted effort, the Saamis had learned to “utterly abhor all their ancient superstition. They pull down all their drums, and burn and demolish all their Images of wood and stone.” This was wishful thinking. One of Schefferus’ principal informants, Samuel Rheen,

46 Widén, “Stormaktstidens prästerskap,” 154, 163; Pleijel, Hustavlans värld, 33; Göran Malmstedt, Bondetro och kyrkoro. Religiös mentalitet i stormaktstidens Sverige (Lund: Nordic Academic Press, 2002); Nordberg, Källskrifter, 79, 81–84, 235–238, 270; Daniel Lindmark, “Syndiga hedningar och ädla vildar. Synen på samer och indianer i tidigmoderna svenska missionsskildringar,” in Mellem Gud og Djævelen. Religiøse og magiske verdensbilleder i Norden 1500 –1800, ed. Hanne Sanders. Nord 2001:19 (København: nordisk ministerråd, 2001), 203–230; Rydving, End of Drum-Time, 115–127; Sten Henrysson, Prästerna i lappmarken före 1850. Ursprung och arbetsuppgifter (Umeå: Forskningsarkivet, Scriptum no. 19, 1989), 12–17; quote from E.W. Bergman, “Anteckningar om Lappmarken. Särskilt med hänseende till kristendomens införande därstädes,” Historisk Tidskrift (1891), 214–215; on names Rheen, 8; Solem, Lappiske rettsstudier, 48, 58 points out that efforts to eradicate heathen names were not limited to Sweden. Both in Denmark and Norway the church fought against the use of “national” names and proposed biblical or holy names instead.

interaction in the north

79

Fig. 2. Saami Man Worshipping Effigy, woodcut in Schefferus’ History of Lapland, 1674 According to Schefferus’ text this stone effigy represents the god Storjunkar, and only men sacrificed to the gods. The woodcut was made after the author’s drawing, with the facial features of the stone effigy added. Schefferus never visited Lapland, and had to rely on informants and on collections of artifacts to create his images. Reproduction: Repro- och fotoenheten/Kungliga Biblioteket.

80

chapter two

described the conversion labor in words that ached of frustration. The Saamis only came to church by force and “they much love the delusions of their forefathers and much claim that their forefathers . . . lived in such a manner and adhered to such practices. For this reason it is very difficult to eradicate this superstition.” Schefferus was also forced to admit that Christianization had failed among the mountain Saamis in the region between Sweden and Norway “whose Idolatry sufficiently demonstrates that all their pretences to Christianity are but fictitious.”47 Pastors recorded similar experiences throughout the century but always presented on a hopeful note of promised progress when submitted to the regents. Thus, Karl XI was dismayed to discover the appalling strength of heathendom among his Saami subjects. In 1685, he ordered a thorough investigation of the whole church organization among the Saamis. Causes must be found and the clergy hurried to compete with each other with protestations of the vileness of their parishioners, perhaps in the hope of clearing themselves. Nicolaus Plantini in Lule lappmark related one particularly disappointing trip he had made to determine the state of Christianity among the Lule Saamis: I began by asking them about the catechism . . . What they understood was quite little; charged them with Idolatry and witchcraft; Intercourse with animals; incest, manslaughter, fornication, but saw no more reaction than from a log . . . when I more clearly repeated his [Christ’s] suffering in the garden, etc. was an equal lack of reaction, I saw only 2 or 3 that cried tears . . . the Pastor has scant responsibility for this, when the Lapp is like this, he can achieve little.

The final report from the Cathedral chapter in Härnösand compiled the reasons for the failure of the Saami mission project. It concluded that fortune telling and superstition were closely connected with Saami tradition, and that their nomadic habits made conversion difficult. Moreover, the pastors were incapable of forcing the Saamis to attend church since they feared Saami sorcery. Finally, the market places sowed evil as the gatherings offered plenty of opportunities for alcohol abuse, and the representatives of civilization had themselves become morally degraded and did not present a good

47 Schefferus, History of Lapland, 33: “. . . Images of wood and stone;” Rheen, 26: “. . . eradicate this superstition;” Schefferus, History of Lapland, 34: “. . . but fictitious.”

interaction in the north

81

example for the heathen. The Saami, the report concluded, preferred “his barbaric and slothful life, which he thinks of as freedom.”48 The problem of getting qualified men to fill the posts as pastors in the lappmarks was as old as the churches. Already in 1631, Niurenius dwelt on this issue. Since the Saamis did not have pastors who preached in their own language they did not know God as other Christians did and as a result they were “no more knowing or understanding of what they learn than the thrush or parrot.” He suggested that the remedy would be to train pastors in Saami languages and accustom them to live in a Saami manner, not softened by living among Swedes. [H]e who becomes used to warm houses, feeding on bread and beer, lying in good beds, he will not be eager to live among the Lapps . . . they quickly die when they have to . . . refrain from bathing, drink water and eat smoke, run on skis, lie like a dog in snow and huts in the winter, withstand cold and frost, walk through rain in the summers, across marshes, swamps and mosses . . . put up with mosquitoes and gnats so that they may eat one alive in summer, above and around giving one peace neither day nor night.

A bleak picture, indeed! No wonder the poor pastors did what they could to escape such duty. In 1641, the pastor assigned to Arjeplog repeatedly refused to go there, the main reason given that he did not know how to get his wife up to the parish. She was “an unusually large, thick and mighty fat person” and too heavy for horses to carry her in summer and there were no reindeer strong enough to pull her in winter. Another appointee, Anders, who was a Saami and expected to go to Arvidsjaur, had lived with two women, one Saami and one Swedish, and had been charged with fornication and could not go. The Saami community had no objection to Anders’ conduct and desired to have him as their pastor, but to no avail. Among the pastors who eventually took up their posts, some abused their position in various ways. In 1639 pastor Johannes aroused the anger of the Kautokeino-Saamis by borrowing their reindeer and sledges and not returning them, by forcing them to give him gifts of food and peltry, charging them exorbitantly for his services, and beating them to the point of bleeding. Johannes was only one of

48 ÖNH III, 56–58; Fellman I, 329: “. . . achieve little;” ÖNH III, 57: “. . . as freedom.”

82

chapter two

several pastors who occasioned complaints and were fined or removed by the courts.49 Unsuccessful as it may have appeared in the eyes of king and clergy, every Saami family felt the Swedish attempts at conversion. All Saamis were potentially affected by the religious demands. No one escaped baptism, communion, church weddings, and church authorities’ refusal to accept Saami names. All of those things meant a direct assault on Saami culture. Whether they adopted these new customs or not, and by and large Saamis refused, every individual suffered under the attack. All overt expressions and practices of Saami religion were forbidden. Those who complied did so not out of conviction but out of fear of the authorities who punished them through fines or by denying them access to the Christian sacraments. At times, the Swedes decided to make an example and punished men and women suspected of witchcraft and sorcery by death or banishment. Nevertheless, Saamis continued in their “barbaric and slothful life.” They did not follow the requirement that they bury their dead in consecrated soil and they continued to give their children Saami names. As polytheists, they could pay their respects to the Christian god, if for no other reason than the force he obviously commanded. Many clergymen expressed awareness that the Saamis only went to church out of compulsion and that they joined the Christian god and Christ with their own deities and paid them equal reverence. Sometimes partaking in the Christian rituals caused conflict. Before Saami women took communion, they prayed to the female deity Sáráhkká to forgive them for being forced to do so. Schefferus concluded that the Saamis had rejected the Christian doctrine as long as they had been independent and “at length they took upon them the name of Christians . . . outwardly only and in shew [sic], esteeming it the best means to gain their Princes favor, and to prevent those evils which threatened them, if they should persist in their obstinacy.”50 Frustrated prelates reported the varied counterstrategies the Saamis employed. The Saami men (and some women) described in these

49 Awebro, Luleå silververk, 231–239 describes the situation around the Kedkevaare silver mine; Henrysson, Prästerna i lappmarken, 13; Nordberg, Källskrifter, 79: “. . . thrush or parrot;” 81: “. . . either day or night;” 216: “. . . mighty fat person;” 217: removal of Johannes. 50 Schefferus, History of Lapland, 25.

interaction in the north

83

reports were by no means passive recipients of Swedish indoctrination. Many made efforts to explain their own views and beliefs to the Swedes, and under the best of circumstances these conversations occurred under pleasant conditions when Swedes visited a Saami kåta. After such a visit, Johannes Körningh related that when the Saami had warmed up from a drink of liquor, he told the Swede “that we ought all to be of the same religion, because we all believe in a God.” Others clearly expressed their respect for the worship and wisdom of their ancestors and elders, “whom they think more wise then [sic] to have bin [sic] ignorant of what God they ought to adore, or the manner of his worship.” Yet others wasted no time on arguments: ”The northern Saamis have little respect for their Priests, but use their foul mouths, especially when they are drunk.” Many Saamis exhibited an interest in theological teaching and discussions, but were not convinced by the Christian arguments. They answered the pastors’ claims with stories of their own. They could not swallow the biblical story of creation but held that the world had existed since eternity. Upon returning home from the holidays and markets, Saamis vented their anger at the presumptions of Swedish ministers, saying to each other: “did you hear how the priest preached last holiday about our drums and our sacrifices and other customs . . . should we not worship as our forefathers have done, that we will never refrain from in our land.” They were careful not to give away too much information to Swedish intruders about their own worship. Schefferus, who went to great lengths to gather information about Saami life and practices, admitted ”[a]s to the ceremonies used . . . I can give no account. . . . The reason for this, I suppose, is, because they themselves keep this secret, as the great mystery of their art.” Nicolaus Lundius wrote of the Saamis in Ume and Lule lappmarks: “[T]hey do not reveal their art; except it happens when they are drunk and one can then with care find out something from them, as well as from their children, but they sternly admonish their children not to tell anything to Swedish people.”51

51

Nordberg, Källskrifter, 238, 240, 246–247; Niurenius, 23, 26; Lundius, 15: Rheen, 8; Schefferus, History of Lapland, 35; see also Widén, “Stormaktstidens prästerskap,” 157; Bäckman, “Female-Divine and Human,” 146. Quotes: Körningh, Berättelse, 46: “. . . believe in a God;” Schefferus, History of Lapland, 34: “. . . manner of his worship;” Lundius, 11: “. . . when they are drunk;” Lundius, 24; 33: “. . . in our land;” Schefferus, History of Lapland, 2: “. . . of their art;” Lundius, 32: “. . . to Swedish people.”

84

chapter two

The battle over the hearts and minds of children formed a central feature of this cultural confrontation. Swedish policy of removing Saami children to Swedish schools remained a threat. Both parents and children resented this action and did everything possible to avoid separation. In Ume lappmark, only old people came to church leaving young boys and girls at home, ostensibly because they needed to tend to the reindeer. The pastor, however, believed the real reason to be fear that the children would be grabbed and taken to school. When school inspectors came to take the children, they had to use force and “the children cry and the parents cry, at times they run away back to their parents again.” The Saamis at Wapsten village were particularly obstinate. None of them put their sons in school. To correct this the authorities decided that the youngest son should be educated “until he could read in a book.” The parents resisted angrily. Eventually they appeared to relent and allow the boys to go to school. The officials let up the pressure and when the inspector returned to take the boys, he found that they had been sent, during the night, to Norway. The parents claimed they had escaped without their knowledge, but a court punished them for their recalcitrance.52 When no other recourse remained, the Saamis turned to violence to defend their culture. In 1686, Petrus Noraeus, pastor in Silbojokk, visited a Saami shaman named Erich Eskillsson whom he described as “a hardened, wicked, and completely godless man.” Noraeus’ purpose was to destroy the shaman’s altar, idol, and drum. When the pastor and his company were on their way back, their mission completed, Erich Eskillsson and two other men attacked the Swedish party with rods and sticks and took the drum back. Noraeus described how the Saami left them “with many insulting words, and this he now spreads around in the lappmark to his own honor, that he does not fear anyone, and chastises the other Saamis who have left their own worship.” Erich Eskillsson continued to forbid other Saamis to travel to church on the holidays, saying that it was an order invented by the priests and not coming from the King, whose subjects he evidently considered the Saamis to be. This is another example of how Saamis argued that their compact was directly with the Crown, and therefore refuted authority of the clergy. From the Swedish per-

52

Fellman I, 329, 332; quote from Lundius, 16.

interaction in the north

85

spective, the clergy served the Crown in their official role to eradicate all traces of Saami religious practices.53 Swedes clearly feared Saami power, both physical and magical. Even Swedes living in the southern region of the country considered the Saamis to be experts in the field. Consequently, the threat of magic constituted a very real weapon in the hands of the Saamis. Bailiffs and police shared the trepidation mentioned earlier in connection with the pastors and chose not to apprehend Saamis even if they were caught in the process of using magic. An occurrence in 1671 proved what could happen if they did. That year Aikie Aikiesson, about eighty years old, stood before the court accused of witchcraft. He confessed to having killed a peasant, Tobias, with magic, because the latter had not paid him for services. The court sentenced Aikie Aikiesson to death, but on the way to his execution the Saami man died. The event caused concern and authorities concluded that he had contrived, through witchcraft, to commit suicide. Such a story naturally added fuel to the belief that Saamis had supernatural powers. They were reputed to be capable of all sorts of dangerous magic, such as killing or injuring from afar, turning people into wolves, and seeing things at great distances. Swedish farmers sometimes employed this power when in conflict. Particularly poorer Saamis could be engaged, for a small fee paid in liquor. The Saamis, however, made quite clear that it was the person who commissioned the witchcraft who carried the legal and moral responsibility for the consequences of magic acts, not the man or woman who performed them.54 Contemporary sources thus give evidence that Saamis defended their cultural practices on at least three levels. The first was verbal. Saamis often spoke out directly to Swedish ministers, explaining their position. Saami spokesmen learned to use the proper channels to reach the Crown, with a mixture of appeals and threats. On the second level, verbal opposition mixed with active, non-violent resistance. Saami parents continued to give their children Saami names

53 Quote from Fellman I, 343; Widén, “Stormaktstidens prästerskap,” 164 gives another example of Saamis using force to defend their ways; Rydving, End of DrumTime, 78–79; Granqvist, Samerna, staten och rätten, 121–123. 54 Cambell, “Om lapparna,” 258–261; Nordberg, Källskrifter, 80; Fellman I, 383; Schefferus, History of Lapland, 58, 60; Körningh, Berättelse, 45–46; Niurenius, 22; Lundius, 39; on the use and beliefs about magic among Swedes, see Linda Oja, Varken Gud eller natur. Synen på magi i 1600-och 1700-talets Sverige (Eslöv: B. Östlings Bokförlag Symposion, 1999).

86

chapter two

and to protect them from abduction to school. And in spite of admonitions, Saamis persisted in burying their dead in the woods. Thirdly, the “unwarlike” Saamis, useless in any war by nature (as every description emphasized), responded with determination and force to destruction of their drums and altars. Håkan Rydving, who studied religious change among the Lule Saamis, adds a fourth response, that of adopting a low profile while continuing to practice indigenous customs. While interactions between Saamis and Swedes occurred regularly on a local level and as part of official administrative efforts, the Saamis maintained their own cultural, economic, and religious practices throughout the century. This is not to suggest that all or even the majority of contacts were conflict-ridden, nor does it mean that no changes took place, or that people responsed uniformly throughout the Saami area. During the course of the seventeenth century individual Saamis cooperated with Swedish authorities and made careers within the Swedish administration, such as Johan Graan, the grandson of a Saami, who became governor of Västerbotten. However, most sources indicate Saami awareness and selectivity in their approach to the opportunities and demands of interchanges with the Swedish state and Swedish neighbors.55 From the perspective of the Swedish state, intensified contacts during the second half of the seventeenth century led to an increasing concern with Saamis as an “other” within the realm. Interest in the north waxed and waned with the demands and worries of relations with Nordic and Baltic neighbors, but increasing knowledge also led to self-criticism and intensified efforts at altering the minds and practices of Saami subjects. Swedish actions display no concerted policy that differed from the rest of the realm. The same general thrust to civilize as in other provinces as well as similar acceptance of local custom dominated the practices of encounter. Special circumstances and Saami actions forced certain adaptations unique to the lappmarks, but also the intensification of others. The greatest conflicts emerged in the areas of religion and education, and concerning marriages and sexual relations, not as a consequence of a concerted Swedish policy, but rather as an outcome of Saami opposition. Saamis argued that the agreement with the Crown ought to allow them to stay on their land and live in the manner of their ancestors. Their

55

Rydving, End of Drum-Time, 68.

interaction in the north

87

ability to enforce their understanding differed depending on such factors as relative location and wealth and place in the trade network. An initial protection of Saami rights to land and water evaporated during later centuries, even though Saamis living closer to the mountains and subsisting on an economy of extensive reindeer herding achieved a somewhat favored status. However, over time Swedish descriptions of Saami practices served to distinguish both reindeer herders and forest dwellers as different and inferior by nature. This became increasingly evident in the following century and through the works of scientists, such as Linneaus, Saamis were relegated to a lower rung on the human hierarchy. Only few contemporaries compared the Saamis to the American Indians, and even fewer made direct connections with encounters in New Sweden. Yet, both interactions were part of the history of European expansion and by participating in them Swedes began to share and shape relations and ideas that became part of the legacy of colonization. Neither in Lapland, nor in the Delaware Valley were these relations a simple outcome of Swedish policies, nor were they uncontested. Did Swedes attempt similar combinations of trade, law, and religion in New Sweden as in the Lappmarks, and how did Indians respond to the encounter with a previously unknown people? It is with an eye to these contests and interactions that we now turn to Lenapehoking where Swedes sought to establish a foothold in the middle of the seventeenth century.

CHAPTER THREE

SWEDISH OVERSEAS EXPANSION

An unlikely venture—the New Sweden colony As one of Europe’s most powerful nations during the seventeenth century, Sweden sought its place among rivals also in its colonization practices. This chapter emphasizes the striking anomaly between attempted policies suitable for a great power and the predominantly agrarian structure of the society, which could not in the long run support one of the most impressive armies in Europe. This tension between desires and means forced Swedish regents to develop intricate strategies to attract foreign investors who could take advantage of Sweden’s natural resources. Territorial expansion became an end in itself, rather than a means to an end. Historians have argued that for the Swedish state of the seventeenth century perpetual war and territorial expansion became its own logic. In order to pay off debts to hired officers and foreign and domestic financiers, the Crown needed land and currency. Land available and appropriate for donations diminished in Sweden proper. New land areas ceded after treaties offered new possibilities and a cycle repeated itself in which debts incurred for military campaigns led to need for more land, which in turn led to new debts to the officers and backers who led these ventures. The same problem, i.e. state finances, encouraged an emphasis on the development and expansion of mining and manufacturing as well as mercantilistic trade policies. All these ventures were linked, and all of them were European and global in nature. Swedish territorial expansion in Europe occurred with the aid of trained officers and mercenary troops from places such as Scotland, Pomerania, and Switzerland. Swedish mining and manufacturing expanded due to Dutch financial backing and continental know-how. Moreover, Sweden owed its efforts at overseas colonization to international initiatives and support. While different in degree the Swedish attempts at establishing colonies in America and Africa did not differ in kind from the expansion in the Baltic region or into the North.

swedish overseas expansion

89

It was connected to the same needs and logic of the early modern Swedish state and inextricably imbued with the practices and rhetoric of European colonial expansion. Overseas colonies attracted the attention of European political and financial leaders as they watched gold flow into Spain from its American holdings. Exploitation of overseas resources appeared as an attractive solution to strained internal finances, as it was expected to generate fresh and surplus capital. Trade with colonies worked on the principle that valuable goods could be bought cheap and sold dear. Different colonial areas demanded different strategies to achieve this goal. In some regions, goods could be obtained without controlling large land areas and therefore trading posts would suffice. In other territories, settlement was necessary to maintain continuous trade with indigenous inhabitants. Northwestern Europe’s special contribution to the overseas ventures lay in the development of the trading companies. These balanced the interests of traders on the new markets and those of government power by providing cooperation between merchant entrepreneurs and government interests.1 Financiers from other countries, primarily Holland, showed interest in investing in Sweden’s colonial efforts. One and in many ways the most prominent example is Louis De Geer, who contributed much capital in the creation of the Swedish African Company in 1649, which established a trading post and fort on the Gold Coast. Here, as in America, the Dutch were the primary competitors and they finally took over the post in 1663. De Geer and other Dutch financiers and merchants also invested heavily in Sweden, developing mining and manufacture. The New Sweden Company, or South Company (Södre Compagniet), came into being as a result of Dutch financiers approaching Axel Oxenstierna and Queen Christina’s (the young daughter of Gustavus Adophus) regency and engaging them in the venture. From the beginning, the crown assumed a strong position in the company. Given the urgent needs of financing the war it is not surprising that the suggestion appeared attractive. The new

1 Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 2–3; Niels Steensgaard, “The Companies as a Specific Institution in the History of European Expansion,” in Essays on Overseas Trading Companies During the Ancien Régime, ed. L. Blussé and F. Gaastra, Comparative Studies in Overseas History, 3 (Leiden: Leiden University Press, 1981), pp. 263–264.

90

chapter three

company was founded in 1637 with equal amounts of Dutch and Swedish capital but already in 1642 a reorganization appeared necessary. The Dutch investors found that their involvement had not yielded the expected profits and they wanted to sell their shares. At the same time Crown representatives, particularly Axel Oxenstierna and Claes Fleming (a member of the council and head of the admiralty), argued that the Crown should take a more dominant role in order to strengthen the colony. This view prevailed and the colony became a direct state interest. Arguments for the state’s involvement in the colony were of three kinds: 1) Swedish trade and shipping would be strongly developed; 2) incomes to the Crown would increase significantly as it had for Spain and the Netherlands; 3) Christianity would be spread among the heathens.2 Among foreigners interested in furthering a Swedish colony was Peter Minuit, who for seven years had been director of the New Netherland colony. Minuit and his merchant supporter, Samuel Blommaert, had become disenchanted with the leadership of the Dutch company and envisioned a Dutch-Swedish rival under Swedish protection. Minuit offered the concrete proposal. He had navigated up the Delaware River and must have been aware of two very strategic tributaries, the Minquas Kill and the Schuylkill River, and also knew that a Dutch post, Fort Nassau, lay too far upriver to obstruct any plans for a trading station on the Minquas Kill. This location was of utmost importance since this river ended the Great Minquas Path, the trail along which the Susquehannocks, who were the leading procurers of furs in the area, brought their goods to the coast to trade.3

2 On the Swedish Africa Company, see György Nováky, Handelskompanier och kompanihandel. Svenska Afrikakompaniet 1649–1663. En studie i feodal handel, Studia Historica Upsaliensia 159 (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1990), on De Geer’s involvement see pp. 93–94, 147ff. Arguments taken from the first discussion concerning the establishment of a colony already in 1625. Similar aims were expressed at the reorganization in 1642, Dahlgren and Norman, The Rise and Fall, 4, 12–13; Amandus Johnson, The Swedish Settlements on the Delaware 1638–1664 (2 vols) (Philadelphia: Swedish Colonial Society, 1911), 221ff. 3 Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 47–48; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 93; John Witthoft, “Comparison of Delaware and Susquehannock Settlement Patterns,” in The Lenape Indian, a Symposium, ed. Herbert C. Kraft (New Jersey: Archaological Research Center, Seton Hall University, Publication no. 7, 1984), 36.

swedish overseas expansion

91

Map 2 Map of Virgina, New England, New Netherland and New Sweden by Thomas Campanius Holm (1702). Reproduction: Repro- och fotoenheten / Kungliga Biblioteket.

92

chapter three

With capital of which half was collected in Sweden and the rest in Holland, Peter Minuit prepared the first expedition. It left Sweden in the fall of 1637 with the two vessels Kalmare Nyckel (Key of Kalmar) and Fågel Grip (The Griffin). They reached the mouth of the Delaware River in March 1638 and landed at the location of present-day Wilmington, where the first Swedish settlement began as a small garrison post located on the Minquas Kill. Later, dispersed settlements developed, still primarily along the west bank, and the colonists built a number of blockhouses and forts in strategic locations to protect the colony and to trade with the Indians. Subsequent colonists made their way across the river and inland along the tributaries to settle in present-day Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Maryland. The first expedition returned with a cargo of tobacco and hides, but was a severe financial loss. In addition to this, Peter Minuit drowned in a storm off the West Indies. Two years elapsed before the next expedition set out. In economic terms, the second trip was just as unsuccessful as the previous one and it was then that the Dutch financiers decided to withdraw. The first ordinance concerning the company was a 1641 privilege to import tobacco to Sweden. Tobacco trade remained the single most gainful activity throughout the period 1641–60, but the colonial enterprise never fulfilled its high promises. Its promoters had hoped for a profitable fur business and a triangle trade involving hides and tobacco from the Delaware and sugar from the West Indies. These hopes were frustrated and the company remained viable only through the monopoly on importation and sale of tobacco in Sweden.4 For several of the aristocratic backers of the venture, however, profits played a secondary role. For those like Axel Oxenstierna, Erik Oxenstierna, Claes Fleming, and Christer Bonde who held positions of influence in the government, the interests of the realm had higher priorities. They held that the role of a great power demanded, and was augmented through a vigorous international trade policy, which also contained elements of judicial and religious responsibilities. The American colony should be more than a trading post and in 1642 the leaders of the reorganized company appointed Lieutenant-Colonel Johan Printz as governor of New Sweden with instructions to extend

4 Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 6–7, 45, 50–51, 60–61; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 119, 158–163, 182.

swedish overseas expansion

93

Swedish law and faith to the glory of the kingdom. For ten years (1643–53), he administered the colony with severity and some success. Under his leadership, the colony grew into a thriving little community, although constantly under strain from the lack of contact with the home country. He was succeeded by Johan Risingh, economist and secretary in the College of Commerce. However, the larger Dutch colony to the north never fully accepted Swedish presence and maintained a fort on the east bank on the Delaware River. In 1655, the Dutch under Governor Peter Stuyvesant backed its claims with force and attacked the Swedish colony. Fort Christina capitulated on 15 September 1655, and Sweden lost its foothold on the American mainland forever.5 When the Dutch annexed New Sweden the Swedish government protested but did not attempt to regain the colony. This may seem strange, particularly in light of the stress placed on the value of overseas trade. Governor Risingh in his economic treatises emphasized the linkages between Sweden’s domain in America and its Baltic dominions as a vehicle for control of the international trade with its center in Northwestern Europe. In Europe, Sweden’s military power equaled that of England and Holland, yet its attempts at overseas trade were insignificant. The economic underpinnings of its empire were too fragile, and its shipping and manufacturing lacked the capacity to stand up to competition. While under Swedish sovereignty the colony had a population of a mere few hundred Swedish and Finnish individuals. In seventeen years, only twelve expeditions left Sweden for the New World, and two of them failed to arrive. Financially, also, the company failed to deliver what the investors had expected. Thus, to the great frustration of men like Risingh, Sweden gave up its American colony without a struggle, and the Swedish and Finnish colonists were left to fend for themselves away from the rule of their home country.6

5 Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 9, 64–65; “Printz to Oxenstierna, August 30, 1652,” in Johnson, Instruction, 184; “Risingh’s Journal,” in Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, [hereafter Risingh’s Journal], 258–259. 6 On Risingh’s reasoning and the problems of the company, see Stellan Dahlgren, “The Crown of Sweden and the New Sweden Company,” in New Sweden in America, ed. Carol Hoffecker, Richard Waldron, Lorraine E. Williams, and Barbara E. Benson (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1995), 54–65; also Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 3–25.

94

chapter three

Apart from Minuit, six men served as leaders of the colony. When Minuit left New Sweden on his last voyage in June of 1638, twenty soldiers and one interpreter stayed on under Måns Kling, who was an officer, and Hendrik Huygen, the Dutch factor who with his knowledge of trade and the conditions of the area became indispensable for future leaders. In 1640 Peter Holländer Ridder took command of the colony and remained until 1643 when Johan Printz arrived as governor. In the interim period between the departure of Printz and the arrival of Johan Risingh, Johan Papegoja served as head of the administration. Risingh, who came in 1654 stayed until the Dutch attack in 1655. Administrating the colony proved no easy task, just as leaders in adjacent English and Dutch colonies up and down the coast had already learned. New Sweden came into being after other European powers had launched colonies and devised operating methods. Swedish colonizers could build on their experiences to establish a commercial outpost; in fact, they were highly dependent not only on Dutch money and know-how, but also on support from English merchants. Swedes learned from the Dutch and English how to carry on trade with the Indians and make formal territorial claims. Yet, relationships with neighboring colonies remained strained and internal friction between colonists and the governor erupted in a mutiny in 1653.7 It had been the royal intent to people this new land with Swedish subjects. Just as in the case of expansion into northern Scandinavia, the Crown had difficulty finding eager emigrants. Sweden was sparsely populated and people saw little incentive to undertake such a long and arduous sea voyage. To provide colonists, the government ordered officers of the western provinces of Elfsborg and Värmland to apprehend such married soldiers who had either evaded service or committed some minor offence, and transport them, their wives, and their children to New Sweden. After two years, they would be allowed to return. In preparation for the third expedition, Måns Kling who commanded the first group of soldiers, returned home to Sweden. He received instructions to recruit from Bergslagen (a mining region in central Sweden) people “for . . . New Sweden . . . that the inhabi-

7 Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 58, 61–62, 64, 78, 80; on the connections with surrounding colonies see Karen Ordahl Kupperman, “Scandinavian Colonists Confront the New World,” in New Sweden in America, 94–106.

swedish overseas expansion

95

tants may profit by the wealth of that land, so rich in valuable merchandise, as well as increase their traffic with foreign nations, and become expert at sea.” Particularly drift-finnar were to be enlisted for this purpose. They were Finns who tried to eke out a living practicing a slash-and-burn cultivation in the forests that up until then had been of little interest to the Crown. Now, with the ever-increasing demand for exchange-values, the forests became an important resource for the production of metals. These forest Finns constituted a problem since they “against our Edict and Prohibition, destroy the forests by setting tracts of wood on fire, in order to sow in the ashes, and who mischievously fell trees.” Sending them to America seemed to solve two problems at once.8 The members of the fourth expedition constituted a typical group. Of the thirty-five who left Stockholm on May 3, 1641, eight were soldiers, four servant boys, and four young men who had been sentenced to be servants. Two young noblemen went along to try their luck as well as one tailor, who intended to start farming, and who brought along his wife, two daughters, and one son. The remainder included one miller, who with his wife and two children hoped to farm, another “future farmer” and wife, one servant for the tobacco cultivation, and a lieutenant with wife, child, and servant girl. In spite of this relative abundance of women, the population structure initially showed a surplus of males and reports back to Sweden commented on the lack of women. The colony needed “above all things, a number of unmarried women for our unmarried freemen and others.”9 The origins and occupations of the colonists aboard the expeditions destined for the American shore varied considerably. Swedish and Finnish speaking colonists dominated, and over time, perhaps half of the colonists were Finns. But a number of individuals came from other countries. Some of the crew as well as officers

8 C.T. Odhner, “The Founding of New Sweden, 1637–1642,” Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 3 (1879), 396, 405–407 (quotes from 405, 406); Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 147–151; the significance of the Finnish slash-and-burn cultivators is discussed in Per Martin Tvengsberg, “Finns in Seventeenth-Century Sweden and Their Contributions to the New Sweden Colony,” in New Sweden in America, 279–289; for an interesting and rather provocative view of the influence of forest Finns on frontier culture in America see Terry G. Jordan and Matti Kaups, The American Backwoods Frontier. An Ethnic and Ecological Interpretation (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989), 117–123, 228–229. 9 “Report of Johan Printz, 1647,” in Johnson, Instruction, 136.

96

chapter three

were Dutch or came from German and Baltic provinces. There was even a “Morian,” a black slave from Angola who stayed on in the colony as a freeman known under the name of Swartz. Among Swedish speaking colonists, many came from the regions of eastern Svealand, Västergötland, and Bohuslän. Not surprisingly, in terms of social background nobility, burghers, and other upper classes were over represented in relation to the heavily agrarian structure of seventeenth-century Sweden. This was particularly apparent during the first years as a military colony, while later, agriculture became the dominant activity. The majority of the colonists stayed in the area, although officers and soldiers intended to return home. A total of nearly a thousand people left Sweden for the colony in the mid-seventeenth century, 350 of whom arrived after the colony was lost to the Dutch. In 1654, the total population of New Sweden amounted to only 368 persons, some of whom were of other nationalities. A high death rate and the difficulty of obtaining colonists in Sweden account for the small population.10 Swedish law, religion, and organization of subsistence was expected to define life in the colony. Settlements were clustered around the main trading forts established primarily on the west bank of the river. Under Governor Printz, the area claimed was divided into districts where land was put into cultivation. Tobacco planting began at three locations, but within a few years, it proved to be a failure, and barley and corn dominated the agricultural efforts. The colonial population remained small and scattered along waterways. While this may have differed markedly for the Swedish colonists who came from rural villages, the forest Finns were able to continue their burnbeating practices and increasingly protested or evaded colonial authorities. It has been suggested that the cultural elements they brought with them, such as the cultivation through burning, the use of the sauna, and shamanistic religious practices led to greater affinities with their Indian neighbors than with Swedish colonial leaders. In any case, Finnish colonists were found in isolated settlements along water-

10

Sten Carlsson, “The New Sweden Colonists, 1638–1656: Their Geographical and Social Background,” in New Sweden in America, 171–182; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 151, 514; “Report of Johan Printz, 1647,” Johnson, Instruction, 129; Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 46.

swedish overseas expansion

97

ways far from colonial centers, and ever more so after the Dutch take-over.11 Relations with other European colonists dominate the instructions to the governors and their accounts and letters back to Sweden. Yet, interactions with neighboring Indians became a regular occurrence as well as necessity; however, Queen Christina and her councilors exhibited only a peripheral interest in the “wild men” of America. This is not surprising. The colony began as a business venture and instructions to governors mainly contained directions on how trade should be advanced and conducted and how the colony with its diverse Swedish and Finnish population should be governed. The instructions for Johan Printz stressed clearly and succinctly that the wild nations surrounding the colony should be treated with humanity and that the governor was responsible for ensuring that the colonists inflicted no violence or wronged the Indians. Count Per Brahe elaborated the point in a letter to Johan Printz. If, he wrote, you are kind to them and allow no harm to be done to them, then they will not attack you and their benevolence will protect you from the hostilities of other neighbors. Friendship was to be the basis of the policy, in the interest of the colony’s safety. Indian military power aside, native religion and society did not impress the Swedish authorities. The poor, erring people should be instructed as children, admonished Count Brahe. He suggested bringing a few Indians back to Sweden to show them another world. They would be treated very well in Sweden and through them, Brahe hoped, much good could be accomplished among other “savages.” This plan never materialized, primarily because of Indian reluctance. Printz received instructions to grasp all opportunities to inform and influence the savages in the true Christian religion and civilization, “as though led by hand,” an expression which again seems to compare Indians with children or subjects in a feudal state. Instructions clearly distinguished between the treatment of Indians and other Europeans. Dutch colonists living within the boundaries of the colony should be allowed to keep the practice of their religion, in spite of the perceived dangers in 11

Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 64–79; Tvengsberg, “Finns in SeventeenthCentury Sweden,” 284–286; Juha Pentikäinen, “The Forest Finns and Transmitters of Finnish Culture from Savo via Central Scandinavia to Delaware,” in New Sweden in America, 299–300.

98

chapter three

the Calvinistic faith which threatened to contaminate the Lutheran Swedes. Therefore, while Printz was urged to protect Swedish church practices, real political considerations made it prudent to allow certain lenience for European neighbors. The Swedes who issued instructions did not perceive Indian religious influences as threatening, and thus concerned themselves only with how Christians might and ought to influence the heathens.12 The overriding concern lay with trade. Printz was instructed to stress to the Indians that the Swedes had not come to harm them but to supply them with what they needed for their livelihood and were unable to procure themselves. To ensure that the Lenape and Susquehannock Indians in the area bought their goods from the Swedes, Printz received orders to undersell the Dutch and the English. The fur trade should be strictly limited to authorized traders under the Company. Printz was responsible for ensuring that the Company made a profit.13 In this respect, the Swedish policy differed from that in New Netherlands, where the establishment of trading posts was not restricted. The markets of Fort Orange/Rensselaerswyck dominated through favorable location, trade expertise, and diplomacy.14 The smaller New Sweden Company tried to compensate by using the authorized trading practices employed earlier in Lapland among the Saami population in northern Scandinavia. There they had tried to confine all trade to well-defined market places held during set times each year. Attempts to restrict trade to certain areas and persons also formed part of the American colony’s policy. Prudence in handling the trade, instructions to seek to maintain peaceful relations with neighbors, the extension of Swedish laws to Swedish territory, and expectations that Swedish leaders would seek to instruct the heathens make up the whole of Swedish colonial instructions in relation to the Indian peoples in America. Expectations in many ways resembled those held on other acquired provinces, such as the Baltic states.

12 “The ‘Instruction’ for Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 79–81, 96–97; “Brahe to Printz, November 9, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 155–156; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 123 reports the Indian response to the Swedish desire to bring some of them to Sweden. 13 “The ‘Instruction’ for Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 80–81, 86–87. 14 Francis Jennings, “Dutch and Swedish Indian Policies,” in Handbook of North American Indians (vol. 4: History of Indian-White Relations, Wilcomb E. Washburn, ed., Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1988), 14–15.

swedish overseas expansion

99

Yet, the contact with Lenape and Susquehannock neighbors turned out to conform little to expectations in addition to being of decisive importance for the existence and operation of the colony as will be shown through looking at the critical areas of land possession, trade, and cultural confrontation.

CHAPTER FOUR

RIGHTFUL OWNERS—THE SWEDISH COLONY AND INDIAN LAND

You must bear in mind that the boundaries of the country . . . extend through the medium and by the virtue of the deeds entered into with the wild inhabitants of the country, as its rightful owners.1

With these instructions, Queen Christina of Sweden expressed her and the Crown’s expectations on how her officers were to establish a firm and virtuous foundation for her colony in the New World. Although trade was the main purpose of the colonial attempt, it depended on access to actual physical space, and without strategic geographical locations a European power could not hope to launch a colony and justify its presence vis-á-vis other Europeans. Colonial officers and administrators strove to access and maintain a land base and then sought to defend that right in terms that would hold up under legal scrutiny back in Europe. However, land use, control, and transfer brought on more conflicts between Swedes and Lenapes than any other aspect of their meeting. Similarly, conflicting claims on land plagued New Sweden’s contacts with neighboring white colonies, in particular New Netherland. To understand what transpired in countless conferences between Swedes and Indians, as well as between Swedes, Dutch, and English we need to take a closer look at the circumstances and ideas surrounding ownership and use of land and its resources. For all intents and purposes, what really mattered initially to both Swedes and Lenapes was the right to use land in various ways. The encounter encouraged each side to formulate ideas concerning the nature of these rights, but it also brought out underlying tensions within each culture. The lack of Indian sources critically restricts our ability to complete the description of Indian relationship to land and environment. Instead, historians must use various colonial sources containing enough similar, sometimes contradictory, evidence to

1

“Instruction for Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 66–67.

rightful owners

101

develop a general picture. The term ownership is a questionable expression to use. Indians did not conceive of the type of ownership rights associated with Roman law and present in today’s western world. Neither did seventeenth century Europeans for that matter. Ownership rights are anachronistic terms when applied to the seventeenth century, whether one is discussing Indian or Swedish society. However, the idea of a people’s right to land cannot be tied to a particular legal concept belonging to one Euro-American culture. To do so would be to sanction the dispossession of land that has occurred in America as well as in Lapland and other parts of the world. I have chosen to use a number of terms, such as possession, dominion, or relations to the land, but emphasize that Indians had and exercised rights to land that superceded the legal rights of the colonizers—they were “rightful owners” in the young queen’s words.2

Lenapehoking Abundant vegetation and a wealth and variety of animals characterized the land which the European invaders described in the seventeenth century. Governor Johan Printz characteristically wrote home about “a remarkably beautiful country, with all the glories which a human being on earth ever at any time may wish for.” The fertile soil, the diversity and numbers of wild game, the plethora of edible plants and fruits are all recurrent themes in the Swedish descriptions of the land they aimed to colonize. “It shines of fertility,” Lindeström noted on one of his maps of the river. Johan Papegoja wrote home that in the summertime the country was “very splendid and beautiful, with all kinds of fruit and [fruit] bearing trees, also very beautiful soil to sow and plant in.” Johan Risingh emphasized that “hunting in this country is overwhelmingly good,

2 The literature touching upon the issue of land ownership is vast. From a focus on land as a material and economic resource, scholarly interest has moved towards looking more at perceptions of land as an issue of culture. A recent and illuminating discussion is found in Nancy Shoemaker, A Strange Likeness. Becoming Red and White in Eighteenth-Century North America (New York and London: Oxford University Press, 2004), chapter 1. Concerning romantic views of Indian relations to land see J. Baird Callicott, “American Indian Land Wisdom? Sorting Out the Issues,” Journal of Forest History 33:1 ( January 1989), 35–42.

102

chapter four

since there are an unbelievable amount of wild animals.”3 Such pronouncements formed part of the rhetoric of justification for the colonial venture, but there is no doubt that the Swedes were impressed with the country they came to. To the Lenapes, this land was home. The word lenapehoking, which they used to designate their land, literally means “land of the original people.” The land along the coast is low and intersected by the many small tributaries to the Delaware and Susquehanna rivers. The area bordering the waterways was covered with soft, ash-like soil and clumps of tall grass. Trees grew far apart in the mixed oak woods, “as if they were planted,” demonstrating human influence on the landscape long before the arrival of white men. Remnants of mussels and shells gave evidence of marine deposits. On the western side of the river, the earth was dark and mixed with clay, while on the eastern shore sandy soil and salt marshes predominated. European sources sometimes give the impression that this land existed in a pristine state untouched by human habitation but Lenape people lived along both banks of the Delaware River and also along the freshwater tributaries. They preferred the inland locations since there they were less subject to harsh weather conditions and an abundance of birds and animals lived along the waterways and in the marshland, being easy prey to human hunters. Fish entered the brooks at spawning and the fertile soils served well for planting.4 At the time of contact with Europeans, all of the Middle Atlantic Slope cultures subsisted by means of hoe-gardening, fishing, hunting, and gathering. Indian corn or maize was the principal crop and staple of the Indian diet:

3

“Printz to Oxenstierna, April 14, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 152; “Papegoja to Brahe, July 15, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 159; Petter Anders Lindeström, “En kort relation ock beskrifning öfwer Nya Sweriges Situation ock beskaffenhet . . .” Rålambs samling, Folder No. 201 (Kungliga Biblioteket); Johan Risingh, “Beskrifning om Nya Swerige, Januari 1658,” Handel och Sjöfart, nr. 196: Kolonier, Nya Sverige II (Riksarkivet). 4 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 157–158, 161; Pehr Kalm, Resejournal över Resan till Norra Amerika II, ed. Martti Kerkkonen and John E. Roos (Helsingfors: Svenska Litteratursällskapet i Finland, 1970) [hereafter Kalm II], 242–243; Herbert C. Kraft, The Lenape. Archaeology, History, and Ethnography (Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1986), 118; Peter O. Wacker, Land and People. A Cultural Geography of Preindustrial New Jersey: Origins and Settlement Patterns (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1975), 13–17. On use of lenapehoking see Goddard, “Delaware,” 235; Swedberg, America Illuminata, 96.

Map 3. Lindeström’s map of the Delaware River Map of “Nova Suecia i Virginia . . . uppmätt 1654–1655.” The map was measured in 1654–1655 and now kept in the manuscripts archive at the Royal Library in Stockholm. It locates a number of Lenape villages and hunting and fishing places along the river and its tributaries. Reproduction: Repro- och fotoenheten/Kungliga Biblioteket.

rightful owners 103

104

chapter four The food supplies are various. The principal one is maize, which is their corn . . . They pound it in a hollow tree . . . When they travel, they take a flat stone, and pound it with another stone placed upon the first, and when it is pounded, they have little baskets, which they call notassen, and which are made of a kind of hemp . . . which they make so neatly that they serve them as sieves—and thus make their meal. They make flat cakes of the meal mixed with water . . . and bake them in the ashes, first wrapping a vine-leaf or maize-leaf around them. When they are sufficiently baked in the ashes, they make good palatable bread. The Indians also make use of French beans of different colors, which they plant among their maize.

Women took the primary responsibility for planting and gardening. Working together in teams, organized by the most influential women of the lineages, women planted and cared for the corn and beans, squash and other vegetables grown in the village fields. They hailed the first full moon at the end of “the time when the frogs begin to croak” (February) as the sign that planting should commence. Women then prepared the seeds, broke up the earth in the fields the men had cleared, and planted five to seven grains of maize in each hill. The seeds were placed three or four feet apart to allow room for thorough weeding. In mid-May when the plants had grown two or three feet high, they planted beans in the mounds to allow them to crawl up the corn stalks. Children and old men stayed around the fields much of the time to help with weeding and to fend off rats and other marauders. In addition, squash and melons were cultivated, as was tobacco. Corn came in several varieties and colors. Lindeström mentioned seeing white, red, blue, flesh colored, brown, yellow, and spotted corn.5

5 Quote from David Pieterszen de Vries, “Korte Historiael Ende Journaels Aenteyckeninge,” in Narratives of New Netherland 1609–1664 [hereafter NNN ], ed. J. Franklin Jameson, (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1909), 218–219. William W. Newcomb, Jr., The Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians, Anthropological Papers no. 10 (Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, 1956), 13; C.A. Weslager, The Delaware Indians; A History (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1972), 56; Kraft, Lenape, 138–139. The relative importance of each of these subsistence sources is a matter of some dispute. Weslager states that agriculture was the foundation for Lenape economy, while Marshall J. Becker argues that the Lenapes were primarily a foraging people, see his “Lenape Maize Sales to the Swedish Colonists: Cultural Stability During the Early Colonial Period,” in New Sweden in America, 121–136. It seems clear to me that the cultivation of maize and other crops was basic to the Lenape subsistence system. An overwhelming number of sources testify to this fact. See Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 154, 167, 170, 179–180, 220; Johan de Laet, “New World,” in NNN, 57; William Penn, “Letter to the Society of Traders,” in

rightful owners

105

While women prepared the land for the new growing season men made ready for the fish to return up the rivers. The Lenapes lived close to water and fashioned dugout canoes for transportation, as traveling was easier on rivers than on land. Sometimes whales swam into the Delaware River and the Lenapes constructed “catamarans” from two canoes, equipped them with sails made of hemp and sailed after the large mammals. The river and freshwater tributaries contained great amounts of fish such as shad, salmon, haddock, sturgeon, pike, perch, and trout, which were caught in dragnets or weirs throughout the spring and summer. The striped bass, called twalt by the Europeans, was a particular delicacy and also renowned for its qualities as an aphrodisiac: “It seems that this fish makes them lascivious, for it is often observed that those who have caught any when they have gone fishing, have given them, on their return, to the women, who look for them anxiously. Our people also confirm this.” Whether it was the fish or the season that produced the desired effect may be left open for debate, but in the beginning of the summer the women turned the care of their fields over to the old people and joined the men for a summer of collecting herbs and roots and gathering other sea food such as clams, crabs, and oysters. Summer was also the time for picking berries, wild fruit, and nuts of various kinds. Ground nuts, hazelnuts, chestnuts, wild grapes, blueberries, and turnips (called kätniss) were important elements of the diet. So vital in fact that kätniss was the main staple during the summer months before the corn ripened. Amid all this work, summer was the season for visiting, trading, and feasting, a time which many of the villagers spent together.6 Narratives of Early Pennsylvania, West New Jersey and Delaware 1630 –1707 [hereafter NEP ], ed. Albert Cook Myers (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1912), 232; Gabriel Thomas, “An Historical and Geographical Account of Pensilvania and of West-New-Jersey,” in NEP, 334; “Father White’s Briefe Relation,” in Narratives of Early Maryland 1633–1684 [hereafter NEM ], ed. Clayton Colman Hall (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1910), 44; “A Relation of Maryland,” in NEM, 82; Isaack de Rasieres, “Letter to Samuel Blommaert, 1628,” in NNN, 107–108; Adriaen van der Donck, “New Netherlands,” in Collections of the New York Historical Society, 2d ser., I (New York, 1841), 208; Nicholaes van Wassenaer, “From the ‘Historisch Verhael’,” in NNN, 69; de Vries, ”Korte Historiael,” in NNN, 219; “Annual letter of the Jesuits” from 1640 also mentions a famine among the Indians “on account of the excessive drought of the past summer,” NEM, 132. 6 On catamarans and whale fishing, see Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 237; de Vries, in NEP, 15, 21; Wacker, Land and People, 71. On fishing: Wassenaer, in NNN, 71; de Rasieres, in NNN, 105; de Vries, in NNN, 222–223; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 187–188, 219–220; Quote from de Rasieres, in NNN, 106. Summer activities:

106

chapter four

Towards the end of the summer it was time for harvest, and maize, beans, pumpkins, and squashes were dried, cooked, or pounded and saved in storage pits lined with mats to be used during the winter or for trade. Impressive amounts, in colonial comparison, were harvested and each woman may have obtained as much as forty to sixty bushels of corn, providing her family with 65% or more of their entire caloric intake. No wonder Indians showed no inclination to copy European agricultural practices “which require too much labour and care to please them,” while yielding less. When crops had been taken care of both men and women busied themselves with the fall hunt. Hunting was primarily men’s responsibility and some of them, particularly the younger men, spent a large part of the summer hunting. In October, women and children followed along on the deer hunt returning to the village in mid-winter, while men stayed out in small hunting parties throughout the colder season. The white-tailed deer was the most useful game animal. From its hide the Lenapes manufactured clothing, and antlers and bones were fashioned into tools, while sinews were used as thread and the guts boiled down to produce glue. At least once yearly, whole villages cooperated in communal hunting. People spread out in a large circle, pulled up the dry grass in the section assigned to each of them, thus creating a ring of bare earth. Then fire was set to the grass within the circumference and burned towards the middle. The hunters followed the fire and killed the animals caught in the flaming circle. Lenapes also hunted a number of fur-bearing animals such as bears, wolves, raccoons, fishers, weasels, skunks, otters, porcupines, and squirrels. Bears provided winter robes and cooking fat. Beavers yielded fat and their tails were considered delicacies.7

Israel Acrelius, Beskrifning Om De Swenska Församlingars Tilstånd, Uti Det så kallade Nya Swerige (Stockholm: Harberg & Hesselberg, 1759), 46, 73; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 158–159, 177ff, 187–188; Kalm II, 390, 408–409; Wassenaer, in NNN, 69, 71; de Vries, in NNN, 219, 222–223; Ives Goddard, “Delaware,” in Handbook of North American Indians 15: Northeast, ed. Bruce Trigger (Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1978), 217. 7 Harvest and amounts: de Vries, in NNN, 209, 219–220; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 179–180, 253; Kraft, Lenape, pp. 126, 139; Merchant, Ecological Revolutions, 75, 80, 297 (one bushel of corn equals 56 pounds), colonial yields were considerably lower, 87. Hunting: de Rasieres, in NNN, 108; Kraft, Lenape, 155–156; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 213–217. Lindeström is a bit vague about when in the year the communal hunt occurred. It is probable that it was the same as the fall hunt mentioned by other writers. Quote from van der Donck, 209.

rightful owners

107

Lenape concepts of land ownership For the Indians in the Middle Atlantic provinces these manifold resources provided safe and plentiful sustenance through the major part of the year and dictated their relationship to the land. The flora and fauna of the land formed part of the common dominion that supernatural forces controlled. The Lenapes believed that they experienced fortune as farmers and hunters only to the extent that they lived in harmony with the wishes of their divinity. Humans interacted with non-human beings such as animals, birds, and plants in a spiritual and physical universe where reciprocal obligations suffused the relationships. The relationship to land must be understood in such a reciprocal manner as well. Rights to land shifted with ecological use, and ownership meant the right to use the land—plant crops, hunt, fish, gather, and build on it. Different groups of people could have different claims on, or relationships to, the same piece of land depending on how they used it. The members of an Indian village did not lay claim to the land itself, but to the things that existed on the land during the various seasons. Moreover, dominion followed on the occupation of a certain position of responsibility within the native society which used the land. Indians’ rights involved open and free access to “wind, rivers, woods, plains, sea, beaches, and banks.” Every individual, whatever nation he or she belonged to, as long as they were not “publicly engaged in quarrels” might “use these freely and enjoy these in as much freedom as though they were born there.”8 8 Michael Dean Mackintosh, “New Sweden, Natives, and Nature,” in Friends & Enemies in Penn’s Woods. Indians, Colonists, and the Racial Construction of Pennsylvania, ed. William A. Pencak and Daniel K. Richter (University Park, Pa: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004), 3–17; Gregory Evans Dowd, A Spirited Resistance. The Native American Struggle for Unity, 1745–1815 (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), 4–9; William Cronon, Changes in the Land. Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England (New York: Hill and Wang, 1983), 65; Anthony F.C. Wallace, “Women, Land, and Society: Three Aspects of Aboriginal Delaware Life,” Pennsylvania Archaeologist XVII:1–2 (1947), 2. The kin group was the most important delineating factor. One’s position within the kin group determined also one’s rights and obligations towards land and ceremonies connected with the procurement of food, see Regula Trenkwalder Schönenberger, Lenape Women, Matriliny, and the Colonial Encounter. Resistance and Erosion of Power (c. 1600–1876) (Bern: Peter Lang, 1991), 181–183. Quotes from Adriaen van der Donck, in Ada van Gastel “Van der Donck’s Description of the Indians: Additions and Corrections,” William and Mary Quarterly XLVII: 3 ( July 1990), 418. Van der Donck added to his description of free access that “they won’t abuse or violate this freedom.”

108

chapter four

This does not mean that Lenapes and their neighbors did not claim rights to specific pieces of land. Indian nations or groups did recognize territories as belonging to certain groups. The plots cleared for crops obviously belonged to those who had planted it. That Lenapes practiced large communal hunts suggests that land was held in common for hunting purposes. William Penn reported that all payments for land were distributed equally among all members of a village: “The Pay or Presents I made them, were not hoarded by the particular Owners, but . . . that King sub-divideth it in like manner among his Dependents, they hardly leaving themselves and Equal share with one of their Subjects.” A much later deposition from 1762, made by a Pennsylvania landholder, summarized the understanding of land control which the Indians had been able to convey to the colonists. It suggests that there never existed a central authority which controlled Lenape lands, but that tribal groups in both Pennsylvania and New Jersey lived in areas “distinguished by certain natural bounds of Hills, Rivers and Waters.” As for the alienation of land, the deponent asserted that it “was the constant or general usage amongst the Indians of North America, particularly the said Delaware Nation, that all Bargains or Treaties for the Purchase of any of their Lands must be with the particular and proper Sachem and under Sachem of the Territory, District or tract in which such Lands treated for, lay.”9

9 On the basis of records of early land transactions some scholars have concluded that the smallest unit of land the Lenapes utilized were family hunting territories consisting of parcels of wooded land bounded by streams, seashores, or other natural landmarks. Use rights would have been handed down from generation to generation. See Newcomb, Culture and Acculturation, 23; Weslager, Delaware Indians, 39; William C. MacLeod, “The Family Hunting Territory and Lenape Political Organization,” American Anthropologist, n.s. 24 (1922), 448–463. On the other hand, Melburn D. Thurman, “Delaware Social Organization,” in A Delaware Indian Symposium, ed. Herbert C. Kraft, Anthropological Series no. 4 (Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1974), 123–125 notes that there are no seventeenth century sources that directly describe hunting territories for the Lenapes and that there is a lack of analysis of the relation of Indian deeds to the legal system and phraseology of European countries. Comparisons with other indigenous peoples emphasize the difficulty in assuming that hunting territories were aboriginal. Eleanor Leacock demonstrated from the Montagnais in Labrador that private ownership of specific resources developed in response to the introduction of sale and exchange accompanying the fur trade. This is supported by the fact that trespass could occur only in one case—when hunting for fur or meat to sell, “The Montagnais ‘Hunting Territory’ and the Fur Trade,” American Anthropologist 56:5(2): Memoir 78 (1974); Penn, in NEP, 233; Wallace, “Woman, Land, and Society,” 6.

rightful owners

109

Families, or probably more correctly lineages, held areas with usufruct rights which permitted the holder to use the land in particular ways and to reap the benefits of their labor as long as needed. Yet, these rights did not resemble the European concept of possession in perpetuity. Instead, it must be remembered that Indians believed land to be a gift from the Creator and as such belonging to all Indians and inalienable. Important game animals such as the white-tailed deer existed in plenty, at least until the middle of the seventeenth century, but began to diminish as a result of trade with Europeans. However, before this there could have been little need to divide the hunting land. It would have been more important for the village to retain control over farmed fields and fishing and clamming sites. These plots were utilized intensively for several years and although prepared and tilled collectively stood under the supervision of village matrons. There are indications that these land areas were not easily transferred to Europeans, logically so since fields could not be simultaneously used for any other purpose.10 While the Lenapes lived in dispersed and autonomous villages, the Susquehannocks at the time of Swedish arrival lived in one large village, and possibly several smaller, surrounded by their gardens, and all land was held in common tenure. Any form of land alienation was considered a tribal transaction. Common to both peoples was the conviction that land could not be permanently alienated in the European sense of sale, but changes in the status of land occurred through donations which then were confirmed and reconfirmed with gifts. Smaller tracts of land could be leased between individuals and Indian custom demanded that an impartial witness be present at the time of the agreement. In essence, land transfers entailed the establishment of a continuing relationship between the parties and, as such, contained ritual elements and sacred qualities. Lenapes and Susquehannocks did not regard possession of land in terms of individual ownership but as collective sovereignty. A Lenape village consisted of a people’s political and ecological territory with the sachem as its representative. Territorial rights rested with the village for

10 Wilbur Jacobs, Dispossessing the American Indian. Indians and Whites on the Colonial Frontier (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1972), 11; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 170, mentions depletion of deers; “Report of Governor Johan Rising, 1654,” in NEP, 148, mentions exceptions to land treaties which include planted land around Passayunk.

110

chapter four

which the sachem, as its agent in diplomatic affairs, conducted land transactions on behalf of his people. Sachems could not act on their own, but had to confer with their tribe members in all matters concerning land. According to some sources, sachems were chosen for this role by matriarchs of the lineage. Lenape lineage groups were matrilineal and a child always belonged to the clan of its mother. The sachem held responsibilities in diplomatic affairs with other nations, supervised communal hunts, and had certain ceremonial obligations. If there were goods to distribute, the sachem was in charge. In fact, the most important function of the sachem was the role as distributor of food and goods, and as such, he was able to influence the harmony and stability of the village. It was a sachem’s duty to provide visitors with food and shelter, but it was his wife, and other female lineage elders, who controlled the houses and procured food. The position as sachem followed a family line, with succession on the maternal side so that a man would be succeeded by his brother, sons of his sister, or sons of his sister’s daughter. Although male persons most often filled this role, women sachems and women exercising power in external relations with other peoples are mentioned in the historical record. The Lenapes and their neighbors believed that a person’s capacity and character were more important than inherited position in determining their influence and power. The interwoven connection between the spiritual world and mundane tasks explain the unusual influence of women on matters of land control—an influence which colonists largely ignored or were unable to comprehend. Women’s work as cultivators gave them guardianship over land and the prosperity of that land was directly related to the correct forms of worship and proper performance of the ceremonies. Thus, women had control over land, a control which also gave them, or at least the matrons, a vital role as counselors.11 11 It is worth noting that some scholars have concluded that the Lenape, in contrast to other nations in the vicinity, invested family groups with complete control of hunting territories. For this argument, see MacLeod, “The Family Hunting Territory,” 450. Concerning the Susquehannocks see Francis Jennings, The Invasion of America. Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 1975), 25; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 180–181. The mention of only one large palissaded Susquehannock village does not rule out the possibility of other smaller towns. John Smith placed and named six different Susquehannock villages on his map. See Barry C. Kent, Susquehanna’s Indians. Anthropological Series no. 6 (Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1984), 37 and Donald A. Cadzow, Archaeological Studies of the Susquehannock Indians of Pennsylvania (Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Historical Commission, 1936), 15–20; Wallace, “Women,

rightful owners

111

Land transfers under these conditions took on different meanings than what was understood in Europe. One might transfer to another person the hunting, fishing, and trapping rights on a piece of land, but this did not permanently dispossess the “owner,” or give the other party the right to erect a fence and exclude all others from entry. Other village members retained the right to pass through or gather non-agricultural foods in such an area. Land agreements in this context might be almost any mutually satisfactory arrangement concerning the relationship of two groups of persons seeking their subsistence on the land. This view of land use meant that several groups could be allowed use rights to the same piece of land. Not occupying the land in the intended manner meant forfeiting these rights. Johan Risingh suggested that Indians, like Europeans, recognized the concept of right of conquest. “If they take a house or a fort, and kill or chase away the owners, they retain it as their own house again—tanquam jure belli acquisitum.” To a European, this was an understandable practice, even if it stemmed from the fact that land as such was not saleable. Under such circumstances, Indians could logically repossess the land given that the European users had overextended their usufruct rights or behaved in an unacceptable manner. However, this was a European translation in the attempt to understand Indian behavior. There is nothing that indicates that Lenapes fought among themselves or with other Indians over territory or its resources prior to the advent of Swedes, Dutch, and English. Sources suggest an abundance of land, as well as the resources on it. The first reports from the area mention wars between Lenapes and Susquehannocks, but the two peoples did not fight over land. Rather the Susquehannocks sought, and achieved, access to the coastal trade in these wars. Territorial control as such simply did not hold any meaning to Lenapes and their Indian neighbors. The fact that Lenapes burned down unused Swedish and Dutch forts speaks not Land, and Society,” 3–6; Acrelius, Beskrifning, 44, 53; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 183; Cronon, Changes, 58–65. On confirmation with gifts, see Jacobs, Dispossessing, 11–12. On sachems and Lenape leadership, see Wallace, “Women, Land, and Society,” 6, 11; Penn, in NEP, 234–235; Thomas, in NEP, 335; Robert S. Grumet, “Sunksquaws, Shamans, and Tradeswomen: Middle Atlantic Coastal Algonkian Women During the 17th and 18th Centuries,” in Women and Colonization: Anthropological Perspectives, ed. Mona Étienne and Eleanor Leacock (New York: Praeger, 1980), 49–53; Joan L. Lowe, “Colonial Gender Discourse and the Delaware Indians” (unpublished senior thesis, University of Pennsylvania, 1991, copy at American Philosophical Society), 6, 33–34; Schönenberger, Lenape Women, 181–182, 217, 221.

112

chapter four

of territorial conquest, instead it is more likely that the Lenapes resented European desertion as an abrogation of the relationship into which they had entered with the Indians. This land agreement rested on the Europeans using and occupying the land, without which they forfeited any claims.12 Ownership as such becomes relevant primarily in relation to other individuals or groups who might forward claims on the same land or object. In lenapehoking, control over land in itself did not lead to any advantages prior to the presence of Europeans. The land offered the provisions needed for survival, but there is no indication that Lenapes or their closest neighbors used surplus amounts to enhance their status or power. Excess food could be stored, but only to provide sustenance during the leaner parts of the year. During periods of intertribal hostility, such as when the Susquehannocks attacked the Lenapes, the former destroyed cornfields but did not seek to dominate the land or settle on it. Rather, Lenapes remained as they were, once the vital question of access to European trade on the River had been settled. Neither do we find among Lenapes a hierarchical social structure wherein one class is able to gain access to surplus production in the form of taxes and land rents. Among them no such structure had evolved that allowed war leaders or sachems the power to extract labor or payments from subjects or neighboring villages. This was in contrast to the more hierarchical Powhatan country to the south. Instead, the influence of a sachem rested on his ability to divide goods among his people, not hoard them for himself. Neither sachems nor anyone else could order village members to settle in a specific place or move elsewhere. Clearing land, planting corn, and much of the hunting and fishing were communal events

12 The word usufruct is here used as an approximation for concepts which would have been mutually comprehensible. The term in the European legal sense means a limited right of exclusive possession, usually limited for a definite period of time, and no longer than the usufructuary’s lifetime. The right is also limited in that the property may not be altered or alienated by the usufructuary. For a discussion of terms see John M. Cooper, “Is the Algonquian Family Hunting Ground System Pre-Columbian?” American Anthropologist, n.s., no. 41 (1939), 69f; Newcomb, Culture and Acculturation, 22–23; Weslager, Delaware Indians, 37–39; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 158, 166; de Vries, in NEP, 24, 25; “Relation of Captain Thomas Yong, 1634,” in NEP, 38–40, 48; Kent, Susquehanna’s, 34–35; Francis Jennings, “Glory, Death and Transfiguration: the Susquehannock Indians in the Seventeenth Century,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 112:1 (February 1968), 17; quote from Risingh’s Journal, 265 (obtained as with the rights of war).

rightful owners

113

which depended on the voluntary cooperation of all village members. Those who might disagree with choices had the option to leave the village. This was essential for a society dependent on communal efforts for survival and it formed part of native ideology concerning land dominion. Distinctions between land owners and dispossessed did not concern individual rights, but depended on rights and needs of lineages. Even though it is difficult to estimate how much land a village would need for its subsistence, the ethnographic sources indicate that there were land and resources in plenty for the people who inhabited the Delaware River valley upon the arrival of Europeans. Limits to growth emanated from the variation of the seasons with its contrasts between abundance and scarcity, not from a lack of land. Indians, just like their European counterparts, found that the encounter forced them to articulate and develop arguments for ownership and connection to the land. They did so by trying to explain their understanding of leadership and decision making. Increasingly by the eighteenth century they presented historical arguments for possession. At a discussion held in the Pennsylvania Christian Indian town of Gnadenhütten in 1750, the Delaware leader, Augustus, and others attempted to explain to Moravian missionaries how the Lenapes (or Delawares as they became known in the late seventeenth century) viewed their relationship to the land. A rumor had reached Gnadenhütten that some Indians from the Jerseys would arrive later that spring to take up residence on a large tract of land along the Lehigh River and that they wanted white people to leave that area. The Delawares living in Gnadenhütten and its vicinity were related to the people from the Jerseys and argued that the land belonged to them and their coastal relatives. Augustus proceeded to declare this connection, and stated that all the land “really belonged to all Delawares, and told us a long history of it, through which the Indians presume to have the right to the land.”13

13 Box 116, F.7, “Gnadenhütten, Pa, Diaries 1746–1750,” 2/7/1750, Moravian Archives.

114

chapter four Swedes seeking Indian land

By the time the Swedes arrived in the Delaware River region, European invaders had long argued among themselves over what justified territorial claims in the New World. The Spanish claimed rights both by discovery and divine decision handed down through the pope. Others debated whether being the first European to lay eyes on a piece of land sufficed to establish claim or whether they also needed to occupy and settle the area. Whereas visual discovery provided a handy argument for Spanish, English, and—to some extent—Dutch claims, later colonizers had to develop more stringent reasons for occupation as well as for acquisition of the original rights from the Indian nations. No colonizing power argued that Indians had no right to land. However, the nature of these rights came under debate since the natives lived without Christian religion and without the customs deemed necessary for equality in diplomatic relations. Recognizing that Indians did have some kind of title to land meant that occupation could not take place without just cause. The Spanish policy makers realized this from the beginning and adopted the doctrine of just war against infidels, which had been used for centuries in Europe. Conquest according to Christian ideas of occupatio bellica (warlike conquest) did not always have to be violent. Ideally, it would mean peaceful subjugation, which required at least tacit acceptance by Indian inhabitants and could then be justified as beneficial to both parties.14 When England entered the colonial scene, a century behind Spain and Portugal, it proved difficult to claim visual discovery against such seasoned colonizers. Instead the English, as well as the French and the Dutch, chose to argue that settlement of a new territory demanded considerably more than just erecting a symbol of sovereignty. Acquisition of a land area was difficult and required time. Until a discovering nation had managed to actually possess the land “found,”

14 John T. Juricek, “English Territorial Claims in North America Under Elizabeth and the Early Stuarts,” Terrae Incognitae VII (1976), 7–22; Berkhofer, White Man’s Indian, 120–130; Wilcomb E. Washburn, Red Man’s Land—White Man’s Law. A Study of the Past and Present Status of the American Indian (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1971), 22–23. The idea of “just war” against infidels was invoked by all Europeans and found an expression in the writings of Dutch philosopher Hugo Grotius. Gustavus Adolphus was so inspired by this work that during a period of his life he regularly read chapters from Grotius’ De iure belli et pacis, Roberts, Swedish Imperial Experience, 18.

rightful owners

115

the discovery could not be considered complete. In view of this, the land grants offered by the British monarchs remained only speculative. They only promised grants of land if the grantee could gain secure control of the area. A change from this stance began with the second Virginia charter in 1609. It was the first of more specific English claims in America, although its borders remained uncertain. By 1620, the English regent had become sufficiently sure of the English position to grant to the New England Council, with flourish and without limitations or escape clauses, all the land between 40° and 48° N. The English now argued that the king himself could take a new territory into legal possession without having set his foot there and subsequently donate it with all the rights belonging to lordship to any subject of his choice. In the Maine charter of 1639, signed by James II, the preamble reads: “we have heretofore . . . taken [the territory of Maine] into actual and real possession.” There were now no limits to the power of the English crown and the justifications could be found in the Bible through reference to Psalm 72 in which the Israelites take command of Canaan’s land from sea to sea. As the assumptions grew, the English began to further the claim that Raleigh and Cabot had visually discovered North America and the English position on discovery and possession became indistinguishable from that of the early Spanish and Portuguese colonists. After discovery had been claimed and the king had taken the land into possession, the royal charters could be used as definitive proof of dominion against competing nations. Such a circular argument, however, failed to impress other Europeans eager to colonize and England routinely made distinctions in charters between “land uncultivated and possessed by barbarians” and land possessed by Dutchmen or Swedes. The reason given for this was that grants including the latter area would involve the crown in wars and disputes with other European nations over sovereignty, while the Indians would not contest it on the international level.15 Once land was possessed and defined in a charter and the king’s paramount lordship “hovered above the land,” the problem remained of actually settling the land. Whether the Indians saw it hovering or not, they were not about to accept English overlordship. In fact, such preposterous assertions held no discernible meaning at all until 15 Juricek, “English Territorial Claims,” quote from 21; Kent McNeil, Common Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), quote from footnote 239.

116

chapter four

backed by force. In actuality, the English, like other colonists, had to recognize Indian sovereignty as long as they could defend it. The colonists of course preferred that the Indians yielded the land peacefully. Although most Europeans defended the rights of Christian nations to wage war against infidels, many placed greater emphasis on commerce and amicable communication. Occupatio bellica required some semblance of approval from the native inhabitants to surrender land. Throughout the New World, Europeans developed similar patterns of pacific procedures that satisfied their need to justify the transfers. These included civil ceremonies, erecting coats of arms, and creating public records in the form of a treaty signed by all dignitaries present. Negotiations and treaties were set up to resemble contracts between European nations. Leaders of colonies met with Indians, presumed to be kings, and agreements were drawn up that defined the extent of English ownership in America at least in relation to other European powers. Of course, this would have been entirely superfluous had the pretensions of the Crown been meaningful. With the growth of English numbers and firepower, this system began to disintegrate and Indians were no longer considered to have any negotiating potency. This change in the balance became obvious first after 1675 when English outnumbered Indians in both Virginia and New England.16 The Dutch West India Company charter differed from English colonial charters in that it contained no grant of territory. The merchants who financed the colonial ventures were not interested in settlement, only in trade. Dutch law recognized an Indian dominion of land in the sense of sovereignty. The practice of purchasing land from what they argued to be the rightful Indian owners developed as a response to English claims of discovery. It became a legal necessity, an expedient (since the charter did not provide for land), and a method to counter primarily English territorial claims. Land negotiations took place between representatives of the company or patroons, and on each occasion “a contract being made thereof and signed by them [the Indians] in their manner, since such contracts upon other occasions may be very useful to the Company.” The Dutch negotiated for small parcels of land on which to build trading posts, forts, and, after the initiation of the patroon system, for larger tracts 16 Washburn, Red Man’s Land, 41, 42; McNeil, Common Law, 237; Berkhofer, White Man’s Indian, 122.

rightful owners

117

for farming communities. Ownership over all other land remained with resident Native Americans until extinguished through purchase according to Dutch law. The Dutch could not claim visual discovery as a first principle in their relation to the English, but they certainly did not disregard the validity of discovery. It was used in arguments with the Swedes over the Delaware River which, the Dutch held, Henry Hudson had discovered for them in 1609. However, the use of deeds proved to be a more successful argument. The first occasion at which a deed became “very useful” to the Company was in a dispute with New Plymouth in 1633 regarding rights to trading posts on the Connecticut River. The Plymouth colony had no original charter and the Dutch use of a deed influenced the former to begin buying Indian land.17 The New Sweden Company charter contained no territorial grant. The Company directors followed Dutch practice of acquiring deeds to parcels of land. As a latecomer on the American colonial stage, New Sweden would have foundered immediately without the expertise of Peter Minuit, the former Dutch governor of New Amsterdam who led the first Swedish expedition. He received orders to sail up the Minquas Kill and purchase land from the Indians. As it turned out, his actions involved Swedes in land conflicts with both the Lenapes and the Dutch. As we have seen, the royal instructions to Johan Printz stated that the governor must “bear in mind that the boundaries of the country” could only be extended through deeds with the Indians, “as its rightful owners.” Recognition of Indian title to land was the necessary and only possible basis for defending Swedish presence in the Delaware Valley and the deeds were kept as proof against the demands of surrounding colonies. Since the Swedes found themselves in no position to take advantage of any of

17 Allen W. Trelease, “Indian-White Contacts in Eastern North America: The Dutch in New Netherland,” Ethnohistory 9 (1962): 138; Jennings, “Dutch and Swedish Indian Policies,” 14–15, quote from 14; Jennings, Invasion of America, 131–134; K.G. Davies, The North Atlantic World in the Seventeenth Century (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1974), 44, 55. Jennings argues that it was the company which found it useful to recognize Indian ownership so that this acknowledged title could be acquired formally. Trelease states that it was Holland, following Dutch law which recognized title. The patroon system, like the proprietary system in the English colonies, was devised to settle the colony. A patroon received a grant of land from the Dutch West India Company in return for promising to settle at least fifty Europeans in New Netherland, Allen W. Trelease, Indian Affairs in Colonial New York: The Seventeenth Century (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1960), 43–45.

118

chapter four

the other arguments favored by European competitors, such as first discovery or conquest, building up justifications for Indian land title became the best weapon in the battle to ensure a foothold in the New World. This argument developed interactively with the reality of Indian-Swedish contacts concerning land.18 Not all colonial administrators considered peaceful means to be the best policy. Governor Johan Printz, a soldier by profession, suggested in an infamous paragraph that the right of conquest superseded the right of purchase and wrote home asking for soldiers to be sent to the colony “until we broke the necks of all of them [the Indians] in this River . . . and when we have thus not only bought this river, but also won it with the sword, then no one, whether he be Hollander or Englishman, could pretend in any manner to this place either now or in coming times.” This request was left unheeded. The New Sweden Company had no such resources to offer and neither Printz nor any other Swedish colonial leader was ever in a position to appropriate Indian land with force. Yet as the quote demonstrates, this resulted not from a particularly peaceful Swedish attitude towards the indigenous inhabitants. Printz lacked forceful means and had to settle for a less violent method of acquiring deeds. However, Printz’ request also reveals something of the reality of the Swedish situation. The deeds were useful primarily in negotiating relations between European settlements in America, but had little to say about the actual power relations in a region. Printz did not control the territory to which he had deeds, and which he was expected to rule. Printz desired and intended to subjugate the area with military might, but his letter with its preposterous request of two hundred Swedish soldiers to add to his garrison of twenty reveals the precariousness of the Swedish position.19 Peter Minuit, during the first voyage from Sweden, ascertained that English or Dutch colonists had no claims to the river. After allowing six and a half weeks for English claimants to appear, he

18 Quote from “Instruction for Governor Printz”, in Johnson, Instruction, 66f (emphasis added); Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 65–66. 19 “Reports of Governor Printz, 1644”, in Johnson, Instruction, 117. See also other letters to Oxenstierna and Per Brahe: “Printz to Axel Oxenstierna,” Aug. 1, 1651; “Printz to Oxenstierna,” Aug. 30, 1652; “Printz to Per Brahe,” Dec. 1, 1653, in Handel och sjöfart, nr. 196.

rightful owners

119

proceeded to carry out his instructions to buy land on the west bank of the Delaware, between Minquas Kill (Christina Creek) and Sankikans Kill (Trenton). Like their European neighbors, Swedish colonial administrators primarily worried about Dutch and English claims, since they perceived these nations to pose the most powerful threat, not just in North America but also in Europe. The realities in America proved different, and Swedish officials had to learn from the Dutch how to bargain for land. Upon arrival, Peter Minuit “requested and caused” the real owners to appear before him and then asked “if they wished to sell the river, with all the land lying about there.” Inhabitants of the different villages populating the country consulted their councils and agreed to do so. Some days later five sachems, Mattahorn, Mitatsimint, Elupacken, Mahomen, and Chiton presented themselves before the ship’s council. They represented the Lenapes but brought Susquehannock witnesses along, which some scholars have argued indicated Susquehannock overlordship. However, as there is no evidence of such territorial control or of Lenape tributes paid to the Susquehannocks, it is more likely that they were present as outside witnesses. Lenape-Susquehannock relations apparently fluctuated between hostility and cooperation, but after the bloody clashes of the 1630s, no indications exist that the two peoples were locked in conflict. The Indians listened uncomprehendingly as the Swedes read a document in Dutch stating that the “sachems or princes . . . ceded, transported, and transferred all the land, as many days’ journeys on all places and parts of the river as they requested; upwards and on both sides.” A former boatswain, Andries Lucassen, who had been in the country before and acted as official interpreter, translated the text for them. The Indians acknowledged that they had been paid to their satisfaction in good and proper merchandise and the buyers delivered the goods to them in the presence of witnesses. Thereupon, the Indian sachems boarded the ship Kalmare Nyckel and signed the deed. With the sale concluded, Minuit and the sachems went ashore. In a solemn ceremony, the Swedish coat-ofarms was raised, a cannon fired, and the country renamed New Sweden. The Indians on their part presented the Swedes with beaver pelts and some sewant (wampum). In its terse way, designed for European legal eyes, the affidavit remaining from the event only hints at the establishment of a relationship between the Lenape people and Swedish colonists, but Swedes soon learned that payment was

120

chapter four

not the correct term for the transaction of goods that occurred during these treaties.20 Payment for land, as Swedes thought of it, commonly consisted of such European goods as wool cloth, kettles, axes, hoes, knives, gunpowder, shot, and awls. Nowhere do the accounts suggest how the parties agreed upon prices. However, Indians, as well as Whites, kept track of the payments. In July 1655, Risingh wrote that they had confirmed the purchase of land around Fort Elfsborg with the sachem Arceoreniam. He brought a bill of sale dated April 12, 1652, signed during Printz’ time, but as he had not yet been paid in full he had kept the deed. Risingh paid him the rest and received the document believing that at this point the sale was final. Arceoreniam, however, saw this payment as a reconfirmation of an agreement which entitled the Swedes to use land which Arceoreniam’s village possessed, as well as a reestablishment of a mutually beneficial relationship between his people and the Swedish colonists. Payment and gift giving, he reminded the Swedes, involved much more than an exchange of inanimate matter.21 The Swedes distinguished between purchase and donation. In the case of purchase, the Indians received payment, while a donation resulted from what the Swedes considered a free gift. The Lenapes and Susquehannocks must have found such a distinction meaningless. Risingh mentioned that the Susquehannocks gave him some beavers as “a concrete symbol of this grant,” but the same symbol was offered in the first purchase in New Sweden. Nevertheless, the distinction became an important one in the justification for Swedish presence.22 How did it develop? The first question to answer is how the situation might have appeared to the Lenape villages. Several ships from a place far off had already sailed up their river, some laden with useful and attractive goods. A few of these vessels had emptied their human content onto the shores and these had proceeded to erect dwellings. In one way or another, whoever ventured to con20 The above is based on the “Affidavit of four men from the Key of Calmar, 1638”, in NEP, 87–89; “More Missing Evidence: Two Depositions by Early Swedish Settlers,” Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 91 (1967), 38. On Minuit’s instructions see Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 59–61; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 109. Minuit clearly did not follow his instructions. Land was acquired on both sides of the river and not as far up as Sankikans Kill. 21 Risingh’s Journal, 17 June 1654, 177; ibid., 17 July 1655, 237. 22 Ibid., 6 June 1655, 239.

rightful owners

121

tact these strangers would have been asked to grant them permission to stay on the land. And Lenapes, accustomed to having their headmen conduct negotiations with strangers, would direct them to their respective sachems. When the Swedes arrived in 1638, there had already been one serious settlement attempt along the river. This was the Dutch colony at Swanendael, the fate of which must have been known to Peter Minuit. The Indians along the bay had long been familiar with Dutch and other trading vessels, when in 1629 the Dutch established a small settlement at Swanendael (Valley of the Swans) near Cape Hinlopen. The settlers bought some land from local Lenape people, known as Siconese, and proceeded to clear the land and plant corn for their upkeep. An all male settlement was charged with the task of hunting whales and raising “all sorts of grain for which the country is well adapted, and . . . tobacco.” Soon, however, cultural conflicts erupted in violence. One day, warriors surrounded the whole settlement and killed every single white person. Two years later David Pieterszen de Vries, one of the initiators of the colony, returned to find the settlement in ruins and upon inquiry heard the only extant version of the massacre. An Indian told him that the hostilities commenced when a sachem cut out some tin from the Dutch coat-ofarms, not knowing the significance of that piece of metal. Upon understanding the outrage of the colonists, the Indians offered to make amends, killing the erring man and bringing in the piece of tin as proof. The commander commented that the punishment exacted was too severe. Members of the dead man’s kin group obviously thought the same and carried out their revenge on the whole colony.23 Ill luck, it seems, befell the small Dutch settlement; however, it is also possible to offer an additional explanation to the strange tragedy. Repeatedly in later documents, Swedes bemoaned their lack of trade goods and report Lenape hostilities when supplies were low. On several occasions, Indians burned buildings that the Swedes no longer used or defended. When Johan Risingh arrived in the colony in 1654, more than a year after Printz’ departure, he found Fort Korsholm burned to the ground by the Lenapes. The Indian proprietors of the land viewed a vacant fort, not used for the purpose of trading, as an affront to the agreement between them and the colonists. Such events suggest the possibility that the Swanendael massacre occurred because it was a colony founded with the intent 23

de Vries, in NEP, 8, 15–18 (quote on 8).

122

chapter four

on settlement, not trading. The colonists primarily aimed to subsist on farming but soon found it necessary to take up fur trading. This continued for two years until company officials in the Netherlands sent a representative to stop this intervention on company prerogatives. The Swanendael colonists were thus forced to abstain from trading and their lack of trade goods made their presence a nuisance aggravating the cultural controversy over justice and the coatof-arms to trigger the violent Indian attack.24 The frightening fate of the Swanendael settlement indicates that the Lenapes wanted to control the settlement pattern and behavior of colonists. However, there seems to have been no general intolerance against white settlement, only that settlement had to be on Indian terms with respect for Indian customs. From the Lenape point of view, European settlement could begin in two ways. Either Europeans approached the Indians to ask permission to “buy” land on which to establish themselves, leading to what Swedes called a purchase, or a Lenape representative could offer one or another group of colonists a place to settle and they then made a donation. To the Indians, this latter alternative would naturally be the most advantageous and offered a position from which to direct settlement. This also happened on several occasions. “On Sunday the 9th two of the major sachems of the Lenape, Ahopameck and Peminacka, came to us at Fort Christina and each presented us with tracts of land.” So did the sachem Hvivan, living near Horn Kill, who invited the Swedes, after he had received their gifts, to come and settle in a place which he would designate for them. Not only could an Indian group, through such offers, establish a European settlement or trading post where they desired it, but they could also keep them out of areas in which they did not wish white intrusion. Ahopameck, in the donation mentioned above, offered the Swedes to settle in “all the land from Marikis Hook along the river and half of the width of the Schuylkill River. He said that he still wished to keep the other half.”25 24 David Pieterszen de Vries, “Extracts from a History and Journal of Four Voyages,” Collections of the New-York Historical Society, 2d ser. I (New York, 1841), 250–252; Trelease, Indian Affairs, 57; Risingh’s Journal, 5 June 1654, 167. Few historians have sought to understand this incident but see Mackintosh, “New Sweden, Natives, and Nature,” 4–6, who has made one of the more interesting attempts at explaining this massacre. I agree with him that cultural misunderstandings brought on the tragedy, but maintain that divergent interests concerning land use and trade lay at the foundation. 25 Risingh’s Journal, 9 July 1654, 187, 189; 29 June 1654, 186 (emphasis added).

rightful owners

123

The most impressive donation developed out of the contacts between Swedes and Susquehannocks during Risingh’s period as leader of the colony. On 7 June 1655, he wrote in his diary: On the 7th, on behalf of the entire Minquas council and their united federation, with a long oration they gave us Swedes a gift. This grant included all the land located on the eastern side of the Virginia River (the Elk River as the English call it), that is, everything from the beginning of the Chakakitque Falls to the end of the Amisackan Falls.26

The Swedes had long desired to enter into this district. Johan Risingh wrote in his 1655 report that if they could buy Chakakitque and Amisackan from the Susquehannocks then his grandiose plans for settlement could be realized, “and we could also carry on the best trade with them there.” The deal, thus, seems to have been mutually beneficial, yet suggested and accepted on Susquehannock terms. This donation offers unique insights into the form of agreements Swedes and Indians entered into concerning land. It began with the general and moved to the specific. Risingh related the preamble in very general terms: “We received the land including everything which grew upon it: forests, fields, birds, and animals; the earth and all that was within it and could be of use; the water and all that was in it; and fish, fowl and the animals, of which they listed a great many and indicated them with special symbols.” The biblical language of the passage may be understood as a way for Risingh to emphasize the magnitude of the donation as well as the solemnity of the ceremony in the hopes of impressing a Dutch or English audience which might not be inclined to respect Swedish dominion over this land. Then the Susquehannocks got more specific. They promised that when the Swedes had settled the land the Indians would provide them with venison and maize for a whole year. In return for this “the condition was that they should be able to buy from us cloth, guns, and all other goods that they now purchase from the Dutch and English, and that we should establish blacksmiths and shotmakers on the land, who should make their guns and other

26

Risingh’s Journal, 7 June 1655, 239f. There is no clarity as to how large this tract of land was. The text seems to indicate that the area involved stretched from the northern tip of Chesapeake Bay and up to the falls in the lower Schuylkill River. The extension to the east is unclear, but presumably Risingh took it to involve all the land east of that line unto the Delaware River, see Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 109–110.

124

chapter four

things for good pay.” The Swedes apparently felt no remorse at promising to establish an official trade in arms and military knowhow, and there is no indication that Richard Lord, the New England merchant who often traded with New Sweden and who was present at the transaction, objected. Both Susquehannocks and Swedes sealed the agreement according to their respective custom; the Susquehannocks by giving some beavers and having a salute fired, the Swedes by writing a document which the present dignitaries and witnesses duly signed. The ceremony concluded with the Susquehannock spokesman taking the hand of Risingh, leading him forward on the floor and saying: “As I now lead you by the hand, so will we lead your people into the country, and maintain you there and defend you against Indians and Christian enemies.” The language and the symbolic guiding of the Swedish governor contain an interesting parallel to the instructions Per Brahe offered to Johan Printz. The assumed superiority of Brahe’s advice suggesting that the savages should be brought to civilization “as though led by hand” stands out in sharp contrast to the reverse reality of the Delaware Valley. Thus, the ceremony and the specific terms of it clearly indicate that the Susquehannocks considered themselves initiators as well as dominant enough to set their own terms. Alienating land was not their primary purpose, access to European trade, specifically arms was. The initial limitless promise appears to have been a standard phrasing in these transactions and both Risingh’s reverent wording of it and his actions to answer the specific demands suggest that he was aware of that.27 These offers, which the Swedes termed “donations,” seem to have been invitations to settle in an area for the express purpose of carrying on trade with the donors. The presentations of land were sealed in the Indian tradition of mutual gift giving. The sources do not indicate that the “payment” expected for a “purchase” and the gifts given in return for a “donation” varied in amount and content. According to the Indian cultural code, both kinds of exchanges signified and confirmed a relationship, an association which in turn had to be reconfirmed with regular and mutual gifts to remain good and valid. Using terms such as “donation” and “purchase” introduced

27 Report of Risingh, 1655, in NEP, 159–160, 190; Risingh’s Journal, 6–7 June 1655, 239.

rightful owners

125

a European distinction. For the Lenapes and Susquehannocks, it remained inherent that land as such could not be permanently alienated. In terms of land use, it made no difference to them whether they or the Swedes had initiated a land agreement. In their perception, both could be changed when circumstances altered or trade goods waned and that same land could be offered to other Europeans to occupy for a while. To the Indians in the region, therefore, the distinction carried no meaning as long as their dominion over the area remained unthreatened. This continued to be the case during the entire period of Swedish colonization. Not until later in the century did Lenapes begin to realize the reality behind land sales in the face of a dominant European population, the most painful discovery of which occurred during the infamous Walking Purchase under the reign of William Penn’s sons in 1737.

European land claims and Lenape internal conflicts Whether land was sold or donated, both situations gave rise to internal competition between Indians as well as between Europeans. These conflicts were often far from internal in their effects. Susquehannocks, Lenapes, Swedes, Dutch, and English soon became so entangled that any dispute touched all those in the vicinity. Conflicts concerning land commonly occurred between Swedes and other Europeans. The Swedes sparred with their neighboring colonies on several occasions. One such event occurred already in 1643. The Puritans had learned well from their experience with the Dutch deed tactic and used it expertly in a confrontation with Printz. John Winthrop charged that Printz had “seized possession of a piece of land which our allies bought at a just price from the Indians, who were the real owners thereof, as by extant and authentic documents of the purchase is and will be made clear.” Winthrop continued to cite “the original grant by the King” in support of the English claims to a trading post in the area. Printz answered with a question: “How far do the mainland and islands of New England extend?” knowing well that the western boundaries of the colonies were not defined. Instead, he declared, Christina, “my most gentle queen,” had given the Swedes permission to purchase the area “in an orderly manner at a just price.” This demonstrates, again, that the Swedes’ strongest argument

126

chapter four

was to emphasize purchase as the only legal way to land title. Even a fighting man like Johan Printz recognized that.28 Relations with the Dutch were often strained and between 1648 and 1651 Johan Printz and the Dutch director Peter Stuyvesant carried on an animated debate over who had principal rights to land along the Delaware River. Already in 1647 Printz complained that the Dutch “begin to buy land from the Savages within our boundaries, which we had purchased already eight years ago, and (are) so impudent that they here and there erect the seal of the West India Company.” In 1648, the conflict concerned tracts of land along the Schuylkill River. Andries Hudde, the Dutch commissary to the South (Delaware) River gathered several Lenape sachems for a conference. Two sachems, Mattahorn and Wissemenetto, donated land to the Dutch and ordered the Swedes to leave, arguing that they had not properly bought the land they were using. It is important to take a closer look at the unfolding of this and later confrontations. The events show signs of disagreements among the Lenapes and their actions throw light on both the origin and development of the conflict and on the concepts of Indian land ownership. Mattahorn was a Lenape sachem who figured frequently in land transactions with the Swedes. Almost nothing is known about him, and so it is that he and his actions are glimpsed only through Swedish and other European sources. Again, I must caution that the bias of these sources influences interpretations. Mattahorn’s and other Indians’ actions and words are seen with European eyes and framed in European concepts. Still, they wrench their way into these sources, and I believe their presence signals more than colonial machinations and therefore it is important to try to go beyond these fragmentary notations. Mattahorn arrived as one of the first Lenapes to welcome Swedish presence in Lenapehoking. However, he saw no reason to support only one European people, and in 1641 sold land to two English traders. In this instance Mattahorn appeared to have assumed the right to convey land deeds to areas belonging to another village. The Swedes disputed this sale when another sachem, Wickusi, claimed that the land did “not belong to the Savage prince [Mattahorn], but to Wichusy alone.” The next time Mattahorn appeared was in 1645 when he called a great council of sachems, as well as ordinary mem28 “John Winthrop to Johan Printz, 1643”, in Johnson, Instruction, 210–211; “Printz to Winthrop, January 12, 1644”, in Johnson, Instruction, 213–214.

rightful owners

127

bers, from surrounding villages to discuss whether or not to annihilate the Swedish colony. The Swedes no longer had trade goods to offer and Mattahorn and his son Ackahorn apparently considered their presence a nuisance. The council decided to wait and see since Governor Printz had promised a renewed supply of goods. However, the chronic shortage of goods must have continued to irritate Mattahorn who then went to the Dutch and brought with him others who presumably had been present at the council in 1645. In 1651 Mattahorn, his son Ackahorn, and Peminacka, another sachem who had previously negotiated with the Swedes, met with Stuyvesant concerning valuable land along Minquas Kill. They all testified that the Swedes, under Peter Minuit, had purchased only a small part of the area claimed and charged the Swedes with not having paid for the purchase, after which the Indians made a donation of land to the Dutch. An incensed Johan Printz rallied his forces and produced a document in which Notike, named as the widow of the former sachem Metatsimint, her son, and another of her relatives stated that Peminacka, who claimed to be the successor of Metatsimint, had no rights to the land. He therefore did not have authority to donate it to the Dutch. The affair eventually petered out and the Swedes retained, for a while longer, the European trade supremacy in the region. Other authors have dwelt on the strategies utilized by governors Printz and Stuyvesant. It is questionable, however, if these events are understandable without an analysis of how the Lenape leaders acted. Their actions throw light on both the origin and development of the conflict and on concepts of gender and authority.29 For Johan Printz and his officers, it made sense to recognize a male head of a household or a male chief as owner of land and women in that position only if they in some way had inherited land in the absence or minority of a male heir. The documents do not 29 Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 183, 211; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 173–179; quote from “Proceedings of Court at Fort Christina on July 10, 1643,” in Johnson, Instructions, 236; “Report of Johan Printz, 1647”, in Johnson, Instruction, 133; to follow the sequence of events, see Donald H. Kent, ed., Pennsylvania and Delaware Treaties, 1629–1737 (University Publications of America, 1979), vol. I, Early American Indian Documents: Treaties and Laws, 1607–1789, by Alden T. Vaughan, documents 8–13; on the twists and turns of this affair see C.A. Weslager, The Swedes and Dutch at New Castle (New York: Middle Atlantic Press, 1987), 65–74; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 434–443; Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 76–78. Minquas Kill is now named Christina Creek and empties into the Delaware River at present day Wilmington, DE.

128

chapter four

tell us how Printz happened to become aware of Notike’s standing as Metatsimint’s widow. Amandus Johnson in his monumental work on the Swedish settlement simply assumed that Printz sent for her and her son. But how did Printz know where to look? The governor had no experience of dealing with Indian women and it is not likely that he knew much about internal power structures in Lenape society. His dealings were almost exclusively with men as ambassadors for their people. Neither in this case, nor in the one mentioned above when Wickusi challenged Mattahorn’s claims, can we assume that Printz knew who to approach to find support. Either an Indian must have informed Printz of Notike’s position or she, herself, chose to appear before the Swedish governor. We cannot know for certain, but we can conclude that the matter was important enough for her to return for a second meeting and sign two of the white men’s documents to assert her understanding of the transactions. Notike, seeking support from Governor Printz, arrived accompanied by “her son and her blood relation, named Quenieck.”30 What role did Notike play in her village? Women, especially lineage elders, played influential roles in food production and distribution, and had important prerogatives in the appointment of sachems. It is reasonable to suggest that Notike did not meet with Governor Printz in her capacity as widow. She came to claim that Peminacka was not Metatsimint’s successor. Notike was very possibly a lineage elder and as such had a direct interest in issues of land management, and that was the platform from which she spoke. Her son accompanied her, but more importantly, so did her blood relative, Quenieck, perhaps Metatsimint’s future heir. What could have caused this woman to seek out, or accept the summons to this male dominated forum? To answer this we must take a new look at what transpired in these negotiations over land in the Delaware Valley. At the conference held between Stuyvesant and several Lenape men designated as chiefs, the discussion centered on questions of whether or not the Swedes had actually bought the land they now occupied. The Lenapes showed discomfort at the idea of selling the land to the Dutch, even though they affirmed that the Swedes had not bought it. The Dutch secretary suggested that their evasiveness stemmed from fear of Swedish retaliation. But there is another possibility: the

30

Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 441–442.

rightful owners

129

Indians may just have wanted to make sure they kept all doors open to different sources of European trade goods, as Peminacka’s subsequent actions seem to suggest. He spoke for the assembled sachems: The Swede builds and plants, indeed, on our lands, without buying them or asking us. Wherefore should we refuse you, Great Sachem, the land? We will rather present than sell the Great Sachem the land, so that, should the Swedes again pull down the Dutch houses and drive away the people, you may not think ill of us, and we may not draw down your displeasure.

A donation was Peminacka’s and the other sachems’ judicious solution. The Dutch, of course, desired to draw up a deed, and the text of it is revealing. Having received the reciprocal gifts in the form of duffels, kettles, axes, adzes, knives, lead, guns, and powder, the sachems gave to Stuyvesant and the West India Company “all actual and real possession, property, right and jurisdiction . . . without we, the granters, reserving any part, right or jurisdiction in the aforesaid lands, streams, kills, and superficies thereof, the hunting and fishing excepted.” The exception is interesting. Is it possible that Peminacka, who apparently was one of the architects behind this construction, had heard of an earlier meeting between Governor Printz and the Lenape woman in which Notike asserted that Peminacka had been given permission by the late Metatsimint to hunt on this land, but not to sell it? Peminacka was certainly very careful. He is named in the written deed, and he apparently received gifts along with Mattahorn, Ackahorn, and Sinques, but he never signed it with his mark. By suggesting that the Lenape donate instead of sell land and by excluding the hunting rights, the only rights he may have had to that land, and finally, by not affixing his mark to the parchment, this Lenape sachem managed to keep trade relations open with both Dutch and Swedes and received valuable goods from each.31 Peminacka’s prudent exclusion of hunting rights, and Notike’s assertion that those were the only rights he had to the land, are likely to be more than a coincidence. It also demonstrates the variety of possessive privileges which existed in Indian conceptions of land

31 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 193, 255; Grumet, “Sunksquaws, Shamans, and Tradeswomen,” 49; Wallace, “Women, Land, and Society,” 13–14, see also Schönenberger, Lenape Women, 175; Penn, in NEP, 234–235; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 140–143; Pennsylvania and Delaware Treaties, 21–22 (emphasis added); Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 189.

130

chapter four

rights. The overlapping nature of these created no problem as long as no exclusive demands were made on land, but when such possessive privileges entered the equation, they could make any transaction chaotic and open to challenge. A good sachem divided all gifts he received among his people, leaving the smallest share for himself—a prudent policy to pursue in order to ascertain allegiance and cohesion. Nothing indicates that the sachems violated this principle. Had Peminacka or any of the other men supporting his claim done anything that would upset a lineage mother? In the deed in which they donated the contested land to the West India Company Mattahorn and his son Ackahorn signed away land as sachems. Contrary to Lenape custom, both men presented themselves, or were presented, as sachems. Peminacka, too, was named in all these dealings with the Dutch as sachem with proprietary rights. Notike, when informed of these treaties, may have reacted to this assumption of title. This action, even if undertaken to wrest goods out of the Europeans, represented a threat to women’s prerogatives concerning land use and its alienation as well as to matrilineal descent as a foundation for political authority. The enormity of such a breach with the established order concerning such a vitally important office as sachem may have forced Notike to break with tradition and emphatically deny Peminacka’s assertions. That she had power in her own right is indisputable, proved not least by the acquiescence of the above named sachems in the subsequent negotiations. In a meeting “between pemenacka and mitatsimint’s wife and heirs” and in the presence of several other sachems, it was ascertained that Peminacka only had rights to hunt and not to sell. The documents end with the assertion by Peminacka and the other sachems that they “had nothing to say against [her but] only sought to placate the wife with good words.”32 Only three documents drawn up by the Swedes remain from the important meeting between Peminacka’s group and Notike’s. What the Swedes wanted is obvious, but what actually occurred between the Lenapes is a matter of guesswork. I imagine that the issue of land sales was of minor importance to the two antagonists, neither being capable or willing to envision the alienation inherent in the

32 “Letters 3 July 1651 + 16 July 1651,” Handel och Sjöfart, vol. 194: “Köpebrev med indianerna 1651–1652,” National Archives, Stockholm.

rightful owners

131

European concept. Instead, the issue would have been one of influence and authority. With that settled, putting a mark on a Swedish deed did not concern the Indians but was of internal European interest. Even so, the European papers were not insignificant. The fact that Peminacka neither donated anything within his powers to give, nor dared sign the donation document suggests that he knew Notike to be right and was not going to contest her further. With this, an intratribal conflict concerning authority over land surfaced to make its imprint on European documents. Peminacka’s deference and his refusal to sign may have settled the dispute among the Indians for the time being, but it triggered a continuation of Dutch-Swedish conflict. The conflict also points to a misunderstanding that left a permanent mark on Indian-European relations. The European desire to designate certain men as “kings” and “chiefs” carried with it implications that complicated internal relations among Native communities. Lenape sachems could not command their people in the way a Swedish monarch and his officers could. During times of unrest and conflict war captains took over and exercised disciplinary power over those who participated in campaigns, but beyond that no central authority existed. In identifying or appointing chiefs, Europeans accidentally or willfully assumed that these men had prerogatives that they did not, and some of them were alienated from the support of their own people and could no longer speak for them. A century later this custom remained alien to the Delawares and their neighbors, as the Baptist reverend David Jones reported from his travels to the Ohio River: “Every town has its head-men, some of which are by us called kings; but by what I can learn this appelation is by the Indians given to none, only as they learned it from us. The chief use of these head-men is to give counsel, especially in time of war; they are used also as most proper to speak with us on any occasion, especially if it be important.”33 A potential source of conflict over land with the Lenapes emerged when Queen Christina, following her policy of giving land grants in Sweden, donated land in the colony to officers of the New Sweden Company. In June of 1654, Captain Sven Skute displayed a letter of donation granting him land including Passayunk—the major Lenape 33 David Jones, A Journal of Two Visits Made to some Nations of Indians on the West Side of the River Ohio, In the Years 1772 and 1773 (Reprinted for Joseph Sabin, 1865), 73.

132

chapter four

village and a convenient and fertile place for a settlement. Later in the same month Risingh and his staff traveled to Tinicum to meet with Lenape sachems to renew allegiance and friendship. The Swedes offered gifts to the Lenape sachems and their followers in order to confirm earlier Swedish land purchases. The Indians promised friendship and “invited us [the Swedes] to build a fort and houses at Passayunk (which is the major village where most of them live).” Not until July did the Swedes receive permission to settle on the land donated to Captain Skute, when the sachem Ahopameck “gave to us the land which Captain Scute had received in donation, only excepting for himself half of the Schuylkill and the land called Passayungh.” The major Lenape village was not for sale and the Queen had no power to donate such lands. Exasperated, Risingh wrote home that title to land must be clear, “otherwise much confusion will result from the fact, that the land of the Company is given away or land which in reality belongs to the savage sachems.” The governor sensed a real possibility of danger if Swedes began to settle land where they had not been invited to do so and he had to argue for Indian ownership both against other Europeans and against his superiors. He may have had no choice.34

Arguments for Indian ownership Throughout the colony’s existence, New Sweden contended with pressures from their English and Dutch neighbors. The Dutch continued to claim the rights of first discovery and Johan Risingh had to find viable arguments against Dutch claims. In doing so, he developed a strong case for Indian dominion. According to this argument, purchase from the rightful owners came first in the process of establishing title, but it had to be followed by occupation and settlement.

34 Risingh’s Journal, 5 June 1654, 171; 17 June 1654, 177; 9 July 1654, 189; “Report of Johan Risingh, 1654,” in NEP, 148. Risingh’s reluctance in supporting the grants may also have been a result of the confusion concerning the company’s land. In general, the land within the colony belonged to the company under the direct supremacy of the Crown. Some land was “special property of the company”— particularly tobacco plantations and forts. There were also a few feudal grants belonging to noblemen, and finally a few areas owned by peasants. Risingh was concerned that the new grants might infringe upon the special property of the Crown, see Dahlgren, “The Crown of Sweden.”

rightful owners

133

Map 4. New Sweden and Lenapehoking Map of New Sweden. Swedish forts and trading posts are marked on the map, and approximate locations of major Indian towns, based on the information in Lindeström’s description.

134

chapter four

“The pretensions which the English and the Dutch have to this river will fall of themselves, when a complete settlement is made here, especially since our own people have secured for themselves from the rightful owners the first right, and since occupation has followed upon this.”35 Governor Risingh, more than any other Swede, emphasized the difference between donations and purchases. Although the land must at times be purchased, he considered donations superior particularly since they seemed to indicate continued Indian support for the Swedish colony. The distinction, however, often appears arbitrary as one reads the sources. Upon his arrival in New Sweden, Johan Risingh attempted to consolidate Swedish holdings and on the earlier mentioned visit by Peminacka and Ahopameck, these men reconfirmed usufruct rights to two areas. Risingh then reproached Peminacka for his 1651 “sale” to the Dutch. Peminacka replied that he had never “sold” the land to the Dutch, only given them permission to build houses and a fort in return for presents. Now he “retracted this and gave us the land. I thus composed a letter and had him set his mark beneath it, and the rest of us signed our names as witnesses and sent it home by the ship.”36 Even to a conscientious colonial officer this must have seemed like splitting hairs. The Dutch had given presents and received permission to build houses, but it was not a purchase! What, then, constituted purchase? The Indians could apparently retract such a contract and “give” the land back to the Swedes. Did this mean that donation superceded purchase? Risingh’s action to quickly write a deed and have it signed and sent home to Sweden meant that he gathered proof of Swedish as opposed to Dutch ownership of the land. Taken together, Risingh’s writings show that he had some understanding of the Indian concepts of land use rights and that he also knew that he did not have the power to enforce Swedish principles. Risingh’s arguments for Indian ownership came in response to European encroachment and as a realization of the power relationship with the Indians. The same power relations prodded his keen concern with occupation. The Indians demanded settlement in return for letting the Swedes use the land. For the Indians, it was a means to be within reach of European trade goods. It is also probable that the Indians did not see that the Swedes had any reason to use the 35 36

“Report of Johan Risingh, 1654,” in NEP, 149. Ibid.

rightful owners

135

land unless they settled on it. “On the 11th a big group of sachems and common Mantes who live on the east bank of the river came to Fort Christina and promised to keep land available for us, which we had purchased from them earlier. We also promised that we would occupy the land as soon as possible, and they would then receive presents.”37 Settlement was also necessary to refute Dutch claims. The Dutch, wrote Printz in 1647, “begin to buy land from the Savages within our boundaries, which we purchased already eight years ago, and (are) so impudent that they here and there erect the seal of the West India Company.”38 To settle was a way to show both Indians and Dutch that the Swedes meant business. It is therefore not surprising that Risingh’s most forceful declaration and argumentation for Indian ownership can be read in his account of the Dutch attack on New Sweden in 1655. The Dutch did not have a legal right to the entire Delaware River, argued Risingh, even if they had built a few houses and fortresses: Because each and every piece of land belongs to a particular owner, and although land was bought from the Indians and documents signed thereupon, the buyer does not retain the purchase unless the land is quickly occupied. Otherwise the Indians repossess it themselves or sell it to others, jure recidivo, as long as they do not wish to keep it for a longer time because of some special affection.39

Thus, in his reasoning, Risingh combined the Dutch practice of purchasing land with the concept of occupation and settlement. He also cleverly used the Hollander’s own idea of the land belonging to the Native Americans until it was extinguished through legal purchases. Purchase from the rightful owners came first in the process of establishing title, but it had to be followed by occupation and settlement. Any English or Dutch pretension in the region would fall, argued Risingh, when the Swedes had settled completely. The River could not entirely belong to the Dutch since it belonged to several specific nations and their sachems, and could not be sold in its entirety. The Dutch could not “deny us nor others the right to purchase or otherwise obtain pieces of land for ourselves from the Indian owners.”40 The Indian owners might dispose of land as it pleased them and 37 38 39 40

Risingh’s Journal, 12 August 1654, 199. “Report of Johan Printz, 1647,” in Johnson, Instruction, 133. Risingh’s Journal, 265. Ibid., 267.

136

chapter four

could also take back land through conquest. “If they take a fort or a house and kill or chase away the owner, they retain it as their own house and land again.”41 Johan Risingh found in the concept of Indian ownership an advantage to be used against European encroachment, yet it was based on a keen realization of the relationships and possibilities in the region. Profound misunderstandings often marred the negotiations over land between Indians and Europeans. Indians could not conceive of selling land, while to the European, absolute possession of territory was vital. Moreover, at this time the Indians saw little reason to try to comprehend what the Europeans meant. The Lenapes or Susquehannocks could invite Swedes or Dutch to enter their territory, trade, and make a living there, without that altering the fact that the land was Indian. Thus, certain use rights were transferable while dominion over the land could not be alienated. Europeans were allowed to plant for their own subsistence, but colonial settlements that had no trade goods and only broke land to farm seem to have been in a precarious position. Indians frequently burned down abandoned houses and attacked outlying settlements. So it was with Swanendael and the earliest Swedish settlers recalled how they had to be armed while out in their fields plowing.42 European payments and gifts were regarded as rightful compensation establishing a just relation between the parties. Lenapes must have marveled at the urge to write it down, but during the period of Swedish colonization, the Swedes had to accept Indian custom. Swedish officers grumbled that the Lenapes were never satisfied and kept demanding payment for land already sold, however, the power balance was such that the Swedes saw no other alternative than to keep offering a payment that primarily signified confirmation of an agreement. The European custom of drawing up agreements on paper and affixing names to them at first must have appeared totally incomprehensible to the Lenapes. The need for deeds in European arguments would not concern them, but the existence of these documents was not just a matter of different cultural practices. Whether agreements were preserved orally or in writing concerned issues of control. That written deeds, preserved for distant authorities, represented an alien mode of power and decision making became clear as Indians 41 42

Risingh’s Journal, 265. See below in chapters on trade and cultural contact.

rightful owners

137

expressed their preference for oral, and orally transmitted, agreements. The Lenape Indian sachem Nutimus clearly argued for the superiority of oral records in a reply to William Penn’s negotiator John Logan in 1735. Nutimus described that when selling land the chief must inform each individual who had any right in the land as well as witnesses from neighboring tribes “So that no Land can be sold without all the Indians round being made acquainted with the Matter. & this we think a Way to have it better known than You take, for when You have gott a Writing from us you lock it up in ye Chest & no body knows what you have Bought or what you paid for it.” Literacy was by no means an insignificant difference between Europeans and indigenous peoples, rather it was a contested notion, one that caused debate and considerable tension.43 Creating written words was not the Indian way to express and preserve valuable information. Initially then, the deeds served no significant function in the negotiations between Indians and whites. For these reasons, the deeds are poor sources for one who wishes to understand Indian attitudes on land rights. However, they do offer us information on the struggles between European colonizers, which eventually had consequences for Indians. The Swedes were late arrivals on the colonial scene and could not claim visual discovery as the English began to do by referring to Cabot. Neither could they claim to have been the first to come into the country. What remained was to acquire absolute title to the land in the colony from someone other than rival colonial powers. Title to specific land had to be purchased from the Indians, and for this to be legally useful, the Indians had to be the rightful owners. In the face of this necessity and of the threats from Dutch governors, Johan Risingh developed a formidable legal argument and defense for Indian land title in the European sense. He was not alone in this. The Dutch lawyer Adriaen van der Donck described Lenape and Iroquois land philosophy: “Of all the rights, laws, or maxims that are to be found somewhere in the world, there is not one that these people honor as much as the 43 Nutimus is quoted in Anthony F.C. Wallace, King of the Delawares. Teedyuscung 1700 –1763 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1949; reprint, Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1990), 21–22 (page references are to reprint edition). I have discussed the debates over orality and literacy in more detail in “Kampen om orden,” in Hembygden & Världen. Festskrift till Ulf Beijbom, ed. Lars Olsson and Sune Åkerman (Växjö: Svenska Emigrantinstitutets skriftserie 13, 2002), 195–206.

138

chapter four

right of nature or the right of nations.”44 Van der Donck was no doubt familiar with the theories of ownership and use rights advanced by Hugo Grotius. He, and Risingh, found a way to explain the Indian attitude to land ownership which fit into a legal concept of their time. Moreover, the acceptance of full land title residing with others than the Crown prevailed in Sweden at the time. Many peasants possessed their land. Thus, according to Swedish law Risingh presented a sound argument and the purchases made from the Indians guaranteed that the land did rightfully belong to New Sweden. William Penn, some decades later, continued the practice of buying land in an attempt to establish just title to the whole area included in his charter, even when other colonial governors regarded the charter as sufficient grant of territory and jurisdiction. Lenape land control rested with the villages in collective sovereignty and all matters concerning land use was to be conducted with the knowledge of all who used the land in any manner. Their relationship to land meant a set of relations between different users rather than between users and an alienable object. The Swedes as latecomers on the colonial scene developed stringent arguments for Indian ownership of land and for proper purchase or donation from the Indians as the fundamental basis for European land ownership in the New World. The actual weakness of the Swedish colony forced an acceptance of Indian customs concerning land transfers, with the addition of the parchment signed by the individual owners. Swedish legal traditions, different from Anglo-Saxon, made recognition of Indian rights to land possible. Neither of these facts, however, means that Swedish colonizers understood or intended to pay attention to the main aspect of Indian land dominion, namely that the land was not for sale. It remained for the English with their superior might to implement the actual takeover which would force the Lenapes and Susquehannocks to removal and extinction.

44

van Gastel, “Van der Donck’s Description,” 418.

CHAPTER FIVE

TWO KINDS OF MIDDLEMEN

Trade in the Delaware River area Trade created the enormous magnet that lured both Indians and Europeans into a complex web of interaction and conflict. IndianEuropean contacts in the seventeenth century become unintelligible unless we pay attention to the meaning of these relations. That trade occurs both within and between all societies is in itself not astonishing. What is in need of explanation is the attraction of a transaction that seems, with hindsight, so disadvantaged and imbalanced. Yet, Indians and Swedes entered into it eagerly and with high expectations, and eventually became bitterly disappointed in its promises. What we need to keep in mind is that trade involved much more than an exchange of goods but rather encompassed a site of social relations. This chapter seeks to portray these interactions as people exchanged goods along the Delaware River. Long before the arrival of the Swedes, the Indians in the area had sought advantageous positions for trade with Europeans. The Susquehannocks, with whom the Swedes later became major trading partners, found their access to the desirable coastal trade blocked by Iroquois neighbors to the north. Before the mid-sixteenth century, the Susquehannocks lived on the upper Susquehanna River in what is now New York State. They occupied small villages comprised of one to three longhouses located along rivers and streams and surrounded by their agricultural fields. Some time around 1550, the Susquehannocks began a move south down the Susquehanna River, overrunning a people known only from archaeology as Shenk’s Ferry, to settle in present day Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. The attraction of the trade along the coast precipitated a move that led to several wars with the coastal peoples who had the easiest access to European trade goods. During the first three decades of the seventeenth century, the Susquehannocks fought devastating wars against all their coastal neighbors, and when the Swedes arrived in 1638, the Susquehannocks had established themselves as the most powerful nation in the region.

140

chapter five

By the early 1600s, the Susquehannocks inhabited a very large and densely populated town surrounded with elaborate fortifications, distinctly different from their former pattern of habitation along the north fork of the river. The town lay near good fishing waters, surrounded by land suitable for agriculture, and within easy distance of Chesapeake Bay. The location also offered control of the Susquehanna drainage and the fur bearing animals of the interior region.1 It was there that the first white chronicler recorded the Susquehannocks’ existence. In 1608, Captain John Smith of the Virginia colony at Jamestown reported that he had met some Tockwoghs (later identified as Nanticoke Indians) in northern Chesapeake Bay where he saw many hatchets, knives, pieces of iron and brass that the Indians said they had obtained from Susquehannock traders. The Susquehannocks were looking for European trading partners and offered the Virginia colonists an alliance that would include trade and support against the Iroquois. Their strategy was to control the inland supply of furs and find a European ally on the Chesapeake or Delaware bay, an alliance that much resembled the one they would later offer the Swedes. William Claiborne established the first English settlements in the northern part of the Chesapeake Bay area when in the early 1630s he built trading posts on Kent and Palmers islands, near the mouth of the Susquehanna River. Claiborne had been granted trading privileges by King Charles I and expected to establish a fur trading empire, largely by commanding the trade with the Susquehannocks. The trip down the river from the Susquehannock town was easy and the Indians landed right on Claiborne’s doorstep. However, as the importance of the fur trade increased, competition between Europeans became just as fierce as among Indian nations. Lord Baltimore began settlement in what was to become Maryland in 1634, and he opposed Claiborne. In 1638, Baltimore managed

1 Witthoft, “Comparison,” 35–35; Elisabeth Tooker, “The Demise of the Susquehannocks: A 17th Century Mystery,” Pennsylvania Archaeologist 54, nos. 3–4 (1984), 2–3; Kent, Susquehanna’s Indians, 19. Witthoft suggests that the Susquehannocks were forced to move away from Iroquois military pressure, while Tooker finds that they sought easier access to coastal trade in the south. Kent concludes that better access to trade goods was the major reason for the move into the lower Susquehanna Valley and adds that competition for, as well as actual Susquehannock denial of those goods to other Native peoples (i.e. Shenk’s Ferry and Lenape) lay behind the conflicts implied in the archaeological records.

two kinds of middlemen

141

to evict the trader who then returned to England leaving the Susquehannocks temporarily without a trading partner.2 The Lenapes had long been familiar with the commodities from across the ocean, probably from as early as the end of the sixteenth century. The first recorded trade occurred in 1616 when Cornelis Hendrickson explored the Bay for the Dutch, and “did trade with the Inhabitants, said trade consisting of Sables, Furs, Robes and other Skins.” The ultimate purpose of Hendrickson’s trip—to rescue three Dutchmen from the Indians—suggests that the contact between Europeans and Lenapes was less than smooth. In 1633, David Pieterszen de Vries reported meeting Indians dressed in “English jackets” which caused him to suspect foul play, “as those were not clothing for them, or trading goods.” In 1626, the West India Company learned that the Susquehannocks had gone to Manhattan to try to open trade relations with the Dutch. This report also indicated conflict between Lenapes and Susquehannocks. To reach the Delaware River and the traders on it, the Susquehannocks followed a well-marked Indian road from Lancaster County down to the vicinity of what was to become Fort Christina. It became known as the Great Minquas Path and fell entirely within a strip of Lenape land. The English captain Thomas Yong, who in 1634 sailed up the Delaware River hoping to reach one of the Great Lakes, reported war between the two peoples. Susquehannock depredations had forced Lenapes to abandon the west bank of the River. The Lenapes appeared as eager to trade with Yong as he with them, and in spite of the violent war the Indians apparently had enough furs and victuals to successfully trade with the Englishman. He in return offered them protection against the Susquehannocks, promising that the English “were ready to defend the oppressed from the crueltie of their neighbours.” Yong also received a visit from the Susquehannocks while he was entertaining a Lenape trader. Fear apparently overcame the

2 William A. Hunter, “The Historic Role of the Susquehannocks,” in Susquehannock Miscellany, ed. John Witthoft and W. Fred Kinsey III (Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1959), 11; Kupperman, “Scandinavian Colonists,” 96–98; Kent, Susquehanna’s Indians, 34; J. Frederick Fausz, “‘To Draw Thither the Trade of Beavers’: The Strategic Significance of the English Fur Trade in the Chesapeake, 1620–1660,” in Le Castor Fait Tout. Selected Papers of the Fifth North American Fur Trade Conference, 1985, ed. Bruce G. Trigger, Toby Morantz and Louise Dechêne (Montreal: Lake St. Louise Historical Society, 1987), 54–64.

142

chapter five

Indian when he saw the Susquehannocks approach the boat in a canoe and asked Yong to hide him, which the English captain did in a cabin between the decks. The Susquehannocks in an authoritative manner signed to the Englishman that they had come from a war with the other Indians, “whome they had overcome, and slayne some of them, and cutt downe their corne.” Yong gave them some hatchets, knives, and scissors and the Susquehannocks then asked to see his trade goods. They told him that they would return in about ten weeks, which he mistakenly thought meant ten days, with beaver and otter pelts to trade. The misunderstanding undid this trade opportunity, but Yong continued up the river trading with various Lenape communities.3 The conflict between Susquehannocks and Lenapes most likely concerned access to the European trade. Both de Vries and Yong reported meeting fleeing and hungry Indians who cautioned them about the Susquehannocks. The European captains expected and prepared for hostilities when they first encountered the Susquehannocks, but they only professed a desire to trade. By the time the Swedes arrived in 1638 however, the Lenapes were again living on both sides of the river and there is no more indication of armed conflict between the them and the Susquehannocks. Thomas Campanius Holm described a tributary status of the Lenapes in relation to the Susquehannocks. The latter “forced the formerly mentioned barbarians to be afraid of them, so that they had to be tributary and pay taxes.” If that was the case it did not imply Susquehannock political control as the term “tributary” suggested to a European. The Susquehannocks never attempted to control Lenape lands. The most likely conclusion is that the war of 1634 established the Susquehannocks’ right to use the Minquas Path and gave them access to the river. Once this was clear, both Susquehannocks and Lenapes could trade on the river and the Lenapes continued to be independent. Thus, already in the beginning of the seventeenth century the

3 On trade with the Dutch: Albright G. Zimmerman, “European Trade Relations In the 17th and 18th Centuries,” in A Delaware Indian Symposium, ed. Herbert C. Kraft (Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1974), 57–60; Hart, Prehistory, 35; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 168; De Vries, NEP, 20; Yong, NEP, 38–43; Witthoft, “Comparison,” 35–36; H. Geiger Omwake, “White Kaolin Pipes from the Oscar Leibhart Site,” in Susquehannock Miscellany, ed. John Witthoft and W. Fred Kinsey, III (Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1969), 127–128; Kent, Susquehanna’s Indians, 34–35.

two kinds of middlemen

143

struggle for position involving competitors in the fur trade had affected both Indians and European colonists. Both sides attempted strategies to play their counterparts off one against the other.4 The Dutch established Fort Nassau as their first trading post on the Delaware in 1624. Together with Fort Orange on the Hudson, it was expected to be the best place for Dutch settlement. But by 1626 the authorities in Amsterdam had realized the great potential New York Bay offered and the majority of arriving colonists were told to locate on Manhattan Island. Families at Orange and Nassau moved there too since Indian hostility made the forts unsafe, and the posts on the Delaware were deserted. From then on Dutch traders sailed up the river occasionally to trade until they briefly reoccupied Fort Nassau in 1633. They deserted it again, however, in the winter of 1633/34. The conflict between the Lenapes and Susquehannocks complicated trade in the area and the Susquehannocks appeared powerless or reluctant to establish more than momentary connections with eager Dutch traders. For two years, the Dutch colonists at Swanendael traded with Lenapes before their lack of goods precipitated the conflict that eventually led to the destruction of that settlement. The English likewise traveled up the river from time to time. In 1634, seven or eight men from Virginia attempted to explore the Delaware, but unknown Indians killed all of them.5 By the time the Swedes arrived, a few Dutchmen under the commissary Jan Jansen maintained the trade from their base at Fort Nassau. Peter Minuit, with his past as governor of New Netherland, knew the location of the fort and shrewdly avoided sailing that far up the river. He landed at the mouth of Minquas Kill where the Great Minquas Path terminated, a location ideal for trade. Minuit had been instructed to buy wampum on the New England coast for use in the trade on the Delaware River. Arriving there, he was to establish contact with the Indians, trade with them, and make sure that his people did no harm to the Indians. The ships Kalmare Nyckel and Fågel Grip carried cargoes to a value of 14,832 gulden, containing a variety of trade goods, such as duffels and other fabric,

4 Jennings, “Glory,” 19–20; Hunter, “Historic Role,” 15; Witthoft, “Comparison,” 35–36; Tooker, “Demise,” 2. Relations were friendly enough that after the Senecas attacked the Susquehannocks in 1675 the latter fled to the Lenapes and received protection there. See also Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 181. 5 Trelease, Indian Affairs, 35–36, 56–58; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 178–179.

144

chapter five

axes, hatchets, adzes, knives, tobacco pipes, mirrors, combs, earrings, and other ornaments. On arrival Minuit dispatched the sloop up the river to commence bartering with the Indians. On its way back to the ship, the Dutch commissary at Fort Nassau spotted the competition. He protested strongly to the Swedes and wrote to Governor Kieft in New Amsterdam, but the Dutch did not have the resources to stop Swedish consolidation. Though modest, first contacts had been made in what was to become a highly specialized SwedishIndian-European trading game. Word must have spread quickly among the Lenapes and all the way to the Susquehannocks that whites had arrived and that their captain was liberal with gifts. At the time of the first land agreement between Lenapes and Swedes, several Susquehannock sachems were present as witnesses to the deed. The Susquehannocks would have been very interested indeed, since they had just lost their trade connection with the eviction of William Claiborne. Governor Kieft in New Amsterdam complained vigorously that the trade on the Delaware suffered considerably “because the Swede has spoiled it . . . which we are forced to submit to. The trade being taken from us and our country, is felt very sensibly by us.” The Dutch considered the trade in the South (Delaware) River as clearly secondary to that in the North (Hudson) River but were nevertheless concerned with the rivalry. When Minuit departed in 1638 he left trade in the hands of factor Hendrik Huygen who exchanged merchandise for large numbers of skins and corn during fall to spring 1638/39.6

The Swedish role in the Indian trade Two basic facts dominated life in New Sweden—the relative lack of support from home and the location in a major North American trading center. Queen Christina issued instructions to the governor to emphasize trade as the principal activity of the colony. She admonished him to “let the Wild people get the necessary things they need

6 Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 113, 182, 185–186, 194–195; Fausz, “To Draw Thither,” 64–65; “Affidavit of Four Men from the Key of Calmar, 1638”, NEP, 87. Hunter, “Historic Role,” 16; quote from Samuel Hazard, Annals of Pennsylvania from the Discovery of the Delaware (Philadelphia: Hazard and Mitchell, 1850), 45.

two kinds of middlemen

145

for a somewhat more reasonable price than they get from the Hollanders at the fort Nassau or from the neighboring English, all so that these same Wild people may be drawn from them and thus more become accustomed to us.” Fur trade with the Indians alone did not justify the establishment of a colony. It is clear from the instructions that the colonial settlement formed part of a much larger complex. Sweden as a great state in Europe had the obligation to carry out a civilizing mission on the same scale as her competitors. Promotion of commerce served the purpose of “extending the jurisdiction and greatness of [her] Roy[al] Maj[esty] and of the Swedish Crown.” This undertaking was found “to be not only lawful in itself and reasonable, but also [conducive] to the respect of ” the Swedish queen and crown. In the ideology of the strong state during the seventeenth century commerce, law, and religion combined to render possible the disciplining of the subjects of the state and to ensure the implementation of a divine purpose. Thus, success in trade and exchange was not simply a matter of a positive balance sheet, but concerned the power, aim, and reputation of the entire nation.7 In order to ensure stockholders in Sweden returns on their investments it was vital that the fur trade functioned well. The Queen ordered Printz to keep a close watch over the trade “and take care that [Her] Roy[al] Maj[esty] and her subjects, and the members interested in this Company, may have reason to expect good returns for their cargoes.” However, investors in Sweden did not supply the cargoes necessary to carry out this order. The Dutch investors in the company withdrew in 1642 and the colony came under direct Crown supervision. But the Swedish crown also had other obligations. Sweden waged a war with Denmark until 1645, as well as one on German territory until 1648, and all ships were requisitioned for naval service. Then, in 1649, one of the best-prepared expeditions was shipwrecked in the Caribbean. Political changes as well as an agrarian crisis in 1649–51 contributed to the almost fatal neglect of the colony. In the more than six years between January 1648 and May 1654 no Swedish expeditions arrived in the colony. Governor

7 “Instruction for Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 62, 64, 80–81, 87 (My translations). Stellan Dahlgren has discussed the motives for Swedish overseas trade and colonization in detail in Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 9, 13–25. See also for a comparison of Swedish overseas trading policies Nováky, Handelskompanier.

146

chapter five

Printz’ letters to his superiors in Sweden speak of desolation and frustration, as in this missive from August 1652: I have humbly the last past five years, according to my duty, frequently written to Y[our] Excell[ency] about the condition of this country; likewise [I] have the last two years, 1650 and 1651, despatched two messengers to Y[our] Excell[ency] with letters and an oral report, but during the whole space of that long time and not to this day [have I] received a single letter, messenger or message from the fatherland . . . The strangers have conceived among others this opinion and tell us at present to our face, that we do not belong to any government at all.8

Printz added that on account of their poor trade the Swedes now lived day and night in fear of an Indian attack. Not until 1653 could Axel Oxenstierna and the newly instituted College of Commerce make a serious effort to support the colony and a large expedition sailed under way with commissary Johan Risingh, who would become the last governor of the colony.9 Swedish colonial traders or merchants did not find themselves in a position to control the supply of goods in any direction; instead, they attempted to influence the circulation itself. In general, colonial merchants had access to three different control instruments. The first was an exclusive right to carry on specific transactions and to prevent competition between traders. Secondly, traders could also control the medium of exchange, i.e. the money used. Finally, they could seek to optimize their profits through superior knowledge of the trade conditions.10 In reality the success of these instruments varied. The New Sweden Company offered its officers exclusive trading privileges, hoping to monopolize the trade for the company and discourage competition. The Dutch West India Company chose a different path by allowing free trade, no doubt a more realistic policy in this vast new land. The Swedes attempted to shut out other traders and this led to skirmishes and conflicts and in the end turned out to be an unsuccessful approach. Control of the medium of exchange proved extremely difficult. The widespread use of wampum, encouraged as money by English traders for the purpose of control, meant that

8

“Printz to Oxenstierna, August 30, 1652,” in Johnson, Instruction, 184–185. “Instruction for Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 86; “Oxenstierna to Printz, September 7, 1647,” in Johnson, Instruction, 169; Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 74–76, 79, 126. 10 For a theoretical discussion see Nováky, Handelskompanier, 21–22. 9

two kinds of middlemen

147

Swedish traders depended heavily on the English. The only avenue open to the new colony seemed to be through developing the knowhow of trading relations. Necessity thus forced Swedish traders to learn to communicate in Indian languages and make themselves indispensable as interpreters. They also traveled across the country, learning the geography of the land as well as how to live on the land like the Indians. This “capital” of similarity and developing trust later turned out to be of major importance to the colonists who remained after the Swedish colony ceased to exist. In order to keep trade going, a prerequisite for survival, the Swedish colony took up the middleman position between Indians and other Europeans. Swedes bought goods from neighboring European colonies, traded with Indians for furs and food, and then resold the furs to other colonies for goods to send to Europe. With the arrival of the energetic Governor Printz in 1643 a pattern developed that characterized the Swedish colony throughout its existence. The Swedish company initially expressed a greater interest in trading with tobacco than with peltries. The governor had orders to raise tobacco in the colony, and this began on a large scale, considering the labor resources, under the direction of a specialist, Elias the tobacco-planter. The attempt, however, did not succeed and after 1646, no more tobacco was grown in the colony for export. The Swedes had to find other ways to fill the return cargoes. Susquehannock interest in establishing trade relations with the Swedes gave the latter an opportunity to become brokers for furs from the interior. The Susquehannocks already occupied a middleman position in the interior, bringing furs from tribes further inland, trading them for goods and wampum at the coast. The Swedes obtained a key role in the exchange of wampum for pelts. They traded beavers from the Susquehannocks with merchants from New Haven and Connecticut, receiving goods and wampum in return. In this way, a contact was established between the wampum producing Long Island Indians and the interior tribes, with the Susquehannocks and Swedes as middlemen.11 The system can best be described with examples. In May 1643 the English merchant John Willcox came from Virginia and the Swedes bought a bark, two guns, sail cloth, 862 1/2 yards of sewant (wampum), 144 knives, three kettles, and fifteen axes, all to a value

11

Kupperman, “Scandinavian Colonists;” Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 73.

148

chapter five

of 7,224 florins. Hendrik Huygen, the factor, paid him with 1,050 florins worth of beaver skins and a draft for the remainder. With cargoes in hand, the problem was now how to inform the Susquehannocks. A Lenape living nearby was paid to bring the Susquehannocks to Fort Christina. In August, the Susquehannocks arrived with large quantities of beaver, which they exchanged for duffels and wampum. The Swedes also established contacts with other interior tribes, notably the Black Minquas, who in the summer of 1643 brought a large supply of skins to Fort Christina. The beavers were then used to buy tobacco from a Virginia merchant for the return cargo. The Swedes did not always find it convenient to hire an Indian to bring messages and often the traders themselves traveled up to the Susquehannock main town, following a strenuous path full of rocks and hills.12 Both the Dutch and the English were interested in taking control of the fur trade in the Delaware region. English colonists in New Haven, established in the same year as New Sweden, soon attempted to gain a foothold on the Delaware River. They did not at first intend to interfere with Swedish or Dutch settlements, but to buy land from Indians in areas not settled by other Europeans. Against this threat the Dutch at Nassau and the Swedes joined forces and twice sought to repel the English. At first, the Indians also refused to deal with the Puritan colonists. Governor Winthrop in New Haven reported that the English found some Pequots among the Lenapes. It is therefore quite possible that Indian reluctance stemmed from knowledge of the recent English-Pequot war. Finally, the English established a settlement on Varkens Kill on the east bank of the river, opposite Fort Christina. Since it was an unsuitable location for trade with the Indians, the Swedes and Dutch made no effort to oust the English, who began to grow tobacco, which the Swedes apparently bought from them. The Queen and the company, however, would have preferred if they left, “therefore, [Her]Most Roy[al] Maj[esty] aforesaid will most graciously leave it to the discretion of Governor Printz to strive for such [a solution] and gradually bring

12 Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 309–312, 318. The identity and location of the Black Minquas is uncertain. According to Swedish maps and directions they lived northwest of the Susquehannocks, who the Swedes also called White Minquas. The Black Minquas have been tentatively identified as Eries. Jennings, “Susquehannock,” 363; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 180–181.

two kinds of middlemen

149

it so far that the English may be removed, in case it can be done with grace and propriety.” Governor Printz remained ambivalent towards English colonists. While the New Haven English continued to threaten his Indian trade, Printz admitted that, in spite of the fact that they charged the Swedes “double prices,” merchants from Virginia and Connecticut were the greatest support the Swedes had in America.13

Trade conflicts In the 1640s, European competition for the valuable trade with the Susquehannocks developed into a conflict leading to a no-win situation for the colonists. The Indians in the area took advantage of the competition, pitting the whites against one another. It began in 1643 when latent hostilities between Maryland colonists and Susquehannocks erupted in violence. In New Netherland the harsh attitudes towards Indians during the Kieft administration reached a peak in the Pavonia massacre in February 1643. Indians all along the Hudson River and Long Island retaliated and open war raged in the countryside for more than a year. Suddenly the Swedes found themselves favored trading partners. Johan Printz did not fail to see the opportunity and intended to take advantage of the situation. Relations had been established with both the Susquehannocks and the Black Minquas. A crucial lack of goods again threatened the Swedish trade. It took three years before Printz received any additional trade goods from Sweden. Apparently Susquehannocks, as well as Lenapes, expressed irritation with the lack of dependability of the Swedish traders and Printz was forced to purchase goods on credit from English and Dutch merchants. When the ship Gyllenhaijen arrived in October 1646, Printz immediately dispatched his most trusted traders, Hendrick Huygen and Gregorius Van Dyck, to the Susquehannocks with presents to restore good trade relations.14 13 Kupperman, “Scandinavian Colonists,” 99–105; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 208, 212, 342; quote from Johnson, Instruction, 70–72. 14 Trelease, Indian Affairs, 60ff; “Report of Printz, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 116, 121–123; “Report of Printz, 1647,” in Johnson, Instruction, 131–134; “Register of the Provincial Secretary, 1642–1647,” New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch, II [hereafter NYHM], translated and edited by Arnold J.F. Van Laer (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1974), 150; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 329.

150

chapter five

The Dutch reached a peace agreement in 1645 with at least ten Algonkian-speaking groups—among them the Lenape’s northern relatives, the Munsees and Esopus—along the Hudson River and on Long Island and returned to challenge the Swedes for control of the trade in the Delaware Valley. They charged the Swedes with selling guns to the Indians, information that they had from Susquehannock chiefs visiting Manhattan. During the following years the Dutch, English, and Swedes repeatedly accused each other of selling guns to the Indians and of inciting them to violence. Printz (and later Risingh) never denied selling guns to the Indians and it is possible that he did see the existing hostilities between Indians and Dutch as an opportunity to sow strife. In 1647 the Dutch commissary at Fort Nassau, Andries Hudde, reported that Lenapes had hindered the Dutch from going upriver, saying that Printz had told them that the Dutch had come to kill them. Hudde further stated that “Printz leaves nothing untried to render us suspected by every means both among the Savages and among the Christians, yea, even connives at the bad treatment of the Honorable Company’s subjects, whether freemen or servants, so that they often return home bloody and bruised, as has often happened by the Indians.” As if that was not enough the Swedes had also blocked all access to the interior through Fort Göteborg and a strong house “just on the path that leads to the Minquas” thus controlling nearly all the trade of the Indians on the river.15 However, Swedish control of the trade in 1647 was an illusion. By fall 1648 they had almost run out of trade goods again. The Susquehannocks grew tired of waiting and went to the Dutch to offer trade. Alexander Boyer, commandant at Fort Nassau, reported to Stuyvesant that a war-chief of the Susquehannocks had come with

15 Dutch charges in Hazard, Annals, 94–95; NYHM XVIII, ed. Charles T. Gehring (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1981), 13; references abound to Swedish sale of arms to the Indians. A sample few are from Beauchamp Plantagenet, “A Description of the Province of New Albion, 1648,” in Tracts and Other Papers Relating Principally to the Origin, Settlement, and Progress of the Colonies in North America, from the Discovery of the Country to the Year 1776, II, ed. Peter Force (Washington, 1838), 19; “Report of Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 133; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 227; “Printz to Oxenstierna, August 30, 1652,” in Johnson, Instruction, 185; also Van Rensselaer Bowier Manuscripts, ed. A.J.F. van Laer, (Albany: New York State Library, 1908), 426, 565–566, 626, for acknowledgement of the guns trade; Trelease, Indian Affairs, 83; “Report of Andries Hudde,” in Johnson, Instruction, 257–258, 263–264, 269.

two kinds of middlemen

151

thirty to forty beavers to find out if a vessel had arrived with goods. They had an abundance of pelts and were eager to trade, but they also expressed their displeasure with the supply situation: “They are also very unhappy that this river is not continually stocked with our goods. The Swede presently has little merchandise left; consequently, if we had any here, there would be without a doubt a favorable trade with the Minquas.” The Susquehannocks set the conditions for this trade and demanded that the Dutch must keep a constant supply of goods at their fort. The Indians also asked for guns, powder, and lead. This new opportunity encouraged the Dutch to attempt to establish a stronger position on the river, but for this they had to negotiate with the Lenapes for land. The ensuing conflict has already been dealt with in the previous chapter.16 The Swedes, with their nearly empty strong house eagerly awaited supplies from home. In January 1648 the ship Swanen arrived, but carried little cargo for trade. The few goods the Swedes were able to obtain came from English merchants and Dutch smugglers who opposed the West India Company and traded directly with Swedes for pelts. At the end of 1649 the ship Kattan was shipwrecked off the coast of Puerto Rico, again leaving the Swedish colony without relief. Meanwhile the Swedish situation worsened progressively and in August 1650 Johan Printz declared that the Dutch had controlled the trade the whole year. The next Swedish ship did not arrive until 1654 when Örnen brought the new commissary, Johan Risingh.17 In 1651 Peter Stuyvesant visited the area. The Mohawks, with whom the Dutch primarily traded at Fort Orange, had then attacked the Susquehannocks’ fort and Stuyvesant may have thought that a combined Dutch-Indian effort would bring the Delaware River under complete Dutch control. The Swedes could no longer maintain all their posts and dismantled Fort Elfsborg and Korsholm and concentrated strength at Fort Göteborg on Tinicum Island. The Dutch, seeing Swedish weakness, built Fort Casimir on the bank of the river

16

NYHM XVIII, 12–13, 19. On smugglers: NYHM XVIII, 32, 75; Father Isaac Jogues reported in 1646 that “it is believed that these Swedes are maintained by Amsterdam merchants, incensed because the Company of the West Indies monopolizes all the trade of these regions.” “Novum Belgium,” The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents: Travel and Explorations of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France, 1610–1791, 28, ed. Reuben Gold Thwaites (Cleveland: Burrows Brothers, 1896–1901), 109; “Printz to Brahe, 1 Aug. 1650,” in Johnson, Instructions, 178. 17

152

chapter five

opposite Fort Elfsborg. This new fort now controlled the passage up the river. Stuyvesant negotiated several land purchases and had one interesting conference with the Lenape sachem Mattahorn, who was by now entirely disillusioned with the Swedes. In the intricate exchange network the Swedes deliberately sought to bypass the Lenapes. This policy, however, had little chance of succeeding since the Lenapes had one major trump to play, namely that of control of the land on which the trade occurred. At this interview with Stuyvesant, Mattahorn stated that upon his arrival in 1638 Peter Minuit had given him a kettle and other trifles and requested as much land as was needed for a plantation. Further, Minuit had promised Mattahorn half the tobacco grown on the land, but he never received any. This conference presented a formidable threat to the Swedish foothold and Stuyvesant saw the opening. If the Swedes lost the right to land then the trade with the Susquehannocks would almost automatically fall into the hands of the Dutch. Swedish-Indian trade appeared to be on the way out. Neither Lenapes nor Susquehannocks saw Swedes as useful partners. Swedish professions of friendship appeared useless as well as false, since they had no goods with which to fulfill their part of the agreement. The Indians also saw possibilities in the growing tensions between Swedes and Dutch. Competition between the European colonists enabled them to compare prices and these increased so that Printz wrote to Oxenstierna in August of 1652 that the Dutch “have so completely spoiled the fur trade that neither they nor we can trade any longer with the Indians with any profit.” It was a disillusioned Governor Printz who left the colony in 1653.18 However, as before, the Swedish colony benefited from conflicts elsewhere. War broke out between English and Dutch colonies in the New World, a war that lasted from 1652 to 1654, and in 1652 (or early 1653) the Iroquois attacked the Susquehannocks. Both these events probably contributed to convincing the Indians—at least the Susquehannocks—that the harmless Swedes might be the best trading partners after all, if only they had goods. Such was the situation when the last Swedish leader, Johan Risingh, arrived in May 1654. He found the Susquehannocks willing to make land available and exercise their role as self-proclaimed protectors of the Swedish colony,

18 “Report of Andries Hudde,” in Johnson, Instruction, 247–250; “Printz to Oxenstierna, 30 Aug. 1652,” in Johnson, Instruction, 185.

two kinds of middlemen

153

in return for cooperation in the trade. At this moment in time Risingh experienced what must have appeared to him as the apogee of the Swedish colonial venture. The deal, however, depended on good relations with Lenapes as they still controlled the coastal region. A secure location with absolute access to the Susquehannocks, without the interference of other Indians or Europeans was the ultimate goal of the Swedish governors. In a letter to chancellor Oxenstierna complaining about the encroachment from Stuyvesant, Johan Printz wrote that he “has drawn away from us the trade of one nation of the Savages, called the Minquas, whose country we bought six years ago, only for the sake of trade.” In his first report home, in 1654, Risingh emphasized the need for firm establishment of Swedish settlements. He recommended that Christina Kill be settled and a passage made from Elk River “by which we could bring the Virginian goods here and store them, and load our ships with them for a return cargo. If we could buy Sakakitqz and Amisackan from the Minquas, then this could well be brought about, and we could also carry on the best trade with them there.” The subsequent Susquehannock donation of land promised to fulfill those expectations. But the Swedish-Susquehannock trade construction was a fragile structure. Other Indians, notably the Iroquois, threatened the Susquehannocks, who also fought with their southern neighbors, the colony of Maryland. The Dutch and English war 1652–54 cut off the supply of goods and wampum to the Swedish colony. In 1652 the Susquehannocks concluded a peace with Maryland; they could not fight enemies both in the North and South. English traders from Chesapeake Bay now had the opportunity to undersell the Swedes. When Johan Risingh led the colony, he acknowledged that the Swedish trade would be poor without the support and protection of the Susquehannocks. However, the stakes were too high and the Swedish colony too weak for the broker role to last.19

19 “Printz to Oxenstierna, April 26, 1653,” and “Printz to Oxenstierna, August 1, 1651,” in Johnson, Instruction, 181, 188. The Arrigahaga that Printz mentions as enemies of the Susquehannocks were Iroquois, possibly Senecas. Reports about this war vary both concerning the time of the attack and who were involved. According to Francis Jennings Iroquois attacked and defeated the Susquehannocks in a 1652 battle, “Susquehannock,” 362, while in “Glory,” 23, he states that it was the Mohawks who attacked the Susquehannocks in the winter of 1651–52, but that the attack was repulsed. In “Indians and Frontiers in Seventeenth-Century Maryland,” in Early Maryland in a Wider World, ed. David B. Quinn (Detroit: Wayne State University

154

chapter five Food trade and dependence on Lenapes

Throughout its existence the Swedish colony needed native food supplies for subsistence, a dependency both economically undesirable and embarrassing. Johan Printz perceived the Lenapes as an obstacle since “we have no beaver trade with them but only the maize trade.” With them out of the way he argued that “each one could . . . feed and nourish himself unmolested without their maize.” Printz wanted to concentrate all his resources on the beaver trade with the Susquehannocks, but it is questionable indeed if the Swedes could have managed without the food trade. In the same report Printz mentioned that maize could be bought cheaply from the Indians “so that I hope that the nourishment of the people shall not be so expensive here after as it has been before.” This seems to belie Swedish capacity to feed themselves. Food supplies remained a problem for the colonists of which later reports give plenty of evidence. For the Lenapes the constant Swedish demand for corn, venison, fish, and other food items meant continuous access to European goods and presents. The Lenapes adjusted to the Swedish presence by increasing, with small effort, their usual food production in order to trade.20 This exchange became a substitute for the fur trade and probably lessened conflict between Lenapes and Susquehannocks. While the fur trade officially received the main attention in the correspondence between colony and home, the mundane barter between Lenapes and colonists remained just as vital. Beavers became scarce in the Delaware region early in the century. Instead, colonists and Indians met and exchanged tools, food, and handicraft items. Food stuffs the Swedes needed and desired included maize of several kinds, beans, meat from deer, moose, and bear, fresh fish, and

Press, 1982), 221 Jennings argues that the war dragged on after an initial Iroquois victory in 1652. Tooker, “Demise,” 3, also relates a winter attack in 1651–52. Dutch documents from 1661 and 1663 make clear that at that time, Senecas were fighting Susquehannocks, NYHM: XIX, 14, 22, 74, 75; Kupperman, “Scandinavian Colonists,” 104; “Report of Risingh, 1654,” NEP, 140; “Report of Risingh, 1655,” NEP, 157; “Risingh’s Journal,” 196–197. 20 “Report of Governor Printz, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 111, 116–118; Kraft, Lenape, 139 on the amount of corn grown on the Indian plots; Herbert C. Kraft, The Lenape-Delaware Indian Heritage: 10,000 BC to AD 2000 (Lenape Books, 2001), 283–285; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 319.

two kinds of middlemen

155

a variety of fowl such as turkeys, grouse, partridges, swans, geese, and doves. The Indians also supplied wild fruits and nuts such as peaches, watermelons, chestnuts, walnuts, plums of varying sizes and colors, grapes, and wild hops. Indian crafts, such as baskets and mats also formed part of this exchange. Swedish women made caps out of old scrap cloth, decorating the tops with many-colored tassels. The Indians became very fond of these and paid the women well for them. Swedes also supplied the Lenapes with fishhooks and the Indians paid for them with the fish they caught. Indians, however, often traded for tools which they proceeded to copy, and which, the Swedes complained, turned out better than the European original. The majority of the Lenapes seem to have found the Swedes to be useful trading partners. They had not experienced the kind of violence that Indians in the Dutch or English colonies had. The Swedish need to trade for food seemed constant and ensured the Lenapes access to European goods and wampum. However, when the Lenapes found that the Swedes sought to bypass them in the trade they changed their strategy. Yet, the two peoples associated with each other “and they are fond of us, because we do not do them any harm or act hostile towards them. Otherwise they would ruin our cattle and probably the people on the land, as they vex them daily and take away whatever they can.”21 Despite these useful and necessary exchanges divergent Lenape and Swedish trade policies resulted in growing tension in the region. Throughout the period, but most markedly during the reign of Governor Printz, documents disclose frustration and hostility on both sides. The Swedish concern centered on monopolizing the peltry trade with the Susquehannocks and the Lenapes were thus often viewed as competitors or intruders in this scheme. It is in this context that Johan Printz’ most infamous statement should be read. After a year of extreme frustration due to lack of trade goods, Dutch competition, and Lenape violence Printz wrote in his report to Axel Oxenstierna:

21 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 225; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 203, 255–256; “Magister Andreæ Hesselii,” 115; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 121, 147; Nils Jacobsson, Svenskar och Indianer (Stockholm: Svenska Kyrkans Diakonistyrelses Bokförlag, 1922), 218; quote from “Report of Governor Johan Rising, 1654,” NEP, 157.

156

chapter five Nothing would be better than to send over here a couple of hundred soldiers, and [keep here] until we broke the necks of all of them in this River, especially since we have no beaver trade whatsoever with them but only the maize trade. They are a lot of poor rouges. Then each one could be secure here at his work, and feed and nourish himself unmolested without their maize, and also we could take possession of the places (which are the most fruitful) that the savages now possess; and when we have thus not only bought this river, but also won it with the sword, then no one, whether he be Hollander or Englishman, could pretend in any manner to this place either now or in coming times, but we should then have the beaver trade with the Black and White Minquas alone, four times as good as we have had it, now or at any past time.22

Oxenstierna did not heed the request; it was way too unrealistic. The Swedish colony only maintained a small garrison and the total force of soldiers at this time numbered approximately twenty. Printz’ plea for more soldiers has been interpreted as a Swedish extermination policy aimed towards the heathens. A more likely interpretation is that the petition grew out of the desperation of an officer who realized his diminished control and ability to carry out his orders. Oxenstierna’s reply came three years later and then it must have been a disappointment, although probably an expected one. The chancellor wrote concerning the request for soldiers and ammunition “I have, although I gladly would have seen all these things accomplished to the satisfaction of the Governor, not been able to accomplish it all at this time.”23 Printz could not do much to lessen Lenape dominance on the land and control of the food trade and therefore was forced to continue balancing the needs of the colony against his orders to trade for profit. Some Lenapes, too, voiced a similar desire to eradicate all of the Swedes. The lack of goods and a dwindling trade led the sachem Mattahorn to convene the general council in 1645 to discuss the future of the Swedes on the Delaware “after they [the Swedes] so had entered and built on their land/and had nothing that they wanted to sell to them.” Messengers were sent to all the villages up and down the river and vast amounts of food were prepared for the meeting. A large number of Lenape men and women assembled to hear what Mattahorn and his son Ackahorn had to say. Mattahorn 22 23

“Report of Printz, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 117. “Oxenstierna to Printz, September 7, 1647,” in Johnson, Instruction, 169.

two kinds of middlemen

157

opened the meeting saying that “the Swedes live here on our Land/and have many forts and buildings to live in: but to sell us any goods/that we find that they do not/neither do they have anything good in storage that is useful to us/that we could trade from them.” He concluded with a question: “What should we do with the Swedish?” Fortunately for the Swedes the final decision of the council was not to obliterate the Swedish colony, since the “Swedes are good enough,” and were expected to soon receive a large ship full of desirable cargo. The conclusion of the meeting was to continue allowing the Swedes to dwell on Lenape land, but only because the Dutch and the English were impopular alternatives. Governor Printz, after hearing about the meeting repeatedly assured inquiring Indians that he soon expected the arrival of a ship laden with goods for trade. When it turned out that the promised ship only contained a few colonists and no trade cargo, some Lenapes attacked the settlement between Tinicum and Upland. They killed a man and his wife in their bed, and a few days later two soldiers and a workman. Thomas Campanius Holm, who reported the Lenape council in 1645, did not question the Indians’ ability to destroy the Swedish colony but rather suggested that Swedish passivity may have saved them. This offers a stark contrast to Printz’ self-assured belligerence.24 When Risingh arrived in 1654, he found it apparent that the colonists depended on the Lenapes for food and that the latter used that need to their advantage. On September 2 Risingh recorded typically: “our yacht returned home . . . and brought very little hops, that is, only two lispund, although those gifts which were given to the Indians had amounted to much more; so deceitful are the Indians.” A few days later Ahopameck, one of the leading sachems, arrived at Fort Christina and promised to arrange good relations and trade with “all the Indians.” He requested gifts in return “which were given to him, as their friendship was greatly esteemed by us because of the danger of attack and because of our trade with them and our need for foodstuffs.” At Passayunk, the major summer encampment of the Lenapes, the Indians had been reluctant to trade any corn 24

Information about this council reached Johannes Campanius who wrote a transcript of the proceedings and translated it into Swedish. It was then printed by his grandson, Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 173–179. Although it cannot possibly be a word for word account, the content is consistent with other sources and with what we know about the Swedish situation regarding trade goods at the time, “Report of Governor Printz, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 104.

158

chapter five

to the Swedes, possibly for fear of the diseases that Risingh’s ship brought. “The Savages feared us,” wrote Risingh, “and were angry, since disease also had come among them, thus got from them few supplies of meat and fish and there was here precious little for us to eat.” Despite illness, Jakob Svensson, an able trader and interpreter, traveled several times up and down the river to provide for the colony. His endeavors often led to success, probably because of his personal knowledge and contacts. In late September he returned with the sloop and 400 bushels of corn and a few days later ventured upriver again. This time he returned with 880 bushels of corn, twenty bushels of beans, and some elk hides. A couple of months later Jakob Svensson traveled again, this time downriver, to the Appoquinimink River to buy venison from the Indians during their winter hunt. He paid for the food with Frisian cloth, powder, and shot. Lack of trade goods, as always, compounded the precariousness of the Swedish position. As soon as Risingh had something to bargain with, in this case some Indian corn, he began to deal with Richard Lord, a New Haven merchant. Lord, wrote Risingh, “held the prices high, as we were in great need, had nothing at hand with which to pay, and did not know of any one else who had such goods.”25 Why were the Swedish colonists unable to grow their own food? Their position in the trade triangle demanded so much resources that little could be left to concentrate on food production. To begin with, as Printz suggested, they could buy food cheaply from the Indians. Buying it appeared to be the most profitable solution. Other resources could then be concentrated on tobacco farming and fur trade. The dependency that followed had dire consequences and the colonists did not become self-subsistent until after New Sweden’s fall.26 The Swedes depended on the fur trade as middlemen between

25 Risingh’s Journal, 204–205, 206–207, 208–209, 214–215, 226–227; “Johan Risingh to Erik Axelsson Oxenstierna,” 13 July 1654, E1055, ser. B, Brev R (Riksarkivet). A lispund was a common unit for measuring food stuffs, and equalled approximately 6.8 kilos or 15 lbs. 26 Karen Ordahl Kupperman, “Apathy and Death in Early Jamestown,” The Journal of American History 66: 1 (1979): 24–40 discusses the problems colonists had in providing their own sustenance. In “Scandinavian Colonists,” she finds that all colonies had immense difficulties in feeding themselves, 91–92. Among the causes for the Swedes’ inability to feed themselves must be counted weakness caused by diseases.

two kinds of middlemen

159

Susquehannocks and English and they lacked the assistance from home necessary for a successful settlement attempt. As long as these conditions prevailed, the Lenapes remained firmly in control of the area and influenced the Swedes by promising or withholding food. The long and arduous journeys into Susquehannock land that Swedish traders undertook form part of the picture of struggles for control of the position as middlemen. The Lenapes regularly threatened the Swedish location in the network. In order to bypass the Lenapes the Swedes had to meet the Susquehannock traders in their own territory. The road to the Susquehannock country was “rocky, full of sharp stones, sometimes a morass, hilly and in some places through streams so that the Swedes had to walk and march in the water so that it reached up to their armpits.” They had to go there once or twice a year with “frisian cloth, kettles, axes, hoes, knives, mirrors and coral” in order to trade for valuable peltry.27 That Swedish traders needed to seek out the Susquehannocks in their core area suggests that the latter no longer maintained the right to passage through Lenape land along the Great Minquas Path. The power balance which in the early 1630s weighed in the Susquehannocks’ favor may have altered so that the Lenapes by the end of the 1640s were able to close off that route. This would be consistent with Susquehannock attempts to open trade channels with the Dutch and later with their impressive donation of land to the Swedes. By the 1670s the former tributary status—if that was ever so—of the Lenapes had altered and instead the Susquehannocks sought refuge in their villages.28 This contest adds another dimension to the council Mattahorn and other sachems called. As long as the Swedes had trade goods to offer for local trade, their presence in the valley posed no real threat to the Lenapes, but when they tried to exclude their Indian neighbors from the benefits and only trade with the Susquehannocks, they became burdensome. Withdrawing permission to settle on the land and offering that to another European colony was one option, while taking over the role as contacts between Europeans and the tribes supplying furs from the interior was another. Risingh related that hostile Lenape bought goods on credit from the Swedes, went

27 28

Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 180–181. Jennings, “Indians and Frontiers,” 223, 237; Jennings, “Susquehannock,” 366.

160

chapter five

to the Susquehannocks where they bought beavers and elk skins, which they then brought directly to Manhattan where the traders could pay more than the Swedes.29

Conditions for trade Notwithstanding this divergence of interests, Swedish colonists and Lenapes found that they had to associate with one another in order to trade. By and large, Lenape customs set the pattern for these exchanges. When the Swedish colony established trade on the Delaware River the Dutch reacted strongly. Governor Kieft charged that Peter Minuit “attracted all the peltries to himself by means of liberal gifts.” Minuit had traded with Indians before, probably even with the northern Munsees and Esopus. The Indians viewed the giving and receiving of gifts as an integral part of any social contract. Gifts conveyed in a very real sense messages, and any form of negotiation had to be opened with the distribution of gifts to clear the path for communication between the parties. Contracts of any nature would be sealed and take effect through veneration ceremonies. The gifts included in these ceremonies “usually consist of zeewant [wampum], furs, duffel cloth, or ammunition for wars, and very seldom of grain.” Gifts constructed relationships determining rank and hierarchy as well as established horizontal communication, as in trade. The gifts involved in the contacts between white and red traders thus had a much deeper meaning than as an addition to the price. Risingh, for instance, recorded that he must always have gifts on hand to be able to distribute when the Indians came. Indians and Europeans, by means of gift exchange, entered into a pact with each other. This relationship, which meant that the Europeans would be called “friends,” was more than a financial agreement. Both sides had to fulfill their obligations for this relationship to survive. For the Europeans, one obligation was to provide trade goods for their allies. Failure to do so would indicate a breach of promise.30

29

“Report of Governor Johan Rising, 1654,” NEP, 157. Quotes from Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 192 and Van Gastel, “Van der Donck’s Description,” 419; Wilbur Jacobs, Wilderness Politics and Indian Gifts: The Northern Colonial Frontier, 1748–1763 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1966), 1ff; Daniel K. Richter, The Ordeal of the Longhouse. The People of the Iroquois League in the Era of 30

two kinds of middlemen

161

Sewant, from an Algonkian word meaning “scattered,” or wampum, from the Algonkian for “string of white beads,” consisted of beads worked out of the insides of shells and clams. Peter Lindeström, the engineer who accompanied Risingh, described three colors of beads in use in the Delaware Valley, white, blackish-blue, and red. The white beads came from the conch shell, while the dark beads were taken from the quahog, a thick-shelled American clam. These shells were both found primarily on the Long Island Sound. The beads could be of varying sizes and were strung together on narrow strips of deerskin. These, called strands, were fashioned into belts, girdles, necklaces, bracelets, and collars. The red beads, according to Lindeström, came from the Black and White Minquas (Susquehannocks). Normally, he wrote, the white beads were valued to three styverts (a Dutch coin) and the more valuable dark beads to six styverts a piece. Specialists worked to produce the beads and it was a difficult job. One person could not manage more than six to eight styverts worth of beads during a day. When through heavy usage the beads were chipped they would become useless, and the Indians were careful to control the quality of the beads they received in any transaction. This they did by taking the whole string and passing it across their noses. If the strings did not feel smooth the Indians immediately rejected them. Wampum became the medium of exchange when the fur trade began and the whole northeastern region was brought into a trade network. Wampum was not common among the Lenapes before their inclusion in this trade, but for them, as for their neighbors, wampum took on at least three important meanings apart from being a currency. By working the beads into figures and geometric designs belts became records of events and transactions that could be read by the initiated. Stewardship of the wampum belts rested with certain keepers and the belts recorded all transactions that

European Colonization (Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1992), 29, and Daniel K. Richter, Facing East from Indian country. A Native History of Early America (Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press, 2001), 135, 139 emphasize the connection between a spiritual alliance and trade, while Richard White, The Middle Ground. Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650–1815 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991, reprinted 1995) (page references are to reprint edition) points out how Algonquians made European goods work in “the service of an existing social reality,” 103, 180–182; “Report of Governor Rising, 1654”, NEP, 143; see also NYHM XVIII, 13, 19 for references to Indian demand that their trading partners keep their stores well stocked.

162

chapter five

concerned the people. Wampum was also absolutely essential in diplomacy and trade transactions. In exchanges of any kind of property existed a potential for evil that might produce malice and resentment among the parties concerned. Wampum shielded against such spiritual contagion through its purifying propensities. Should evil leak through an exchange, the wampum would purge its keeper. The use of wampum in all sorts of treaties depended largely on its importance as a religious object with spiritual qualities. Wampum was a sacred symbol, believed to have come originally from supernatural sources and containing profound spiritual and supernatural powers. It formed an essential part of ceremonies. Religious and political leaders wore the sacred objects on special occasions. The Lenapes also wore wampum as decoration. Lindeström reported that the Lenapes decorated their hair with “their money,” wore it in bands around their heads, in their ears, around their necks, in bands across their shoulders, and as decorations on moccasins.31 Gift giving as a way to establish relations would have been quite understandable to the Swedes. Establishing a position by means of gifts was recognized practice in seventeenth century Sweden. The Crown Prince Karl X Gustaf to some extent worked his way into this position (he was a cousin of Queen Christina’s) by liberally giving parties and favors. While Europeans seem to have encouraged the use of wampum as a currency, and understood the belts as

31 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 195, 229–231; Jacobs, Wilderness Politics, 19–20; Neal Salisbury, Manitou and Providence. Indians, Europeans, and the Making of New England, 1500–1643 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982), 149–52, and Cronon, Changes in the Land, 95–97, for discussions on the development of wampum as a medium of exchange in the fur trade; Dorothy V. Jones, “British Colonial Indian Treaties,” in Handbook of North American Indians IV: History of Indian-White Relations, ed. Wilcomb E. Washburn (Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1988), 185–194; and Richter, Facing East, 130–138 discuss diplomacy and the importance of wampum in negotiations; James H. Merrell, Into the American Woods. Negotiators on the Pennsylvania Frontier (New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1999), 187–197 goes through many different uses and meanings of wampum in interactions between Indians and Europeans; on Lenape and wampum see Frank G. Speck, A Study of the Delaware Indian Big House Ceremony, 2 (Harrisburg: Publications of the Pennsylvania Historical Commission, 1931), 63–64; Mark R. Harrington, “Some Customs of the Delaware Indians,” The Museum Journal I:3 (University of Pennsylvania, 1910): 60. Harrington reported in the early 1900s wampum was still used to pay everyone who performed a service in any ceremony among the Delaware; also Mark R. Harrington, “A Preliminary Sketch of Lenape Culture,” American Anthropologist, n. s. 15 (1913): 234; Kraft, Lenape-Delaware Indian Heritage, 382–386.

two kinds of middlemen

163

Fig. 3. Skokloster Indian collection, anthropomorphic club This club is one of the most interesting items in Carl Gustaf Wrangel’s armoury at his castle Skokloster. The club is presumed to originate from the lower Delaware, along with some other Indian artefacts. However, its provenance is uncertain. Its seventeenth century origin from the Northeastern woodlands makes it unique, and whether it came from New Sweden or not it is an intriguing illustration of the exchanges that took place in the colonial trade and conflicts. Anthropomorphic club, (inventory number 6904). © Skoklosters slotts arkiv.

164

chapter five

mnemonic devices, they took longer to grasp its importance as a sacred medium protecting the participating parties from evil and as means for opening the channels of communication. Yet all colonial traders learned to value these beads for its various capacities. Johan Printz realized the potential of status inherent in wampum and, according to Lindeström, had the Lenapes make him an entire suit of wampum, for which he paid the value of several thousand gilders. Printz also presented the Queen of Sweden with a band of wampum, describing the beads as that “which the Indian chiefs use on their Kinteka [religious dancing] and greatest glory and is so highly esteemed among them as among us gold and silver.”32 One way to describe European and Indian exchange is to divide it into two basic types of goods, trade with utilities and trade with luxury items. European colonies further distinguished between goods for export and the necessities needed in the colony. Beaver pelts were not the only furs used for export. The Swedes also bought otter, bobcat, fisher, mink, wildcat, moose, bear, wolf, cougar, deer, fox, marten, and muskrat. The inland tribes, Susquehannocks and Black Minquas, supplied the best furs. The Indians primarily asked for cloth, such as the Holland duffels (red and blue being the preferred colors), copper and brass kettles, axes, picks, spades, shovels, awls, scissors, knives, and needles. But Indian traders also desired beads of all colors for decorative purposes, paints, mirrors, combs, liquor, and guns. At times the desire for arms caused the Europeans a conflict of conscience. They agreed that an abundance of firearms in the hands of the Indians would lead to an extremely unwelcome situation. Yet all European traders dealt in arms trade and found it impossible to desist. Indian demand for guns coincided with European desire to back one or another of the Indian nations as allies in the trade competitions. Lindeström explained the situation on the Delaware River thus: “Formerly it was indeed forbidden, and agreed among the Christian nations, that no guns, powder or lead should be sold

32 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 222; “Printz to Brahe, July 19, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 166–167; on the lack of understanding of the meaning of wampum among Swedes, see for example Holm’s description, Kort Beskrifning, 138–139; Michael K. Foster, “Another Look at the Function of Wampum in Iroquois-White Councils,” in The History and Culture of Iroquois Diplomacy, ed. Francis Jennings (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1985), 99–104; White, Middle Ground, 95–99; on gift-giving in Sweden: Stellan Dahlgren, Anders Florén, Jan Lindegren, Kungar och Krigare. Tre Essäer om Karl X Gustav, Karl XI och Karl XII, (Stockholm: Atlantis, 1992), 37ff.

two kinds of middlemen

165

to the savages; but after the English in Virginia had broken the law and first begun to sell guns to the savages, therefore the Swedes began to sell powder and lead for them.” Once the Swedes had begun to procure guns for the Indians they seem to have continued with good profit and without any further qualms. The Susquehannock fort, for example, was thus allegedly equipped with Swedish cannons. This artillery came in handy on at least one occasion when the Susquehannocks fought other Europeans.33 In all probability, the Susquehannocks and the Lenapes laid down the rules for trade on the Delaware River. They controlled the land and played the Europeans against one another to manipulate prices and control trade. Indian practices of gift giving prevailed. Trade relations in the seventeenth century rested on a number of stipulations. There were at least three essential conditions. One was European realization and, though grudging, acceptance of Indian strength. Van Rensselaer, the Dutch patroon, acknowledged that “the savages . . . are now stronger than ourselves,” and then wrote fervently in favor of large-scale colonization to be able to take control of the trade.34 The fact that neither the Netherlands nor Sweden possessed the will and ability to carry out such a colonization scheme meant that on the Delaware River, Indians still dominated settlement and transactions in the region. Secondly, Indian customs in establishing trade contacts prevailed. In June 1654 a Susquehannock Indian named Aqualiquanes visited the Swedes at Fort Christina. Risingh gave him presents “so that he would seek both good friendship and trade with the Minquas for us.” The Susquehannocks were at war with the English in Maryland and, according to Risingh, the Indians wanted to “retain friendship with the Swedes and trade with them.” It seems plausible that Aqualiquanes came with the purpose of establishing trade relations again with the Swedes after the disastrous years in the early 1650s and having achieved his purpose and received gifts as confirmation he returned home. In August Jakob Svensson traveled up the river to the Susquehannocks, bringing gifts with him to start up the trade. On the way there he encountered Ondoliasnekii, a Susquehannock sachem. The latter left some of his party with 33 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 223, 225, quote from 227; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 255–256; “Magister Andreae Hesselii,” 115; Plantagenet, “Description,” 19, 24–25; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 181. 34 Van Rensselaer Bowier Manuscripts, 248.

166

chapter five

Svensson to help him carry the goods while the sachem himself continued on to Fort Christina to visit. His professions of loyalty were reciprocated when “such gifts were given him as is customary.”35 This constant necessity to reconfirm and reestablish trade relations with gifts grew out of Indian custom, which held that gifts contained spiritual and ceremonial qualities. Whether understood as such or not by the white men, all the gift giving meant an expense which could not directly be viewed as an exchange of goods but which nevertheless formed an inevitable precondition for such an exchange. Colonial traders had to make sure they had a supply of goods apart from trade items to use as gifts. The home base did not always appreciate this need and letters express frustration with their lack of understanding. Probably the most important stipulation for smooth trade was the reciprocal arrangement by which Indians offered land while Europeans offered goods. This relationship is nowhere explicitly stated, but it makes best sense of the events to assume that such an implicit agreement existed. Indians conveyed land on condition of trade. In his diary Johan Risingh wrote on June 29, 1654, that his people came home from the Horn Kill with the yacht and told us that Hvivan, who was the sachem there, had received them well in return for gifts they had brought him. He promised to make the land available to us and requested that we come there to live. They had told him that our people would go there as soon as we received some ships and people.36

Further evidence comes from the many accounts of the effects that lack of trade goods had on these relations. Thomas Campanius Holm wrote that the Indians took good care of the Europeans as long as they had something to trade, but lacking that “they [the Indians] did not well suffer them/but sought how they might find an opportunity to kill and exterminate them.” In addition, Johan Printz wrote to Per Brahe “as long as we are without cargoes we must fear the Savages.” A lack of trade goods plagued the colony throughout its existence and the governors reported repeatedly that they needed relief “so that we might keep the peace with the Savages,

35 36

Risingh’s Journal, 178–179, 196–197. Ibid., 186–187.

two kinds of middlemen

167

for if the Savages are compelled to seek elsewhere for cargoes, then the peace will have an end between them and us.”37 The nature of the trade produced misconceptions. The Lenapes and Susquehannocks wanted what in Swedish estimates amounted to trinkets, while the Swedes gained invaluable furs and corn for their survival. To the Indians, however, these same furs as well as the corn were part of a surplus, or at least easily accessible items, while they obtained previously unknown wares and materials that in addition saved labor and added comfort. To begin with, both sides must have wondered at the gullibility of the other. Lindeström says that the Indians were not wise and could not tell the difference between simple woollen cloth and the finest scarlet cloth. Indians also allowed white traders to cheat them with measures, since they understood no better. On the other hand Jesuit Father Paul le Jeune reported an Indian viewpoint when his host showed him a beautiful knife saying “The English have no sense; they give us twenty knives like this one for one Beaver skin.” A report sent to Stuyvesant in 1648 feared that the Dutch had to pay the Indians too much. They paid one fathom of cloth for two beavers and “the Indians choose their largest men to trade.” The Lenapes probably preferred using wampum as currency in the trade because that gave them the advantage in setting the price. Lindeström wrote, “if bargaining with the wild peoples money, it costs the Christians more.” Printz added in his report in 1644 that “it is difficult to trade with the Savages; half or at least one-third of the cargoes must be sold for sewant.” In 1647 he was even more emphatic: “It is not possible to keep up the trade with the Savages by means of cargoes only, because the Savages always want zewandt besides, which is their money.” To deal fairly with the Indians and draw their trade away from the English and the Dutch as instructed meant sensitivity to Indian demands and customs. Swedish governors could not forgo that if they wanted to take advantage of the opportunities of the middleman role in the trade network.38 37 Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 68; “Printz to Brahe, 1 August 1650,” in Johnson, Instruction, 178; “Printz to Brahe, 1 December 1653,” in Johnson, Instruction, 193; also “Risingh’s Journal,” 231; “Report of Governor Printz, 1647,” in Johnson Instruction, 133, 135, 140; “Report of Governor Risingh, 1654,” NEP, 143. 38 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 223, 225–226; Jesuit Relations, 6, 299; NYHM XVIII, 19; “Report of Governor Printz, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 118; “Report

168

chapter five Sweden’s “if . . . only” in the New World

The Swedish colony seemed to have a golden opportunity. The Susquehannocks’ insistent search for a replacement for William Claiborne settled on the Swedes with the generous donation of land to Risingh in 1655. However, the Swedes were never in a position to grasp these chances. Instead opportunities vaporized as coffers emptied, supply ships failed to appear, and Indian and white neighbors expressed increasing frustration with the Swedish presence. A fitting epitaph over Swedish trade relations in the New World might be the if onlysyndrome. Intriguing and somewhat tragic, the concept emerges again and again among colonial leaders. Johan Printz’ infamous statement about killing all the Lenapes so that the Swedes could control the river, if only they could have a couple of hundred soldiers, belongs to this category. However, Johan Risingh was the unrivalled master of this thinking. In his first report, in 1654, upon perceiving the great opportunities of the new land, he wrote: “Wherefore should one not risk expense of money and goods . . . since we now, God be praised, have free opportunity to settle it . . . that it, by the help of God, will endure, and later . . . be a jewel in the royal crown, if only succor can now early be sent here?”39 Indeed a glorious prospect ended in a whimper! It was difficult to lead a colony and see so clearly that there were no ends to what could be achieved, if only those supplies would come. The same possibility seemed to slip out of his hands in his report from 1655 when, again, the lack of trade goods appeared to be the only obstacle to Swedish success. Concerning the trade . . . it would be the most important thing . . . if we only had enough cargo to draw the beaver trade to us from the Minquas and the Black Minquas. . . . This cargo which we now have brought with us cannot be used for much else at this time than to enlist and hold the savages in good friendship and for buying the provisions and necessaries, without which we could not subsist here.40

of Governor Printz, 1647,” in Johnson, Instruction, 139; Kupperman, “Scandinavian Colonists,” 103 also suggests that the Indians gained from the use of wampum. For an alternative interpretation of the use of wampum in the exchange which stresses European manipulation and control, see Cronon, Changes in the Land, 95–97 or Salisbury, Manitou and Providence, 149–152. 39 “Report of Governor Rising, 1654,” NEP, 138. (Italics added). 40 Ibid., 143 (Italics added).

two kinds of middlemen

169

These are grandiose dreams from a man heading a colony that after sixteen years could barely procure enough food for subsistence. Risingh’s plans were symptomatic of the whole Swedish colonial venture. During a few years, the lucrative position as middlemen fed dreams of grandeur that had no actual basis in the conditions in the Delaware Valley. Company shareholders in Sweden prompted and encouraged the expectations based on their hopes of returns and what they had seen of riches flowing into the chests of their European neighbors. In retrospect, however, the Swedish success was temporary and rested on a shaky foundation. It depended on the Susquehannocks to control the interior trade and hold off the Iroquois. It hinged on further conflicts between Dutch and English. It demanded continued good relations with the Lenapes and access to their food. It needed a steady supply of goods. Even granted these things, Swedish dominance in the Delaware fur trade was a transitory episode. From the beginning of the arrival of white men along the Delaware River the Indians sought ways to open trade. The Susquehannocks moved southeast down the Susquehanna River in the middle of the sixteenth century to evade Iroquois pressure and reach the coast and thus a better trade position. Both Lenapes and Susquehannocks sought to control trade to their advantage. Wars during the early 1630s ensured the Susquehannocks access to the coast while Lenape villages remained in control of the land. Indians were able to take advantage of the different needs and desires of the European traders and colonists. Swedish interests rested primarily in the tobacco trade but to survive as a small colony without much support from home the Swedes had to engage in a complicated triangle trade involving furs from the Susquehannocks and Black Minquas, wampum from Indians on Long Island Sound and trade items from English and Dutch merchants. The Indians chose the Swedes as preferred trading partners because of relatively little friction and the weakness of the Swedish colony. The Indians had the greatest control over the trade in the Delaware Valley during the first half of the seventeenth century. The Swedes acknowledged, although sometimes tacitly, Indian power and accepted the Susquehannocks as protectors. Indian customs of gift giving prevailed and the Indians set the conditions for trade agreements. One of these conditions was that Indians provided land while the European counterpart was expected to provide trade goods.

170

chapter five

For the Swedes, the balance on the Delaware River proved more than they could handle and official Swedish colonial trade had an abrupt end in 1655. Tragic for the Swedish colonial venture, perhaps, but even more sinister for the Lenapes and the Susquehannocks. They could not have known this in 1655, but the disappearance of the Swedes as food consumers on the Delaware marked a turn for the worse for the Lenapes. Later, waves of Europeans wanted land primarily for agriculture and the Lenapes had few pelts to trade. The Susquehannocks were beset by the Iroquois who wanted control of the entire eastern fur trade. Lacking strong allies and having enemies among the Marylanders, the Susquehannocks could not hold off long. The Swedes had no help to offer. Swedes who stayed on in the area continued as traders, and their ability to speak Indian languages and their knowledge of trade became invaluable assets to later European settlers. Swedish traders and interpreters were employed extensively both by Dutch and English (New York and Pennsylvania) administrators. However, their efforts and presence no longer offered the Indians an opportunity to choose among European traders as an instrument to control the trade. Instead, the Swedes became part of the growing European surge across the North American continent. The power balance had shifted and left the Indians of the Delaware Valley as losers.

CHAPTER SIX

STRANGELY KEPT AND PROTECTED

Cultural contacts and conflicts in the Delaware Valley Negotiations and exchanges concerning land and goods constituted the most visible interactions between Swedish colonists and Indians, but these had broader implications as people brought their own cultural practices to every-day encounters and official meetings. In the afterlife of the colony, these encounters have been cloaked in an aura of peacefulness. This chapter looks at some of these encounters and how each side framed them in a cultural rhetoric and practice that occasionally led to increased mutual understanding, but frequently to disagreement and confusion. We live in Harmony, Love and Loyalty with the Indians when the surrounding countries and neighbors they have been greatly forced by the Indians, and I must say in truth that God he has strangely kept and protected us and had a singular care for us in this heathen land.1

Thus wrote Peter Gunnarsson Rambo in the 1690s in a letter to his sister in Sweden. He had been in the New World since 1640 and was one of many who found it remarkable that no large-scale violence ever erupted between New Sweden colonists and Indians. Around them violence raged and rumors of war frequently reached the colonists both from the north and the south. They seemed justified in feeling “strangely kept and protected.” Between 1638 and 1655, Indians reportedly killed eight Swedish colonists, while there is no mention at all of Indian victims of Swedish violence until the 1670s. Even if all casualties are not accounted for, this is an unusually low figure. New Sweden’s European neighbors all participated in armed conflicts with Indians within the first twenty years of colonization, often resulting in a great number of dead and maimed. However, it would be erroneous to perceive the area as free of intercultural tension. Lenape suspicion and hostility met both governors Printz 1 “Peter Gunnarsson Rambo, till sin syster 169?,” R 1100—Svenska ecklesiastika handlingar 1686–1694, Riksarkivet.

172

chapter six

and Risingh, and aged colonists remembered in the 1740s that “in the beginning it was so dangerous with the Indians that when the Swedes plowed, another of them had to go behind the plowman with a gun in hand to defend in case the Indians should come.” Swedish presence in the Delaware Valley was preceded by the unfortunate Dutch colony at Swanendael, and the Swedes received news of Indian attacks from both Maryland and New Netherland. No wonder plowing men brought their guns.2 Johan Printz brought royal instructions to treat the Indians “with all humanity and respect, [and see to it] that no violence or wrong be done to them by the people.” The governor followed his orders, but he did not trust the Indians. He had cause to be uneasy. In 1643–44, Indians around Manhattan attacked the Dutch in response to massacres at Pavonia and Corlaer’s Hook, and Maryland and Virginia were embroiled in wars as well. Lenape Indians were less willing to tolerate Swedish intruders with their ever decreasing ability to provide trade goods, especially since the latter so clearly sought to pass them by with trade offers to the Susquehannocks. No Swede doubted the Lenapes’ capability to wipe out the entire Swedish settlement if given a reason, so to keep the Lenapes at peace Printz spread a rumor that supply ships were soon to be expected with large numbers of colonists and goods. The unfortunate truth of only one ship, poorly equipped, may have precipitated the attacks in which Indian war parties killed five people in different settlements. Later another group set fire to Tinicum and burned up wood that carpenters had cut and sawed for a keelboat. This tense state-of-affairs continued and in 1645 the previously mentioned Lenape council convened to discuss the future existence of the Swedes in the area. Even though the decision was to wait and let the Swedes stay, skirmishes continued. In the fall of 1646, Indians killed Jan Wallin (possibly an English colonist) and in 1647, the Dutch killing of an Indian sachem stirred up ill will against all Europeans. During the autumn of 1648 a short notice in Dutch records told of two Swedes being killed while on their way to trade guns to the Susquehannocks.3 2

For the number of killed, see the reports of Printz and Risingh; colonial-Indian violent conflicts occurred in Virginia after 15 years, New Netherland after 16 years, Connecticut and Massachusetts Bay after 6 years, Maryland after 10 years; quote from Kalm II, 140. 3 “The Instruction for Johan Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 78; “Report of Governor Printz, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 116–118; Johnson, Swedish Settlements,

strangely kept and protected

173

Rumors reached the Swedes on several occasions that Indians were preparing to attack the colony. These rumors originated in times of Swedish lack of trade goods or competition for trade with the Susquehannocks. Johan Risingh wrote in his 1655 report: our neighbors the Renappi threaten not only to kill our people in the land and ruin them, before we can become stronger and prevent such things, but also to destroy even the trade, both with the Minques and the other savage nations, as well as with the Christians. We must daily buy their friendship with presents, for they are and continue to be hostile, and worse than they have been hitherto.

As a consequence, one of Risingh’s undertakings upon his arrival in the colony was to repair and add to ramparts and palisades around Fort Christina “so that one can dwell there securely against the attacks of the savages.” Colonists living outside the forts and fortified houses had less protection. Old colonists recalled how they had been attacked by Indians (they did not know from which tribe) who attempted to scalp them. A young girl did suffer such disfigurement and remained bald for life, her head covered only with scant down. Such Indian customs frightened the Swedes and added to accusations of barbarism. Charges of cruelty, especially in the treatment of prisoners, abound in the Swedish literature (as in all colonial literature). “They are moreover rather cruel and torture their prisoners, that they in that respect are barbarorum barbarissimi,” wrote a new arrival, pastor Andreas Sandel, to his bishop Jesper Swedberg. Such accusations of barbarism boosted the sense of moral superiority among the Swedes in a precarious situation. For these savages, a thirst for blood was a sufficient inducement to kill, or so Johan Risingh suggested. Some settlers had fled the harsh rule of Printz and in 1654, interim governor Johan Papegoja sent some Indians to retrieve the erring settlers. Shortly after Risingh’s arrival the Indians returned with the severed heads of three fleeing men, reporting that they had resisted a forced return. The grisly proof shocked the Swedes and Risingh noted that it was “a procedure which many considered too severe. The Indians might in that way become accustomed to slaughtering our Christians, which the Indians are only too willing to do when they have the opportunity.”4 376; Hazard, Annals, 104; “Printz to Oxenstierna,” March 11, 1644, Handel och Sjöfart, nr. 196: Kolonier, Nya Sverige II, Riksarkivet. 4 On rumors, Kalm II, 142; “Report of Risingh, 1655,” NEP, 156–57, 164; on

174

chapter six

Undoubtedly, the contradictory images contained in the appellation vilde (wild man) influenced attitudes to these strangers. Risingh may have compared the severed heads of the runaways with reminiscences of the fate of the Swanendael colonists, but he had a stock of stereotypes of heathen cruelty to take from. Lindeström and Campanius Holm reveled in lurid descriptions of Indian torture, accounts that no doubt represented stories shared by white colonists. Observed differences in practices produced conflicting assertions, but fear and rhetoric also obscured similarities. A typical example can be found in European descriptions of Indian warfare. Although the Europeans feared Indian strength, they carried no high opinion of their military customs. A typical report from a number of Dutch officials described Indian soldiers as “far from being honorable, but perfidious and accomplish all their designs by treachery; The thirst for revenge seems innate in them; they are very pertinacious in self defence, when they cannot escape; which, under other circumstances, they like to do.” “Treacherous,” “revengeful,” and “cowardly” are adjectives European observers, including Printz, Risingh, and Lindeström, liked to attach to their Indian adversaries. Northeastern Indian military culture differed distinctly from European. The tactics of war consisted mostly of raids and ambushes carried out in forested areas by small companies. This style allowed the Indians to profit from their knowledge of the environment as well as minimized casualties. The campaigns under the Swedish king Gustavus Adolphus had revolutionized warfare in Europe during the Thirty-Year War, but battles still consisted of large-scale conflagrations in open territory. However, European condemnations of Indian warfare exaggerated the differences. In many ways, Indians and Europeans shared a code of honor. Women and children ordinarily were spared and tribes formally declared war rather than carrying out unannounced attacks. Looting, the taking of trophies, and public torture accompanied wars on both sides of the Atlantic, but it was the differences that prompted comment. European observers retold with grisly fascination how the Indians tortured their prisoners. In Indian America torture was a public occasion functioning as emotional compensation for the losses and constraints suffered in battle, but also as a contest between captors and prisoners. Torture was woven into the code of honor so scalping, Kalm IV, 238; Acrelius, Beskrifning, 46; Sandel’s quote in Swedberg, America Illuminata, 98; Risingh’s Journal, 156–157.

strangely kept and protected

175

that victims could earn posthumous glory by stoically bearing the ordeal. Both avenging captors and suffering prisoners called upon supernatural forces to aid them in this contest, and the torture connected the worlds of the living and of the dead. Among Indians torture was an element of armed combat, while in Sweden as in other parts of Europe torture was an accepted part of jurisprudence and often performed in seclusion both in order to extract admissions and as part of the punishment. The Swedish legal system also executed torturous punishments in public, often with the purpose of discouraging other subjects from attempting similar crimes. Although public display of torture existed in both societies, none of the Swedish observers drew any parallels between European and Indian practices but regarded the Indian custom as an example of their greater tyranny and cruelty.5 Lenape attitudes toward war and its consequences become clear from a speech at a meeting between English Quakers and Lenapes at Burlington. Our Young Men may speak such Words as we do not like, nor approve of, and we cannot help that . . . We have no mind to have War, for when we have War, we are only Skin and Bones . . . we alwayes are in fear . . . we are minded to live at Peace: If we intend at any time to make War upon you, we will let you know of it, and the Reasons why we make War with you; and if you make us satisfaction for the Injury done us, for which the War is intended, then we will not make War on you.6

Wars were contested and served different functions for different people, among Indians as among whites. For young men, bravery in war proved their manhood and men’s identity as warriors was an

5 Adam Hirsch, “The Collision of Military Cultures in Seventeenth-Century New England,” The Journal of American History 74:4 (March 1988), 1191–1192; Jennings, Invasion of America, 160f. Swedish descriptions of torture, titillatingly lurid, can be read in Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 146 and Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 242–243; “Papers relating to the Colonies on the Delaware, 1614–1682,” Pennsylvania Archives, 2d ser. V (Harrisburg, 1877), 130; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, chapter 10; Kupperman, Indians & English, 107–109; Jill Lepore, The Name of War. King Philip’s War and the Origins of American Identity (New York: Vintage Books, 1998), chapters 3–4, but especially 113–119; Dowd, A Spirited Resistance, 9–16, brings out the spiritual meanings of war; on Swedish warfare in the Thirty-Years War, and especially on Swedish cruelty during war, see Peter Englund, Ofredsår (Stockholm: Atlantis, 1994). 6 Thomas Budd, Good Order Established in Pennsylvania and New-Jersey in America (1685) (New York: Burt Franklin, 1971), 67–68.

176

chapter six

integral part of northeastern woodlands culture. Wars were sometimes necessary to restore balance or redress injuries, but they also threatened balance and led to devastation and suffering. Powerful cultural mechanisms existed to prevent wars. Ceremonies and diplomacy aimed to create alliances and heal breaches without violence. But just as in Europe, these did not always work. Vengeance was a common cause for hostilities while wars were rarely fought for the economic and political reasons common in Europe where land was scarce and material accumulations desirable. If fought to retaliate, a war ceased when the aggrieved had achieved satisfaction. Such hostilities often brought kin group against kin group, while wars between tribes aimed at symbolic domination with status conveyed by small tributes to the victorious, rather than the territorial domination sought in European conquests. Young, hotheaded men could not be restricted in a society that based its decisions on mutual consent anymore than they could in patriarchal and hierarchical European colonies. Young men sought to prove themselves as men in battle and were often eager for an opportunity to demonstrate bravery. Their actions, however, should not be allowed to involve entire nations in warfare. Injuries could and should be dealt with by peaceful means of atonement, only when such retribution did not come forth was war morally justifiable. Such was the war ethic that emerged from the Lenapes’ speech. War was not desirable in itself, it only caused suffering and forced people from their homes.7 Swedish observers condemned Native warfare, but at times found themselves embroiled in it. The cooperation between Swedes and Susquehannocks which begun with trade also extended to military aid, and the Swedes hired out three soldiers to the Susquehannocks to teach them how to use European arms and march with them against other Indians in Virginia in 1641 and perhaps also against Maryland militia in 1648. Swedish descriptions were heavily influenced by their relationship to the Indian people in question and clearly linked to issues of power in the region. Even though Lenape aggression plainly posed a threat to the Swedish colony, Johan Printz described them as “deceitful, vindictive, anger harboring . . . cowardly and fearful,” while the Susquehannock trading partners were “good soldiers: good marksmen with their bows and arrows.” It is tempting

7

Hirsch, “Collision,” 1190; Jennings, Invasion of America, chapter 9 “Savage War.”

strangely kept and protected

177

Figure 4. Fort Trinity Fort Trinity (renamed so after the Swedes took over the Dutch fort Casimir in May 1654) on the west bank of the Delaware River, after it was rebuilt and fortified according to plans made by Lindeström. Drawing in Lindheström, “Geographia Americae, eller, Indiæ Occidentalis . . .” Manuscript from 1691, at De la Gardiegymnasiet, Lidköping. Photo: Gunlög Fur.

178

chapter six

to suggest that the comparative weakness of the position in which the officer Johan Printz found himself engendered the disparaging invectives against the Lenapes as compensation.8

Negotiating conflicts Both Indians and colonists dealt with the friction of conflict in their own culturally influenced ways. Instructions to the Swedish governors detailed how the affairs of the colony ought to be conducted and that in “controversial matters” the governor should “administer according to Swedish law and justice, custom and usage.” Likewise he should “in all other matters, so far as is possible, adapt and fit the laudable customs, habits and usages of this most praiseworthy kingdom [to the new conditions].” The instruction gave directions on how to deal with the Dutch and the English in the area, ordering the governor to “bring these English families under the jurisdiction, devotion and dominion of [Her] Roy[al] Maj[esty] and the Swedish Crown.” The Hollanders who dwelled in New Sweden should be ruled “according to the contents of the charter and . . . Yet Roy. Maj. leaves it to the discretion and prudence of the Governor on the spot, duly to consider the behavior of said Hollanders . . . and as he may judge, he may either let [them] remain quietly, or make the disposition and settlement . . . most suitable and advantageous . . . to this Company.”9 Clearly, the instructions differentiated between colonial settlements and Indian nations. While specific concerning other Europeans, the instructions were silent on the point of Swedish judicial relations with the Indians. The Swedes were no doubt aware of the existence of an aboriginal system of law although their knowledge of it remained rudimentary. Lindeström wrote that Lenape leaders had absolute authority over their subjects and punished insubordination with immediate execution. A few lines further on he added that the Indians showed no reverence for their leaders, who did not expect it from their people. In this case, Lindeström clearly superimposed his own

8 Plantagenet, “Description,” 19, 24; Kalm IV, 268; “Printz to Oxenstierna, April 14, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 153. 9 “The Instruction for Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 70, 76–78, 92–94.

strangely kept and protected

179

cultural expectations on the Lenapes. Insubordination and opposition against the hierarchy was a crime in New Sweden, one for which the culprit would pay with his life, but it was not in lenapehoking. The authority of native leaders rested on persuasion, distribution of goods, and spiritual influence—not on displays of force. Anyone disagreeing with particular policies was in principle free to leave the group, although this was a freedom with limited applicability as it would have been difficult for a person to survive alone. Injuries, stated Lindeström, were retaliated for on the principle of “like for like,” i.e. an eye for an eye. Rather than retaliation, however, the Lenape legal system rested on the concept of retribution. When a murder had been committed the wrongdoer had to make amends and pay a fine to the relatives of the dead person. Otherwise, the killer would have to pay with his life. The fine for murder of a woman was twice that of a man. The settlement was usually in wampum and one source mentions one hundred fathoms for a man’s life and two hundred fathoms for that of a woman. The nearest blood relative on the maternal side of the murdered person was the avenger and attempted to find the killer within twenty-four hours of the deed. If the murderer could survive that long he was rarely slain, but he had to stay hidden while his relatives tried to reconcile the parties. The sachem never interfered unless to appease warring factions and then the chief duty was to give liberally of wampum to effect peace when the offender was too poor to pay the compensation. In a community based on consensus, as Lenape and Susquehannock societies were, it was more important to reestablish the balance within the community after a crime, than to mete out punishment.10 Swedish society, too, recognized the importance of consensual solutions to conflicts and restoration of harmony. The events in 1644, described above, demonstrate how Swedes both learned and misunderstood Indian justice. After the murder of the five Swedes Governor Printz drew the people together “to prevent a future and a greater

10

Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 205–206. Several times during the existence of the colony colonial leaders condemned insurgents to death, as happened in 1653 when Governor Printz ordered the execution of Anders Joensson, the leader of a mutiny, Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 462–463; see also Grumet, “Sunksquaws,” 47; Van Gastel, “Van der Donck’s Description,” 420; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 143; Penn, NEP, 236; Wallace, “Woman, Land, and Society,” 10; Van der Donck, 212.

180

chapter six

damage.” Lenape sachems came from different places to assure the governor “that this had happened without their knowledge and asked for peace.” They may have seen this congregation of the colonists to one site as a threat to profitable trade relations. Printz, who claimed that this ensued because the Indians feared the Swedish reaction, answered that peace was granted on condition that “in case they hereafter practiced the smallest hostilities against our people then we would not let a soul of them live.” This, the Indians granted, signed their names to a document, “and (according to their custom) gave us twenty beavers and some sewant,” while Printz presented the Indians with a piece of cloth. But, he added, “they do not trust us and we trust them still less.”11 Why did the Lenape sachems come to offer retribution? Were they, as Printz said, afraid of what the Swedes would do in retaliation? Or could it be one of the first examples of the development of a Lenape peace strategy in relation to European colonists? To answer these questions we may examine an event ten years earlier involving the killing of some white men by Wicomese Indians at William Claiborne’s trading station in the Chesapeake Bay. A Patuxent man acted as go-between to arrange for retribution between the Wicomeses and the English, represented by Lord Baltimore. The violence had been a rash act by some young men and the Wicomeses had no desire to be involved in war with the English. The spokesman emphasized that the Wicomeses “desire you not to thinke that they doe this for feare, for they have warres with the Sasquehanocks, who have by a surprise, lately killed many of their men, but they would not sue to them for peace, intending to revenge the injuries . . . yet their desire was to have peace with the English.” Governor Baltimore answered that he wanted the culprits delivered to him for English justice, to which the Patuxent man replied: It is the manner amongst us Indians, that if any such accident happen, wee doe redeeme the life of a man that is so slaine, with a 100. armes length of Roanoke and since that you are heere strangers, and come into our Countrey, you should rather conforme your selves to the Customes of our Countrey, then [sic] impose yours upon us.12

11 12

“Report of Governor Printz, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 116–118. “A Relation of Maryland,” NEM, 89–90.

strangely kept and protected

181

The affair in Maryland aids in understanding the Lenape interaction with the Swedes. According to Indian custom the killing between nations could be avenged by further killings, while murders within a nation or between allies were mostly settled either by “raising the dead,” which meant that a person from the perpetrator’s group was offered to take the dead person’s place, or by “covering the dead,” which involved compensation to the family of the victim. The Lenapes did not desire war with the Swedes and therefore hastened to offer reparation to the kin of the dead. This was done to prevent further hostilities that could lead to an unwanted war and was not primarily a gesture suggesting fear of Swedish retaliation. However, the Lenapes’ action is also indicative of the development of a strategy towards colonists that emphasized peace rather than war. The attack on the Swanendael settlement indicates that Lenapes could act swiftly in violent anger, yet again and again in the years that followed they chose a conciliatory approach. That this worked with the Swedes, in spite of Printz’ aggressive rhetoric, must have convinced the Lenapes that this was a beneficial practice.13 Europeans eventually learned, and the Dutch seemed to learn quicker than the Swedes, what kind of justice prevailed in Indian country. In 1647, a Susquehannock sachem was beaten to death, presumably by Dutchmen. Peter Stuyvesant, who attempted a more conciliatory policy towards Indians than his predecessor Kieft did, wrote hurriedly to Andries Hudde, commissioner at Fort Nassau: “[You are] hereby ordered to prevent all mischief and troubles with the [Minquas] and the other Indians; and if possible to come to an agreement concerning the death of the chief by presenting the Indians with gifts, according [to their custom] . . . Meanwhile, you must take care not to fall into discord and quarrels with the Indian.” In January of 1660 three Indians—two Lenapes and one Susquehannock—were murdered by Dutch at New Amstel. Relatives of the murdered men received money as a settlement, were satisfied, and the culprit was released from prison. The following year some Lenapes killed four Marylanders visiting Dutch territory. The Indians offered monetary

13 Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 144; Van der Donck, 212; Michael Witgen, “‘They Have for Neighbors and Friends the Sioux’: The Migration, Adaptation, and Transformation of the Western Ojibways in the Dakota-Ojibwa Alliance,” (Working Paper No. 98–21, International Seminar on the History of the Atlantic World, 1500–1800, Harvard University, 1998), 11.

182

chapter six

restitution, but as in 1634 the governor of Maryland found the offer insulting and threatened to make war on the Lenapes. The Dutch, with great difficulty, arranged a peace. Europeans were apparently willing to take advantage of the retribution custom to avert Indian revenge while Indians were not permitted to make restitution that way. However, the ability to adhere to such a principle varied, as the example with Printz demonstrates. That the Swedes were forced to accept Indian custom in international matters becomes obvious in another example. In 1655 during a time of great insecurity, Risingh reported that a woman had been killed the previous winter. Later the Lenapes offered to make amends for it and return stolen goods, but only gave ten fathoms of wampum. The people Risingh negotiated with may not have had more to offer, but this could also be interpreted as scorn for their European neighbors whose presence and preference for the Susquehannocks as partners had become a burden. Ten fathoms represented only 1/20 of the sum commonly paid for a woman’s death.14 Official diplomatic exchanges between Swedes and Lenapes developed in a fashion similar to that in other colonies. All meetings which aimed to establish friendship, relieve tension, or reach agreements concerning land and trade were based on an oral-cultural model which had recognizable features for both peoples but with a distinct Indian format.15 Through these meetings, Lenapes and Swedes also chiseled out a specific relationship, one that the Lenapes could use as a template for later encounters. An instructive and extensive example is the meeting which occurred between Johan Risingh and his officers and a number of Lenape sachems upon Risingh’s arrival in 1654. This meeting on the shores of the Delaware River was a solemn and momentous occasion both for the assembled Indians and for the newly arrived Swedish colonists who had come to relieve the flailing settlement after years of neglect. The ship brought a new governor and an imaginative young engineer, as well as several hundred tired passengers suffering from disease and malnutrition. The Indians must have wondered at the rags and the stench from the corpses, yet the gifts of cloth, kettles, axes, hoes, knives, powder and

14 NYHM XVIII, 23; “Report of Governor Johan Rising, 1655,” NEP, 157; Wallace, “Women, Land, and Society,” 10; Jennings, Invasion of America, 148–149. 15 Jones, “British Colonial Indian Treaties,” 186–187.

strangely kept and protected

183

lead, and awls did much to appease them and again they sought to confirm the rocky, yet mutually beneficial relationship that had developed between the two peoples in the past fifteen years. Both Governor Risingh and Peter Lindeström have written about the meeting.16 Risingh had sent messages to the villages along the western bank of the River that he wanted to make an alliance with them and confirm through gifts earlier purchases of land. Ten or twelve sachems, among them Akopamen (Ahopameck), Quirocus, Peminacka, Speck, Weymotto, Juncker, Mattawiracka, Skalitzi, Winangene, and Naaman gathered with some followers at Tinicum to negotiate with and measure the new Swedish leader. By this time several of these men had long experience of dealing with the Swedes, and it is likely that at least some of them had been present at the 1645 council that Mattahorn had called during which the fate of the Swedish settlement was decided. Both sides declared themselves willing to establish an alliance, one which would guarantee the Swedes dominion over areas purchased for New Sweden and the Indians access to trade. The meeting began with professions of friendship and mutual promises to alert one another concerning possible threats and dangers. Further promises included: “We should likewise do no harm to them or their plantations; only they will not kill our swine or cattle, nor tear down our fences or ruin our grain and fields.”17 When these reciprocal pledges had been uttered the Swedes offered gifts as a confirmation of the pronouncements. The sachems indicated that they wished the gifts to be distributed to them each separately after which they retired in a private council to discuss their reply. Their chosen spokesman, Naaman (or Nachaman), delivered the Lenapes’ decision: “See there,” said he, “what they bring us and how they offer us friendship” and then stroked himself down his arm a few times, as a sign of particular good friendship. Then he thanked us, on behalf of all, for the presents and said that we should hereafter keep a very fast friendship, that if they had hitherto been as one body and one heart during the time of Meschatz, i.e. large stomach (thus they called Governor Printz) therewith struck himself on his breast, so should they hereafter be as one head with us, at this grasped about his head and twisted around with his hands, as though he wanted to tie a fast knot.

16 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 126–130; Risingh’s Journal, 174–178. Lindeström’s account is based on an earlier version of Risingh’s journal and slightly more detailed. 17 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 127.

184

chapter six Thereupon he told us a ridiculous simile, that just as a calabash is a round growth, without a fissure or cut, so should we hereafter also be like one head without a fissure . . . they all gave a loud shout and consented.18

The Swedes followed this oration with a salute from their cannons to which the Indians responded with a charge from their guns. This ended the formal meeting and they all gathered to eat and drink. The meal was offered by the Swedes but consisted of traditional Indian sappan, a sign as good as any that the Swedish colonists had already learned practices and customs from their Indian neighbors. Although the promises were mutual, the Swedes made the overture and sought with the aid of their gifts Indian acceptance and support. The gifts, or veneration presents, should always accompany a request, wrote the Dutchman Adriaen Van der Donck. If the persons to whom the request has been made accept the presents, “the request has been accepted and approved in the form in which it was formulated.”19 Thus, the Swedish terms were agreeable and an alliance desirable for the assembled Lenape representatives, who answered in kind with words which received their strength from the collective deliberations that preceded them. It is possible that this was not an ordinary example of agreements between Swedes and Lenapes, but rather a unique event in which the Swedes were construed as relatives, with the corn and reference to the calabash representing symbols of peace making. Both Risingh and Lindeström were new in the country and in both accounts, they convey their sense of wonder when watching and listening to the Lenape spokesman’s expressions. Naaman promised, wrote Risingh, that the friendship would be firmer than before, “which he extolled with words, images, gestures and grand airs, so that we had to marvel at the Indians.”20 Many questions remain as to the meaning of this exchange, but it is clear that it contained elements of great ceremonial and ritual significance for both sides. The “words, images, gestures and grand airs” were part of an orators arsenal, and their specific content carried important messages. Lindeström wrote that Naaman likened the desired relationship with the Swedes to a gourd, “without a fissure

18 19 20

Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 128–129. van Gastel, “Van der Donck’s Description,” 420. Risingh’s Journal, 177.

strangely kept and protected

185

or a cut.” In a later drawing, Lindeström would portray an Indian man, woman, and child. The adults are dressed in a similar manner and what defines their gender is that the man carries a bow and arrows and has feathers in his hair, while the woman carries a gourd by her side. Women were associated with vegetable foods, with corn, and other crops. Were there any women present at this meeting? We do not know—neither Lindeström nor Risingh mention the gender of the Indians present. It is suggestive that both the simile of the gourd, as well as the sappan that was served, derived from the domains of Lenape women. Through their connection to growing things, women paved the way for creation of kinship ties and for the establishment of peace.21 Naaman may have spoken for the women when he invited the Swedes to share body, heart, and now also head with the Lenapes, that is friends in its deepest meaning of kin.

Religious exchanges Spreading the Protestant faith was an integral yet not dominant part of the Swedish expansion. Motives of a religious kind were woven into the instructions and plans for Swedish activities in the New World as well as in other areas of expansion, such as the north of Scandinavia and in the Baltic countries. Queen Christina instructed Governor Printz to use every opportunity to inform the wild people of the Christian religion and worship and bring them to a civilized way of life. Rather than direct confrontation, the Crown and Church preferred to eradicate heathen practices through a strategy of establishing advantageous positions and use them to slowly turn the population towards Christianity through the medium of education. The primary teachings of the orthodox Swedish church was contained in Luther’s Little Catechism, through the help of which the Church had attempted to build up lutherdom in Sweden from the beginning of the seventeenth century. Religious life was minutely regulated and the sermon—the Word—was at the center of the church service. The teaching of the sermons was intimately connected with the concept of the God-ordained order contained in the ideology of the three estates. According to this, society consisted of teachers, i.e.

21

Schönenberger, Lenape Women, 213–225.

186

chapter six

Figure 5. Lenape Family Lindeström’s image of a Lenape Indian family. The drawing supports the description in the text showing that Lindeström did not see major differences in the appearance of men and women. Objects, such as the gourd and the bow and arrows, distinguish gender rather than physical features or clothing. From Pehr Lindheström, “Geographia Americae, eller, Indiæ Occidentalis . . .” Manuscript from 1691, at De la Gardiegymnasiet, Lidköping. Photo: Gunlög Fur.

strangely kept and protected

187

preachers and educators, political superiors, i.e. aristocracy and rulers, and the male heads of individual households. Each individual had specific responsibilities in this scheme. The Protestant reformation had in no way, however, eradicated all other forms of religious expression in Sweden as was indicated in a wealth of documents from the time. Swebilius’ catechism from 1689 gives a vivid picture of the religious practices of the common people. They worshipped the sun, the moon and other celestial bodies, angels, and remnants of saints. People were said to seek the aid of the devil and his tools such as witches, mythical creatures in the forests, and gnomes. Neither did parishioners necessarily accept the order prescribed in the ideology of the three estates. While Lutheranism seems to have been the decisive element of Swedish identity during the period, it by no means involved a general acceptance of the theology preached by its leaders.22 European political thinking of the seventeenth century intimately connected civilization with some form of Christianity, whether considering peasants in Europe or native peoples in other parts of the world. In a scale from Puritans to Catholics, Christians of all hues insisted on Indian acculturation. This attitude explains why Printz’ instructions contained provisions assuring the Dutch and the English the right to continue their form of worship, even though Swedes were highly critical of the Dutch reformed church. In principle, anyone who wanted to live in Sweden proper had to become a Lutheran, but in reality enclaves of particularly high status immigrants, such as Dutch merchants and financiers, were allowed to maintain their own religious practice. Other groups with less political and economic

22

“The Instruction for Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 80–81; Widén, “Stormaktstidens prästerskap,” 148–149, 154; Pleijel, Hustavlans värld, 24, 30ff, 205, 210. Much recent scholarship has been devoted to the reformation and its reception among the populace in early modern Sweden. This research has challenged the perception put forward by Pleijel and others that the Crown and Church forcefully indoctrinated or controlled the peasantry, see Malmstedt, Bondetro och kyrkoro, especially chapters 2 and 5 and literature cited there; Olle Larsson, Biskopen visiterar. Den kyrkliga överhetens möte med lokalsamhället 1650–1760 (Växjö: Växjö stiftshistoriska sällskap, 1999); Daniel Lindmark, “Hustavlan i folkundervisningen,” in Västsvensk fromhet. Jämförande studier av västsvensk religiositet under fyra sekler, ed. Christer Ahlberger and Göran Malmstedt (Göteborg: Humanistiska fakulteten, 1993). Church discipline tightened noticeably towards the end of the seventeenth century with the ascendance of King Karl XI to the throne and the introduction of absolutism in 1680.

188

chapter six

influence, such as Jews, gypsies, or Saamis, were forced to convert or faced the death penalty.23 Printz held no high opinion of Lenape religion: “when one talks to them about God, they pay no heed, but point out that they are a free people, submitted to none, doing what they please. I believe that they can be converted, but only through great effort.”24 The sheer number of similar statements illustrates the determined rejection of European cultural conversion attempts. Accepting tools, weapons, and trade goods did not imply a desire for wholesale transformation. Yet, in the ideology of seventeenth century Sweden one could not come without the other. Cultural alteration was considered a necessary result of colonization and an absolute requisite for a stable, God-supported state. In this way, the spiritual and physical needs of the state merged, just as much as in Native societies, and neither considered the two issues as separate. One major difference lay in how religious worship was structured. While Lenape and Susquehannock communities displayed a generally horizontal structure of collective responsibilities for the communal worship, the Swedish Kingdom was markedly hierarchical with little freedom of movement within the structure. Obedience to those above, and the concomitant responsibility to discipline those below, characterized religious and societal doctrine and was an essential structure in order to undertake projects such as warfare and colonization. Printz’ superiors in Sweden did not accept his guarded pessimism about the chances of converting Indians to Christianity. Per Brahe expected his comprehensive civilization program for northern Finland to be applicable in the New World as well. Brahe told Printz to Above all things exert yourself in instructing the poor, erring people; decorate your little church and your priests in a Swedish manner with chasuble in order that you may be different from the English and the Hollanders, fleeing from all Calvinistic leaven. Outward ceremonies

23 Berkhofer, White Man’s Indian, 133–134; Kenneth R. Andrews, Trade, Plunder and Settlement. Maritime enterprise and the genesis of the British Empire, 1480–1630 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 31; “The Instructions for Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 97; Ingvar Svanberg and Mattias Tydén, Tusen år av invandring (Stockholm: Gidlunds Bokförlag, 1998), 74, 130–132; Bo Hazell, Resandefolket. Från Tattare till Traveller (Stockholm: Ordfront, 2002), 38–39. 24 “Printz to Oxenstierna, April 14, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 153.

strangely kept and protected

189

will do much with such savage people [and will] also incline other people to be devotional and God-fearing.25

Printz tried to follow orders and appointed at each settlement someone who could read to hold daily evening and morning prayers. He even tried to keep Indians around the fort for periods of time to influence them, “but they have watched their opportunity and have run away again to the Savages.” The Dutch had attempted to take young boys and teach them to read and write in the hope that civilized arts would lead to conversion, “but they have in like manner waited for an opportunity to run away, and are now in these wars the cleverest enemies and persecutors of the Hollanders.” The obvious conclusion to Printz was that kindness was insufficient to convert the Indians: “But if it shall happen, it must happen with compulsion, so that one would strike to death and destroy the greatest part of the older [people] and bring the remainder under the obedience of H[er] R[oyal] Maj[esty] and then compel and force them to a knowledge of God.” Just as in the north of Sweden, hope lay with attempts to influence the young. The Dutch Reverend Jonas Michaëlius had made a similar suggestion sixteen years earlier but was pessimistic about the prospect since “this separation is hard to effect. For the parents have a strong affection for their children, and are very loth to part with them.” That such an approach would fail was obvious, since the Swedes lacked the necessary force. As in so many other situations, the Swedes were forced to admit the wide discrepancy between policy and reality.26 By the time Johan Risingh arrived to head the colony, official attitudes had changed. He still regarded the conversion of Indians as of utmost importance for the glory of His Royal Majesty and following generations, but he suggested different methods. The colony needed men who knew Indian languages, although this request followed more the needs of trade than those of conversion. This approach had begun with Pastor Johan Campanius who came with Printz’ expedition in 1643. A genuine interest in Indian conversion led him to learn the pidgin Lenape that was used as a trade language. He recognized the importance of having religious literature

25

“Brahe to Printz, November 9, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 156. “Printz to Brahe, July 19, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 164; “Letter of Reverend Jonas Michaëlius, 1628,” NNN, 128. 26

190

chapter six

in native languages, and therefore struggled to translate and publish Luther’s Little Catechism in Lenape. When it was printed in 1696, it was the first book printed in Lenape and the second in any Indian language, preceded only by John Eliot’s Algonkian Bible which was printed in 1663. The significance of the catechism for Swedish Lutheranism and education can hardly be overstated. Every subject of the kingdom was expected to know the articles of the catechism and the clergy used it in the provinces and in Lapland as the foremost tool of conversion. But the Lenape catechism had only limited use. John Heckewelder, a Moravian missionizing among the Lenapes at the end of the eighteenth century and knowledgeable in the language, described Campanius’ translation as a compilation from many different informants, probably both Swedish and English traders. One result was that Campanius “has not three proper Spiritual Words, throughout the whole book, and since his informants were unacquainted with such words, they gave him as substitutes, what they thought might do; or, as they understood them, many of which however imply to vulgar things, while others are most absurd, and proper nonsence [sic] where inserted.”27 Lenape men and women watched the Swedish religious rituals with great curiosity. Colonists built the first small church near the walls of Fort Christina in 1641–42. In 1646 a larger edifice was erected out of logs and clapboards and fitted in the style of Swedish churches, with simple decorations and the altar improved with “a silver cloth.” It was to this church Campanius arrived in 1643 to bury his predecessor Torkillus, and begin his mission. The Indians occasionally visited Campanius’ church. They expressed surprise and concern that Campanius alone spoke for hours while all the congregation sat in silence. Indians misunderstood the meaning of this kind of meeting, believing that Campanius’ fiery declarations incited the colonists to war against the Indians, or so he interpreted the growing

27 Risingh, “Beskrifning,” RA; Lutheri Catechismus Öfwersatt på American-Virginiske Språket (Stockholm, 1696), in Kungliga Bibliotekets samlingar (Royal Library collections), Stockholm; Ives Goddard, “The Delaware Language, Past and Present,” in A Delaware Indian Symposium, ed. Herbert C. Kraft (Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1974), 105; quote from John Heckewelder, “Remarks on the Swedish Lenape (Delaware) Translation of Dr. Luthers Catechism,” Communications made to the Historical and Literary Committee & to Members of the American Philosophical Society, on the Subject of the History, Manner & Languages of the American Indians, 1821, American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia.

strangely kept and protected

191

Figure 6. Frontispiece Campanius’ Lenape Catechism The frontispiece for Johannes Campanius’ Catechism in the Lenape language, printed in 1696 shows the Christian Mother Svea, symbolizing Sweden, with the book under her arm, pointing towards the light that shines on both her and the Indian flanking the Swedish royal coat-of-arms. Reproduction: Repro- och fotoenheten / Kungliga Biblioteket.

192

chapter six

hostility of the infrequent visitors. Suspicion angered the Lenapes and Campanius and the other pastors lived in fear of their lives. Slowly, however, Campanius learned some Lenape and managed to dispel their fears. He made friends, according to the accounts passed on by his grandson, but nonetheless conversion showed no progress. In fact, in 1647 he wrote home to request a commission in Sweden and cited as a reason that he had “now been in this country nearly five years, in danger for my life day and night in a heathen country among these cruel heathen, who have threatened to kill us Swedes and exterminate us.”28 Swedish efforts at creating a Christian community did not impress representatives of other denominations. The Dutch Domine, Johannes Megapolensis, accused one Swedish minister, Lars Lock, saying that he “would prefer drinking brandy two hours to preaching one; and when the sap is in the wood his hands itch and he wants to fight whomsoever he meets.” The Jesuits, too, were critical. When a Huron convert, named Charles Ondaaiondiont, visited one of the New Sweden settlements in 1647, he was appalled to find that they had no church there. The good proselyte observed some “acts of levity” between Swedish men and Susquehannock women after which “he took occasion to speak, with zeal, of their indifference to their salvation and to reproach them because they thought only of the fur trade, and not of instructing the Savages with whom they are allied.” The captain of the settlement, presumably Måns Kling, apologized and complained, according to Ondaaiondiont, that he was not obeyed by his people as regarded purity of morals.29 In the early eighteenth century, Campanius’ catechism inspired renewed efforts to encourage conversion among the heathen. Sums of money were donated, earmarked for the mission. The bishop of Skara diocese in southwestern Sweden, Jesper Swedberg, spoke to the King about an ancient German foundation that through its testament provided for missionary work among heathens. As both king and bishop agreed that there were now no heathens left in Sweden, the money ought to be used in the New World. But the Indians did

28 Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 205, 366; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 68–70; Jacobsson, Svenskar och indianer, 79–87; “Campanius’ letter to the Archbishop, 30 Jan. 1647,” Handlingar angående svenska församlingar i Amerika F VIII, Uppsala Landsarkiv. 29 “Letters of the Dutch Ministers to the Classis of Amsterdam, 1655–1664”, NNN, p. 396; Jesuit Relations 33, 135.

strangely kept and protected

193

not match the enthusiasm. In 1724, Andreas Hesselius reported that in his thirteen years as pastor in the country, only one Indian had been baptized and he had to be kept isolated from the others in danger for his life. The Swedes were by no means alone in failing to spread the Christian faith and civilization to the heathen Americans. Johannes Megapolensis complained in 1654 about the poor state of conversion among Indians. Even a sachem who spent extended time with the Dutch in New Amsterdam failed to become acceptable, “and indeed, is not better than other Indians.” The Domine concluded that “[W]e do not indeed expect much fruit of religion among these barbarous nations, until they are brought under the government of Europeans, as these latter increase in numbers.”30 Swedes and other Europeans devoted a good deal of effort to try to understand why conversion was so slow in coming. They identified major obstacles in the various Indian languages and the missionaries’ inability to learn them, as well as the nomadic habits of the Indian peoples. Many found in the New World experiences cause for profound misgivings concerning the level of Christianity among their own people. Thus, Andreas Sandel wrote, “the Christians live like them [the Indians], yes worse than some of them. Were there quite a difference between us and them in our ways . . . than the heathen would have better thoughts concerning our faith and teachings.” In his 1731 dissertation, Tobias Biörck pointed to the perverted way of life often found among Christians, and his father, Eric Biörck, wrote with vehemence that if a sin comes among them [the Indians], such as drinking, fighting, cursing, etc., then they blame it on the Christians, since they earlier did not know of these things. . . . Thus, through such evil Christians, who are too often among them, God’s name is sadly abused among the savages now, as in the age of the Apostle Paul.

Such sallies against the immoral living of colonists resounded throughout the colonies. Ever since the French author Michel de Montaigne published Les Essayes in 1580, juxtaposing cultures had become a possibility for critical evaluation of European society. Montaigne 30 Swedberg, America Illuminata, 73; Jacobsson, Svenskar och indianer, 176–196; Ecclesiastical Records of the State of New York I (Albany, 1901), 327; see also Boxer, Dutch Seaborne Empire, 150–151 on conversion attempts in New Netherland; on general lack of success see James Axtell, The Invasion Within. The Contest of Cultures in Colonial North America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 242, 275.

194

chapter six

critiqued contemporary France by comparing the lifestyles of Europeans and idealized savages in the Caribbean, suggesting that the French had lost their original virtues. This set the tone for a whole new genre of grievances on the development in Europe. In a similar manner, Puritan ministers used the threatening image of (and the actual violent encounter with) the Indians to explain God’s chastisement of his chosen people. In this way, Indian critique and rejection of Christianity became a lever for internal discipline within the European communities.31 The Lenapes and the Susquehannocks appeared to have viewed the Swedish attempts to Christianize them with mild curiosity. They appreciated discussions about religious and spiritual matters, but found no compelling reason to embrace a new culture. Some of them came by the Swedish services and stopped to listen as the congregation sang hymns, but it is probable that Swedish attitudes and behavior did nothing to entice Indians to convert. Nils Gustafsson, young in the 1660s, once traveled in the company of a Lenape man when they encountered a red speckled snake. The Swede looked around for a stick with which to kill the snake. The Indian tried to stop him, saying that the snake also was a spirit-creature. The Swede admitted that he might have spared the snake had the Indian not said that he had faith in it. Such false worship had to be stamped out, proclaimed Nils Gustafsson as he clubbed the snake to death. As European civilization increased in strength, the Indian response became sharper: “If the Christians lived according to their religion better than we, then we would become Christians. But we cannot find that such is the case, since we see and hear them drink, fight, murder, steal, lie, cheat, etc. . . . We would rather remain as we are.”32 This “almost invincible obstinacy along with a prejudice concerning the superiority of their own life and religion” astounded missionaries and ministers and shook some of them deeply. Jonas Aurén was one of these. He took part in the inauguration of the two Swedish

31 Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 149; Biörck, Planting of the Swedish Church, 35; Swedberg, America Illuminata, 97; “Prosten Biörcks Berettelse om the Christne och Hedningarnas tilstånd i America,” K3 Handskriftssamlingarna, Uppsala universitetsbibliotek (Manuscript collections, Uppsala University Library). Such criticism against pastors was also used in Sweden to explain the lack of true conversion in both Saamis and peasant Swedes, see Malmstedt, Bondetro och kyrkoro, 88–103, 169–172. 32 The story about the snake is found in Kalm II, 410, see also Mackintosh, “New Sweden, Natives, and Nature,” 1, 17; “Prosten Biörcks Berettelse.”

strangely kept and protected

195

churches, Holy Trinity Church in Christina (Wilmington) and Gloria Dei Church at Wicacoa (Philadelphia) in 1697. He was sent on a mission trip to the Susquehannocks at Conestoga where he on January 13, 1700, entered into a debate about religion with a Susquehannock man. Aurén sent a transcript of the old man’s reply, as it was translated to him, adding that he “was amused to have revealed his savage state to be so harnessed, that I was amazed at the cogency of the heathen capacity that had been fostered in unawareness and trained free from care.” In the answer, the Susquehannock completely refuted Christian teachings concerning original sin and judgement, and his logic left Aurén speechless. No one will deny, I judge, that we are the work of God. Moreover we believe that God has the greatest concern for his work . . . To say that he leaves us in error through this great interval of time, without remedy, is to set the mark of a tyrant upon him. Our conception of our good God is better, and we judge that it is blaspheming him if anyone teaches otherwise . . . Can it be consistent with his goodness and providence, to care for men while they are born and live, and then when they sin and pass over into eternity, to give them no remedy by which they may be saved? . . . In this very worship of God we find them [the Christians] worse than ourselves; therefore on account of their way of life we abhor their doctrine as erroneous.

He urged the missionary to “prohibit drunkenness, enmity, mingling with the wives of others, and other vices known to us by name.” The Indian’s words have been sifted through a Christian mind, yet the criticism was stringent and the morality consistent with Indian concern to live a good life on earth. Aurén’s willingness to listen, however, appears exceptional and may have been influenced by his doubts about the Lutheran church and theology. He later joined the Sabbatarians and printed a controversial pamphlet in which he defended his views, something that would have had dire consequences back in Sweden.33 33 Several translations of Aurén’s latin text exist and I have generally quoted from the English, printed in Biörck, Planting of the Swedish Church. However, there are some differences found with a recent Swedish translation. In the English version the first quote says: “was indeed pleased to have discovered myself something of a savage in my highly civilized state, and I admired the alertness of the natural capacity of the heathen,” 39. My translation comes from Carl-Martin Edsman, “En religionsdialog år 1700 från mötet mellan svenskar och indianer,” in Studier i religionshistoria: tillägnade Åke Hultkrantz, (Löberöd: Plus Ultra, 1991), 183; Biörck, Planting of the Swedish Church, 35–39; Swedberg, America Illuminata, 45, 74; Blomfelt, ed., Andreas Sandels Dagbok.

196

chapter six

Swedish Lutheran theology may have facilitated the understanding of some aspects of Susquehannock and Lenape beliefs. In comparison with English Puritans, Swedish pastors brought along a somewhat more open missionary theology that incorporated ancient Hellenic and Roman ideas of natural religion and God’s general revelation of himself to all mankind. Running as a thread from Campanius to Swedberg, Swedish pastors found proof of divine revelation in the beliefs they encountered among the Indians. Their beliefs about the after-life provided proof of this. “The heathens have certain thoughts about this,” wrote Swedberg, “through which one may perceive the light of nature, in which it consists. Some say and hold forth, that they are entirely blind, but the merciful God has not allowed them to remain without knowledge of himself. For they profess it, that there is a good God and they know how to speak about him.”34 Yet, fear and caution seems more common than dialogue. Despite these protestations regarding a natural and universal revelation, Aurén’s meeting in Conestoga constitutes an unusual example. Fear placed a strain on Campanius’ efforts to learn Lenape and communicate with his closest Indian neighbors, fear surely lay behind the killing of the red-spotted snake, and fear cloaked those few Indians who considered the Christian baptism. To the Swedes, the New World had its spirits and even with the presence of pastors and demands of church discipline within the small colony, many may have wondered if God had indeed forsaken them. Only a few glimpses like the one above remain of Indian responses to European arguments, yet we know that Lenapes and Susquehannocks were, like other Indians, more successful in converting Europeans to their way of life. Many subsequent European visitors to the region bore witness to the similarity, outwardly at least, between Swedish and Finnish colonists and their Indian neighbors. Yet, there is hardly any evidence of intermarriages between Swedes and Indians. Considering the frequent contacts between the peoples and the reputation of friendship, this is a remarkable fact worthy of comment. Since both Jesuits and colonists mentioned sexual relations between Swedish men and Indian women, there were in all likelihood unions, but they were never legalized as marriage. One possible explanation

34 Quoted in Jacobsson, Svenskar och indianer, 240; on difference between Lutherans and Puritans, see Edsman, “En religionsdialog,” 190–192.

strangely kept and protected

197

is that men living with Indian women would move away from the European settlements and “liken more and more the Indians.” Speaking for this theory is the evidence that whites who came to stay with Indians desired to return much less frequently than Indians among whites. It was a source of great bewilderment that when Indian children were taken to be brought up among Europeans they looked for the first opportunity to escape home “rejecting all the advantages they were offered and that they had . . . without ever wanting to return.” On the other hand, white children captured by Indians and reared as their own could often not be induced by presents or prayers to return to their parents. Europeans wondered if the freedom of the Indian way of life was the cause of this rejection. Child rearing practices differed and may have been a reason children preferred Indian life. Lenape parents were kind and gentle with their children, whether they were red or white, while the father in a Swedish household had God’s permission to run a tight regimen over his family.35

Daily interactions in the colony Official instructions had little influence on the daily contacts between settlers and Indians. We know that the new arrivals, at least those with some education, came with a Eurocentric view of history, assuming that Europe was the center of the world and that its cultures were the oldest. Ethnohistorical studies suggest that the conceptual approach of Europeans was remarkably similar whenever they encountered comparable situations. Europeans tended to see themselves as being at the center of historical events whether they were Spanish, English, or Swedish. It is, however, also justifiable to speak of a general Indian view of European culture during the seventeenth century.

35 On Indian success at converting whites, Axtell, “The White Indians”, in Invasion Within; on sexual relations and marriage, Jesuit Relations 39, 145; Kalm II, 168, 322; I have only found one notation of a marriage between a Swede and a Lenape. Othniel Murray, who claimed to be a Lenape or Sickonese Indian and came from Cape May County, had married Katharine (last name unknown), a Swede, some time in the second half of the 18th century. From William Steward and Theophilus G. Steward, Gouldtown—a very remarkable settlement of ancient date (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Co., 1913), 62–63; on freedom and child rearing, Kalm II, 230; Kalm IV, 238; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 201–202; Pleijel, Hustavlans värld, 33–34, 66; Jacobsson, Svenskar och indianer, 218–219.

198

chapter six

Commonly, Indians, whether they spoke Iroquoian or Algonkian languages appreciated European technology, where it could replace native tools and offer convenience. Indians were also impressed with European ceremonies and uniforms. However, they charged the Europeans with bringing diseases and often suggested a connection with European use of sorcery. Alcohol held an attraction for Indians as well as for Whites, but Indian leaders often deplored its consequences and tried to ban the trade. Indians also displayed a marked reluctance towards European religions and felt no necessity to learn European languages. Indians of all nations commonly had low regard for European legal practices, morality, and medicine. Indians, with different concepts of history and culture, also asserted primacy for their own people. They included the new experiences and the objects which appeared useful within the pattern of their own cultural codes, while rejecting the concomitant ideological and cultural baggage. Only gradually were they forced to realize how the encounter with European colonists violently reshaped these patterns.36 To the Lenapes assembled on the shore in March of 1638, the new arrivals presented a curious and strange spectacle. Their dress with cumbersome suits and boots was decidedly different, as were their hairy faces. The tremendous boom of the cannons resembled the noise of man’s spirit friends, the Thunderers, and perhaps the Indians thought these white and bearded people had come to do battle with the Horned Serpent of their mythology. The Swedes observed the awe induced by the cannons and interpreted it as fear of European military superiority. As the Swedes settled in, surprised Indians watched as men began to clear the ground and prepare for farming. The differences in techniques were less astounding than the fact that men were doing what clearly was women’s work! That would have explained their pitiful inability to feed themselves and their interest in Indian women. As the number of freemen increased in

36 Cornelius J. Jaenen, “Amerindian Views of French Culture in the Seventeenth Century,” Canadian Historical Review 55 (1974); James P. Ronda, “‘Singing Birds’— European Perceptions of the Delaware People,” in The Lenape Indian, a Symposium, ed. Herbert C. Kraft (New Jersey: Archaeological Research Center, Seton Hall University, pub. no. 7, 1984); James Axtell, After Columbus. Essays in the Ethnohistory of Colonial North America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 125–143; Richter, Facing East, offers a particularly imaginative account of how Indians experienced early contacts with Europeans, see esp. chapter 1: “Imagining a Distant New World.”

strangely kept and protected

199

the colony, Swedish and Finnish families settled along the kills (small rivers) and rivers where the fishing was good. Thousands of Lenapes lived in inland villages but migrated seasonally to the shores of the Delaware River, and many of them associated with the newcomers on a daily basis. The language barrier presented initial difficulties, but on both sides people were accustomed to dealing with several different tongues. Aboard the first ships from Sweden, German and Dutch could be heard as well as Swedish, while Algonkian speaking Lenapes and Iroquoian speaking Susquehannocks awaited on shore. Andries Lucassen, a Dutchman, was the first to serve as interpreter. He was followed by a long series of German, Dutch, Swedish, and Finnish colonists who learned to communicate with both Lenapes and Susquehannocks.37 Peter Lindeström had no high regard for the Lenape language: “[I]t is a poor language, where one word can mean many things, depending on pronunciation.” But Lindeström never learned any Indian languages. Instead, he joined a long line of visitors to the New World who categorically charged its inhabitants with inarticulate speech and a lack of reasoning faculties. One man who did learn some of the native language was Johan Campanius. Apart from the translation of the Little Catechism, he also wrote a slender dictionary of common phrases. Neither the catechism nor the dictionary show a deep understanding of the language but represent the trade jargon of the area. That his sincere efforts met with such limited success suggests the formidable barrier that language differences presented. Not only were Swedish and Lenape or Susquehannock of completely different language families, but the underlying concepts and values differed to such an extent that understanding and translation on a deeper level must have been near impossible. Again, we are reminded of the differences in worldview emanating from the orality or literacy of a culture. Although the majority of European peasants would have lived in an almost exclusively oral culture in their daily experiences, the pastors carrying the Christian mission across the oceans and the colonial officers running the organization of colonies represented a literate society and world perception. Campanius, inhibited by his 37 Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 144; Jesuit Relations 33, 135; It has been suggested that for a long time the Lenapes thought that the Swedes were a race of only men; Kalm IV, 238; “Affidavit of four men from the Key of Calmar, 1638,” NEP, 88; “Letter of Thomas Paschall, 1683,” NEP, 250–252.

200

chapter six

training, may have been in this way less capable of understanding Lenape than the common traders. In addition, while trade could be conducted satisfactorily without too much oral communication, that would have been impossible in the efforts to convey a religious message. The centrality of the Word in the Lutheran service, separated from much of its Catholic visual imagery, contributed to the difficulty. The old man debating with Aurén made this clear when explaining from where the Indians had their knowledge. “Certainly all these things have become known to us not through the written word, nor from any other exterior source . . . Our opinion is, that everyone is enlightened as much as they need . . . When some say that they have God’s word, the difference between them and us is not in the plan of salvation . . . but in the special kind and degree of revelation . . . Much is entrusted to the writings, but is all of it true? Let us say, that it is true, that which has been written for them, they then have the messages, that are given to them, but they do not concern us. It is necessary, that we are convinced by other things. What God wants to make evident he manages without human help, nor does he need human testimony.”38 Daily contacts afforded the participants plenty of opportunities for surprises and culture shock. Particularly when visiting, both Indians and whites had to learn new codes. Lenape villagers and Swedish colonists regularly visited each other’s households. Both upheld their notions of good manners. Indians returned any offering of food or water with skins and other goods which the Swedes thought constituted a “much greater value.” When Lenapes visited a Swedish cabin the owner must take care to clear one end of the table because the Indians preferred to sit cross legged on the table and they would ask for any food that they might care for. These visits could be bothersome, as the Indians asked for more and more of the popular 38 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 203 (my translation from the Swedish); Campanius wrote in the introduction to the catechism that: “Concerning the Barbaric language it is found to be very poor in vocabulary and convenient and particular phrases to properly designate the customary forms of our Christian articles of faith,” Campanius, Lutheri Catechismus; Hodgen, Early Anthropology, 410–411. This notion has remained throughout the history of contact. More than one hundred years after Lindeström, the Jeffersonians would make the same claim. See Bernard W. Sheehan, Seeds of Extinction: Jeffersonian Philanthropy and the American Indian (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1973); quote from Edsman, “En religionsdialog,” 179–181; Indian lack of interest in learning French has been noted by Jaenen, “Amerindian views,” 277.

strangely kept and protected

201

European items and the colonists dared not refuse them. Whatever they might have thought about it, Swedes found it necessary, or prudent, to adjust to Indian customs in social contacts. Dependence on Lenapes for food and on Susquehannocks for trade skins, provided good reasons for such acceptance. Initial reliance on the Lenapes for food led to Swedish adoption of several Indian dishes. Corn was a new crop to the Europeans, they had to learn how to cook and prepare it, and in the process, they incorporated several recipes. The most popular appears to have been “sappan.” The name comes from the Lenape word sapon meaning corn, and it was a thick soup consisting of boiled and parched corn kernels and meat. From a later date, Andreas Hesselius provided insights into this dissemination of Indian cooking into Swedish households illustrating a process that had evolved already during the initial years of contact. As a newly arrived pastor in the early eighteenth century he learned to prepare turtles and grasshoppers by cooking them in hot ashes, he grew pumpkins and calabash to use as storage utensils, and Indians taught him to avoid poison oak and how to treat the boils if need be. Pehr Kalm, likewise, testified to the significance of Native culinary practices as he even offered his reader a recipe for Indian corn mush.39 It is perhaps in this context of need and dependence that the following story should be read. Holm followed his account of how the Indians prepare food and how “the Swedes have had to help themselves likewise when they first came into the country,” with an anecdote he claimed came from the oral testimony of his grandfather. Some Indians asked a Swede to join them in their home and offered him a meal. The Swede relished the food which proved to be abundant and deliciously prepared, and one dish resembled what the Swedes call sylta (chopped pieces of meat and lard cooked together in a sauce). However, directly after the meal the visitor found that his stomach rejected it all, which insulted his hosts who had wanted to treat their guest to their best offerings. The Swede desired to know what he had eaten but they did not want to tell him. Some time later one of his good friends revealed to him that the Indians had gotten hold of an enemy and it was from his flesh that the fried and chopped meat had been prepared. From the earliest travel

39 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 233–234; Kalm II, 175, 358; “Magister Andreæ Hesselii,” 113, 119, 122, 123; Risingh’s Journal, 177–179; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 126.

202

chapter six

accounts, cannibalism was a charge leveled at the inhabitants of the New World. These charges took many shapes but also included depictions of human flesh as part of regular meals. Holm showed in other parts of his book how he relied on previous and contemporary authors who are known to have disseminated stereotypical descriptions from America. Other references to cannibalism in the Northeast typically were told within a metaphorical context that place these man-eating tribes at some indistinct distance from the author’s own neighborhood. Yet, in this specific story he cites his grandfather as his source. The insecurities and balancing between extremes is striking in accounts concerning Johannes Campanius’ relation to Lenape Indians. On the one hand, his grandson and countless successors have emphasized the great ease with which the pastor related to the colony’s native neighbors and the genuine friendships that were said to have developed. On the other hand, his own letter as well as some of the accounts on which the grandson based his book, speak of fear, tension, and hostility. Perhaps the story of Lenape cannibalism emanated from this atmosphere of insecurity in which Swedes had little choice but to adopt alien food practices without knowing for certain that they were not being deceived. Another story, attributed to Francis Pastorius, demonstrated to Campanius Holm’s readers how Natives took advantage of gullible newcomers and tried to pawn off inedible food stuffs on them if they were not careful and observant.40 Various methods of food procurement led to conflicts between Lenapes and Swedish colonists as well. As in the surrounding European colonies, the introduction of livestock in conjunction with European disregard for native land use led to problems for the Indians. Cows and oxen could be kept around the farmstead but pigs were more difficult to restrict. The European pig quickly adapted to the American environment and proceeded to proliferate in an astounding manner. Swine showed little respect for human labor in the form of cleared cornfields and they also developed a fondness for kätniss, a type of turnip that was an important summer food for the Indians. In fact,

40 Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 121–122, 126–127; Kupperman, Indians & English, 47–48; Sabine Brauner, “Cannibals, Witches, and Shrews in the ‘Civilizing Process,’” in “Neue Welt”/“Dritte Welt”. Interkulturelle Beziehungen Deutschlands zu Lateinamerika und der Karibie, ed. Sigrid Bauschinger & Susan L. Cocalis (Tübingen & Basel: Francke Verlag, 1994), 1–27.

strangely kept and protected

203

the pigs’ appetite severely disturbed Lenape dietary patterns. Nils Gustafsson told Kalm that kätniss was a staple food (“as long as they had them they did not care about other food”) but the swine all but cleared the land of these roots, no doubt causing hardships for the Indians during a lean part of the year. These must be the same roots Lindeström compared to artichokes that grew in abundance in the marshes and which the pigs fed on during the winter, making them as big as if they had been fattened. On the other hand, pigs were easy prey and the Lenapes saw no reason why they could not eat a few. Indians also took wild pigs back to their villages and raised them to become as tame as dogs so that when the families moved the pigs followed obediently. Some Indians raised so many pigs that they could sell them back to the Swedes for a small sum. While this may have meant that the Lenapes had enough food, it does not imply a status quo. The severity of the depletion of kätniss and the alteration in food patterns should not be underestimated. Pigs added to the diet but could not replace the vegetable food, either in reliability or in nutritional value. Domesticated animals and particularly pigs represented a disturbing European intrusion on Indian land and subsistence and caused tension. It is likely that such disturbance lay behind Risingh’s sharp admonition in August 1654 to freemen at Sandhook to fence their land and keep an eye on their cattle. English colonial leaders tried to enforce laws concerning fencing, but cattle were difficult to control. Similarly, in New Netherland livestock became a constant source of friction as settlements advanced. Laws enacted to deal with the complaints revealed that protection for Indian fields aimed more to safeguard settlers than Indians, since the latter, if annoyed, might gather forces against the colonists.41

41 Kalm II, 310, 390, 408; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 158–159; Risingh’s Journal, 182–183, 196–197; Trelease, Indian Affairs, 64; Cronon, Changes in the Land, deals extensively with the problem caused by the introduction of domesticated animals on Indian subsistence patterns, see 129, 135f. Along the New England coast, swine wreaked havoc with oyster banks and clam sites and came into direct competition with Indians for food. According to Roger Williams, “Of all English Cattell, the Swine . . . are most hateful to all Natives, and they call them filthy cut throats,” 136; Yasuhide Kawashima, Puritan Justice and the Indian: White Man’s Law in Massachusetts, 1630 –1763 (Middletown: Wesleyan University Press, 1986), 62. Kawashima holds that colonial leaders strongly intended to protect Indian lands from cattle encroachment, while Cronon states that it was extremely difficult to fence in animals adequately. Others, i.e. Jennings, Invasion of America, 144, see in this attempt only a disguised way of crowding Indians off the land; ultimately the different understandings of

204

chapter six

The disturbance would also have altered relationships within Lenape communities and changed the way land was used. For hunters, pigs represented an alternative to other prey, while for gatherers the destruction of this vegetable food source meant that their labor to procure enough subsistence during the lean summer months was seriously hampered. A food gathered by women was thus exchanged for one that men hunted, and in a community with important areas of responsibility divided along gender lines this alteration must have been significant. It was the first in a long row of changes which influenced the balance between the sexes towards a patriarchal hierarchy. When the infringement of pigs and cattle encroached upon Lenape women’s vitally important subsistence work as maize growers and gatherers of edible plants they sought other ways to complement their diets. Indian and Swedish concepts of usufruct and ownership clashed in the apple orchards the colonists planted. The new fruits became popular with the Lenapes, and Indian women, in charge of the collection of fruits and berries, went into the orchards to pick what they desired. The Swedish planters did not take lightly to what they considered theft of their property. It happened that a woman who was caught was obliged not only to restore the fruit, but also to leave the clothes she wore. Lenapes must have found this impossible to comprehend. They did not consider fruits, berries, and nuts to be anybody’s private property. Instead, they could freely be picked by anyone who needed them.42 For the Lenapes, the primary attraction with the newcomers was the new tools and materials they brought. European technology appeared superior. It did not alter Indian societies, but it eased their labor. Technological adaptation was a matter of replacement. Stone knives were discarded for the hardier and sharper metal knives, and the same was true for hoes, adzes, axes, and picks and so on. Needles and awls simplified dressmaking work. Brass kettles soon replaced pottery. Lindeström described an Indian house full of copper and brass kettles of different sizes hanging from the ceiling from one door livestock management led to division and war, argues Virginia DeJohn Anderson, “King Philip’s Herds: Indians, Colonists, and the Problem of Livestock in Early New England,” The William and Mary Quarterly 3d ser. LI:4 (October 1994): 601–624. 42 For the most distinct statement on how colonialism changed the gender balance among the Lenapes, see Schönenberger, Lenape Women; The influence of livestock on gendered subsistence practices is also discussed in Anderson, “King Philip’s Herds,” 607; on apples Kalm II, 409.

strangely kept and protected

205

to the other. The replacement of ceramic pots with copper kettles was so complete that eighty years later pot making skills had almost vanished among the Lenapes. Initially, it was primarily the women who benefited from this influx of labor saving European implements. With the increasing emphasis on firearms, Indian demands moved to favor goods employed by men in their hunting, warfare, and status demonstration. The land donation from the Susquehannocks in 1655 is clear in its emphasis on the provision of guns, powder, and blacksmiths as the Swedish part of the bargain. This, however, marked a difference between Lenapes and Susquehannocks, as the Lenapes were not beneficiaries of the arms trade. Seen with Peter Lindeström’s eyes, traders took outrageous advantage of poor and gullible Indians. Indians also showed their lack of sophistication in their fear of such natural phenomena as salt water glistening like fire around the bow of a ship. But as far as natural phenomena were concerned, Swedes also had their share of scares. A young guard sounded the alarm one night thinking the enemy was attacking with lit fuses. Experienced men, awakened from their sleep, were probably less than happy as they watched the Spanish fire flies lighting up the dark night.43 Clothing and hairstyles varied and were objects of much description and wonder among Swedish contemporaries. They likened Lenape footwear to Saami shoes. The Indian custom of greasing their hair and painting and tattooing their faces and bodies elicited many comments. Swedes and Dutch reported great admiration for the knowledge and skill Indians displayed in mixing and applying colors. The Indians, however, appreciated European dyes as well and in the early eighteenth century the Swedish artist Gustaf Hesselius became popular with his colors. In all probability, although no records exist, the Lenapes and the Susquehannocks discussed Swedish dress habits with a similar mixture of disgust and curiosity. What we do know is that Indians incorporated certain aspects of European clothing. Some purchased shoes and stockings, finding them comfortable. Many liked linen shirts but were not used to treating such materials and thus wore the shirts without washing them until they fell apart. Swedes began to sew knee-long coats out of blue and red friezes, and these became popular among the most prominent Lenapes. These half-red and half-blue coats were bound to cause ridicule among some of the

43

Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 131, 133–134, 226, 255; Kalm II, 240.

206

chapter six

Swedes since they resembled the clothes of children at Stockholm’s orphanages.44 Varying perceptions of decency presented a bigger problem than clothing. The Delaware Valley was considerably hotter than Sweden during the warm part of the year and we can infer from their behavior that native Americans in the area did not find it necessary for reasons of morality to cover up their bodies. European visitors returned again and again to the subject of savage nakedness. Among them, as we have seen, nudity was also a metaphor for primitivism and barbarism. Whether “ashamed” as Lindeström would have it or simply insulted by rude European staring, the Indians eventually found themselves forced to cover their bodies carefully “if they wish to have dealings with the Christians.”45 While opinions on decency varied, the standards of cleanliness were more similar among Lenapes and Swedish/Finnish freemen. Both men and women among the Lenapes used a sweat lodge for cleaning as well as for other purposes, and the bath houses (badstuga, bastu) the colonists built must have been a recognizable feature to their Indian neighbors. Colonists generally used their bathhouses each Saturday (lögaredag = washing day, from which comes the Swedish word for Saturday, lördag). The habit, however, all but vanished in the late part of the century among those that lived close to the English, (perhaps contributing to the deterioration in health reported by Kalm and others in the early eighteenth century). A decline in the use of bath houses noted throughout Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was tied to a concern with the perceived immorality of the exposure of the nude body and has thus been connected to ideas of increasing selfcontrol and inhibition characterizing modern society. The anxiety of leading Swedes that they were not regarded as equally civilized as the English may well have contributed to the disappearance of bath houses among the Swedish in Pennsylvania.46 It is surely worth noting that in these interactions between Lenapes, 44 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 196, 199; “Magister Andreae Hesselii,” 115, 116; Biörck, Planting of the Swedish Church; “Printz to Oxenstierna, April 14, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 153; Van der Donck, 195. 45 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 198. 46 Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 198; Kalm II, 413, also 155, 159, 422–423; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 357–362; Batsto River is a place name in New Jersey. It has been suggested that it is either from the Swedish word bastu or a Lenape name meaning bathing place and the bathers were probably Lenapes, Jim Rementer, personal communication; Hodgen, Early Anthropology, 378.

strangely kept and protected

207

Susquehannocks, and Swedes, the Indians were more willing to adjust to European expectations or Europeans were more capable of enforcing their codes, concerning clothes than concerning justice or diplomacy. In the daily contacts, exchanges in the areas of food, clothing, tools, and customs occurred. Both Indians and Swedish/Finnish colonists found use for the other’s knowledge and skills and adopted customs which facilitated the interaction. Such adjustment did not challenge basic concepts concerning one’s own society but served to minimize friction and probably laid the foundation for future interaction and mutual support. Clothing could be incorporated as a replacement but it did not immediately threaten basic structures of influence and decision making (although it did modify subsistence practices). On a symbolic level, however, clothing carried great meaning and eighteenth century Lenape reactions to white influence included exhortations to return to native clothing.47

Alcohol, health, and disease For Lenapes and Susquehannocks, just as for indigenous peoples all over the continent, meeting white men involved a devastating contact with European intoxicants and European diseases. As far as we know, the Lenapes and Susquehannocks did not use any fermented drinks or mind-altering compounds prior to European arrival. The Swedes came with a solid background in the home production of beer and liquor. In 1647, the cargo aboard the ship Swanen included a large copper brewing kettle to ensure the production of local beer. In the early years, the Swedes brewed beer from barley malt, but they also had distillers (pans) and made their own grain alcohol. There are plenty of indications that the Swedish and Finnish colonists enjoyed their own drink to an extent that earned them scorn from their European neighbors. Dutch patroon David P. de Vries sold a good quantity of wine to the Swedes and commented that Governor Printz was a man who liked his drink. Augustine Herman, on his trip to Maryland as Dutch envoy reported a frightening meeting with Finnish-Swedish colonists whose drunken frolicking in 1659 involved firing guns and threatening the Dutch. Accounts of how

47

Dowd, A Spirited Resistance, 174.

208

chapter six

other people use intoxicants are always complicated to interpret. Elements of class and status enter into the picture and color the pronouncements. The descriptions of Swedish and Finnish drinking habits, however accurate, may also have reflected their lowly position in the colonial white world.48 Like their European neighbors, the Swedes and Finns found alcohol to be a popular trade item with the Indians and they apparently harbored no scruples about peddling their brew. Alcohol became part of the ritual surrounding diplomatic exchange, and towards the end of New Sweden it was clearly an integral part of meetings between Swedes and Indians. Upon his arrival in 1654, Johan Risingh gathered the resident sachems to renew the alliance between Swedes and Indians, and wine and liquor was served. “Then one must take care, that he [the Indian] does not get too much of that kind, since he then becomes completely mad, so that he does not know what he does,” explained Lindeström. Dutch visitor Jaspar Danckaerts deplored selling liquor to the Indians in New Amsterdam and elsewhere and then robbing them. “They [the traders] do not rest until they have cajoled him out of all his money, or most of it. . . . Although it is forbidden to sell the drink to the Indians, yet everyone does it, and so much the more earnestly, and with so much greater and burning avarice, that it is done in secret.” A visit to the Delaware River in 1680 exposed the disgusted Danckaerts to a deplorable scene: “Indians, who . . . were all lustily drunk, raving, striking, shouting, jumping, fighting each other, and foaming at the mouth like raging wild beasts . . . And this was caused by Christians. It makes me blush to call by that holy name those who live ten times worse than these most barbarous Indians and heathen.” The outraged Dutchman spoke severely to his hosts about this trade and they defended themselves feebly by arguing that “if they did not do it, others would, and then they would have the trouble and others the profit.”49 However, such lurid descriptions of Indian drunkenness are largely

48

Zimmerman, “European Trade Relations,” 65; Johnson, Swedish Settlements, 259; Kalm II, 408; Journal of Jasper Danckaerts 1679 –1680, ed. Bartlett B. James and J. Franklin Jameson (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1913), 100; de Vries, NEP, 273; Augustine Herrman, “Journal of the Dutch Embassy to Maryland,” NEM, 316. 49 Hazard, Annals, 211; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 129–130; Journal of Jasper Danckaerts, 79, 179–180.

strangely kept and protected

209

absent in the early Swedish sources. A letter from pastor Eric Biörck, suggests that the Lenapes had worked out a way of dealing with the consequences of intoxication: When they have big feasts and have much to drink, they appoint certain savages to watch the others, who that day drink nothing but watch out for the others that they do not drink too much that they in no way argue or fight. They also remove all sharp objects. The second day the others (the watchmen) treat themselves and enjoy.

Biörck’s story sounds fantastic, but is corroborated by Kalm who reported learning that Indians designated some people to remain sober and make sure the others did not act foolishly or dangerously. This suggests that initially the Lenapes had ways to handle this novelty. Alcohol became part of a feast and famine cycle. The excessive drinking that Europeans observed was the traditional way Indians dealt with surplus. An abundance of food was consumed, since it could not be preserved. The same happened with alcohol, but the effects were potentially more harmful. But by the last quarter of the seventeenth century, alcohol had definitely emerged as a problem in the eyes of the Indians. The Swedes never suggested a ban on beer and liquor sales, but by the time Dutch and English administrations took over, regulating that trade became an important issue. By then, visitors and broadsheets described daily spectacles of drunken Indians on the streets of the towns. English farmers complained that drunken Indians bothered them greatly, and their complaints led to bans on sales. Yet, just as with the descriptions of Swedish drinking one must consider that the issue of drunkenness also is one of status. Derogatory comments about Swedish freemen and the way Swedes reacted to these accounts suggest that they threatened a fragile position in the colonial hierarchy. Likewise, opinions of Indian drunken behavior confirmed their position on the societal scale, whether they really handled the consumption in their own way (as Biörck suggests) or not.50 It is undeniable that alcohol consumption did create stress within native communities. Indian leaders saw devastating effects in their communities and often took action to stem the trade with alcoholic beverages. Possibly the system of designated sober guards developed

50 “Prosten Biörcks Berettelse;” Kalm II, 159, 168; Journal of Jasper Danckaerts, 142; NYHM XVIII, 205, 311, 340; on the feast and famine-cycle, Cronon, Changes in the Land, chapter 3.

210

chapter six

to deal with the effects of intoxication but eventually failed to hinder abuse. By the second half of the seventeenth century an increased influx of European settlers led to severe strain on the internal cohesion in Lenape communities and families. Concerned Indians asked their go-betweens, the Swedish colonists, to relate their pleas to the magistrates in New Castle and New York. In the early 1660s, Hendrik Huygen in a letter to Willem Beeckman said that Lenapes at Tinicum had asked him that no more brandy or strong drink should be sold to them. In June of 1668, Peter Rambo informed the English that the Indians desired an absolute prohibition on the sale of strong spirits. Efforts were to no avail, however, and in 1685, several Lenape sachems delivered a scathing accusation against the Dutch and Swedes. After reproaching Dutch traders the spokesman continued that “the next People that came among us, were the Sweeds, who continued the sale of those strong Liquors to us: they were also Blind, they had no Eyes, they did not see it to be hurtful to us to drink it.” The Lenapes were fully aware of their inability to withstand the lure of alcohol and the spokesman added: but if People will sell it us, we are so in love with it, that we cannot forbear it; when we drink it, it makes us mad; we do not know what we do . . . seven Score of our People have been killed, by reason of the drinking of it, since the time it was first sold us . . . and we know it to be for our Hurt . . . the Cask must be sealed up, it must be made fast, it must not leak by Day nor by Night, in the Light, nor in the Dark.

The problem was real and should not be minimized; yet, it must be placed in connection with other events disturbing the structure of Lenape society. It is significant that the problem with alcohol emerged when Lenape cultural patterns began to be seriously threatened in other ways. Alcohol formed part of the forces which undermined traditional channels of authority and village structure. The sequence of events suggests that a strong, confident Indian population in contact with a small European settlement was not adversely affected or threatened by alcohol. Real problems began to emerge when combined with the loss of homelands, disastrous diseases, and a greater influx of whites bringing with them increasing volumes of alcohol. When societal cohesion was threatened, especially in connection with European germs, alcohol compounded the problems.51 51

“Papers Relating to the Dutch and Swedish Settlements,” 678, 723; block quote

strangely kept and protected

211

Initially, the Indians in lenapehoking enjoyed good health, if not long lives according to present European or American standards. There is very little archaeological evidence of disease and early European colonists report the astounding good health of the Indians they encountered. Van der Donck remarked that during his whole time in the country he had not seen more than one Indian who was born deformed. Lindeström wrote that the Indians by nature were a healthy people and suffered few diseases. Van der Donck offered an explanation to this state-of-affairs. “Still it must be admitted that nature assists them greatly, for they indulge in no excesses of eating and drinking, otherwise they could not accomplish so much with such simple and small means.” Pre-contact Indian health concerns seem to have been a matter of injuries of different sorts, bites from snakes and insects, ulcers, and syphilis. The latter plagued the savages, wrote Lindeström with ethnocentric emphasis, due to their immoral living “like soulless creatures.” Lindeström was no doubt unaware of the fact that the dreaded disease had long been around in the New World, had become endemic and lost its character of venereal infection. Among the Indians, it was a milder disease, comparable to scabies, while Europeans suffered deformation and death from its effects. Indian medical practices sufficed to alleviate these problems. Both men and women had an extensive knowledge of herbs, roots, barks, leaves, and berries that eased or cured pain and disease. The Europeans marveled at the many valuable and wonder working herbal medicines that Natives knew to administer, so that “if it is not a fatal disease, they know a remedy for it immediately, which they keep very secret from the Christians.” Blood letting was practiced, seemingly more as a prophylactic method than curing. Sweating was an important part of native cures, one that the Swedes and Finns could understand.52 from Budd, Good Order, 63; Kraft, The Lenape-Delaware Indian Heritage, 387–388 believes the situation in Lenapehoking was equally severe as further north already by midcentury and he bases his conclusion on Lindeström; see also Nancy Oestreich Lurie, “The World’s Oldest On-Going Protest Demonstration: North American Indian Drinking Patterns,” Pacific Historical Review XL:3 (August 1971): 311–332. The most comprehensive study of Indians and alcohol is Peter C. Mancall, Deadly Medicine. Indians and Alcohol in Early America (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995). On stereotypes and social order see chapter 1, esp. 13, 20. 52 Kraft, Lenape, 137, states that the archaeological material shows that few Indians lived to be more than 35 or 40 years old. Gray haired people were revered as especially favored by the supernatural beings. Compared to the life expectancy of

212

chapter six

When ill, both Indians and Europeans turned to the spirits for comfort and cure. In a world replete with spirits that could be both supportive and disruptive to humans, physical dangers in the shape of animals, or difficult terrain, men and women endowed with special powers to control or influence these forces earned particular consideration and respect. The Lenapes recognized two types of medical practitioners or healers, the herbalist (medew) and the shaman ( powow). The shaman interacted with certain supernatural forces while the herbalist primarily used extensive knowledge of the application of various plants. Both received their power through dream visions. The powow combined healing practices and spiritual invocations in dealing with illnesses. Herbalists were frequently women, but sometimes the vision to become a herbal healer could be given to a man as well. When a person received such a vision in a dream it meant that she or he must rigorously observe certain obligations and the young apprentice learned both from older herbalists and from the special healing knowledge given to them by their own guardian spirits. The Lenapes believed that to be truly effective, herbal medicines had to be gathered with the proper respect for the spirit forces that lived in and guarded the plants. Only clean and well-formed plants were selected and roots had to be free from knotty growths. Residual parts of the plant would be buried and never just thrown away. Lenapes and other Indians differentiated between diseases that could be cured with plant medicines and the kind that needed more direct supernatural intervention. The first category included such ailments as wounds and bruises, sores and ulcers, the effects of syphilis, inflammation, burns, and colds. Lenapes, just as their European con-

contemporary Europeans, the Lenapes lived long. Life expectancy among ruling families in Europe did not reach 35 years, while peasants probably had shorter life spans. See Russell Thornton, American Indian Holocaust and Survival. A Population History Since 1492 (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1987), 39. There are several notations in the early records of Indians who lived long. I have found no suggestion in any of the material that the Lenapes practiced infanticide, thus the absence of deformed children may indicate a healthy population; Van der Donck, 208; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 239 (the quote is my translation of the Swedish), 240–241, 244; Kraft, “Religion of the Delaware Indians,” 55; for the debate concerning syphilis see Alfred W. Crosby, The Columbian Exchange. Biological and Cultural Consequences of 1492 (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1972), chapter 4; Swedish medical practices are discussed in Sofia Ling, Kärringmedicin och vetenskap. Läkare och kvacksalverianklagade i Sverige omkring 1770 –1870, (Uppsala: Studia Historica Upsaliensia 212, 2004).

strangely kept and protected

213

temporaries, believed in the existence of witches, and these were thought to fly through the air at night working magic arts, giving enemies bad luck, or making them sicken and die. Persons with extraordinary powers could also inflict illness on others, as was believed to have happened in 1654 with the arrival of the ship Örnen. In such cases, herbal medicines would not suffice. When it was a matter of life and death, serious intervention was needed and the Indians turned to shamans. The powows were not in league with the devil, as the Swedish sources suggested, but rather operated more within a spiritual realm than a physical in their attempts at dealing with disease. Lindeström described it thus: When a savage is plagued on his deathbed, he calls on the doctor . . . Then he uses first for him all kinds of medicines. And when he realizes that they will not help, then he makes himself as if he was worse than the devil, meaning to chase the evil out of the body of the savage . . . runs back and forth, shouts, so that it is heard a long way, rolls naked in the burning fire, takes firebrands and places them around the sick man.

Illness and pain were always assumed to be the result of supernatural forces and thus must be met with spiritual remedies—on this Swedes and Lenapes agreed. While Europeans described the shamans with scorn and fear, they were full of admiration for the herbal knowledge of Native healers. The Lenape pharmacopoeia was extensive. A sample list includes black walnut ( Juglans nigra) sap that reduced inflammation and juice from its crushed hull was used to rub over ringworm. Cottonwood (Populus deltoides) bark was boiled to make liniment against pain in arms, hands, legs, and joints. Tall ironweed (Veronica altissima) leaves were used against acne and to improve the complexion. Cohosh reduced fevers and helped against female problems, while coltsfoot (Tussilago farfara) was used to alleviate colds, coughs, diarrhea, and asthma. Juniper (gen. Juniperus) berries served as survival foods, oil for insect repellant, and as a contraceptive. Sassafras (Sassafras albidum) boiled as tea reduced fevers and congestion and wild lettuce (gen. Lactuca) was used to calm nerves and as an antiseptic wash for poison ivy. Lenape herbal doctors willingly and generously came to the aid of sick white people, but apparently they did not trust the Europeans to treat the spirits properly. They adamantly refused to reveal the manner in which they procured and prepared their medicines. Swedes desired to know the secrets and sometimes spied on the Indians to find out what plants

214

chapter six

they used. Some offered them drink and then tried to pry the secrets from the intoxicated Indian.53 Nothing, however, could protect Native Americans against the onslaught of European contagious diseases. Smallpox, measles, typhus, dysentery, and other infections brought death and disintegration to Indian villages and were an important element in the restructuring of Indian political patterns and alliances. Estimates of the decimation European diseases caused run as high as ninety percent. These epidemics were by no means harmless for the white communities either, but while Europeans on both sides of the Atlantic suffered losses that kept the population from growing, the Indians saw their numbers dwindle. So drastic was the loss of Indian life that observers already in the seventeenth century spoke of them as a vanishing race. A motive for describing the Indian nations and their customs was so “that after the Christians have multiplied and the natives have disappeared and melted away, a memorial of them may be preserved.” Swedish pastors at the end of the seventeenth century all reported the same thing. Andreas Rudman and Eric Biörck wrote that the “heathens are now very few so that they are seen only now and then: here at Passayung where my vicarage is, where before have been many 1000 are now none; God has caused them to die through infectious diseases and civil war etc.” These words were echoed by Pehr Kalm’s informants less than fifty years later: “The Indians previously lived quite densely, where Philadelphia now stands, and moreover lived everywhere in the country; but they became extinct through the measles, which they got from the Europeans, when many 100s died.”54 53 Kraft, The Lenape-Delaware Indian Heritage, 337–342; Kraft, “Religions of the Delaware Indians,” 55–56; Harrington, “Preliminary Sketch,” 232; Gladys Tantaquidgeon, Folk Medicine of the Delaware and Related Algonkian Indians (Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1972), 7–15, 29–39 (cohosh is of Algonkian origin, any of several American medicinal or poisonous plants, Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary 8th ed.); quote from Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 247 (my translation from the Swedish); see Van der Donck, 208 for a similar quote; on Swedish appreciation of Indian medical treatments, see Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 127–128, 240–241; “Prosten Biörcks Berettelse;” “Magister Andreae Hesselii,” 124; both Lindeström (240) and Risingh mention the use of a particular grass to counter-act the venom from rattlesnakes, bites of which killed several Swedes, Kalm II, 322. 54 Thornton, American Indian Holocaust, 64, 70; Dean R. Snow and Kim M. Lanphear, “European Contact and Indian Depopulation in the Northeast: The Timing of the First Epidemics,” Ethnohistory 35:1 (Winter 1988): 20–28; Bruce G. Trigger and William R. Swagerty, “Entertaining Strangers: North America in the Sixteenth

strangely kept and protected

215

That Europeans carried diseases was not unknown to the Lenapes and each arriving ship brought dangers. In 1643, Governor Printz reported general sickness in the colony. In that one year, twenty percent of the population in the colony died, mostly from disease, leaving less than one hundred Swedes in the area. It appears that the problem was connected to the inability to provide for themselves and the workmen’s health improved after provisions bought from Dutch and English sloops had been added to their wages. But when Gyllenhaijen (The Golden Shark) arrived in October 1646 the “master of the ship, the mate and all the people, except one man, [were] sick; so that, according to their report, they would have despaired, had they not reached land when they did.” They probably suffered from dysentery, a common problem in crowded areas, such as army camps and on ships, and a disease that at times vied with the pestilence as the number one killer in Europe. The same problem beset the passengers and crew on board Örnen (The Eagle) that brought Governor Johan Risingh to New Sweden. “Our people lay so ill,” wrote Risingh, “and the stench was so strong that one could not stand it for long.” Of the three hundred people that began the journey, approximately one hundred died during the crossing or shortly after the arrival to New Sweden.55 It is from this event that we have the first definite account of disease spread from Swedes to Indians. At the meeting between Lenape sachems and the new governor in June of 1654, the Indians complained of the infection the Swedes had brought. “They also let it be known that, although they were well pleased with us, they had received the sickness that came with our ship, of which they feared that all their people would perish.” The Lenapes clearly saw the

Century,” in The Cambridge History of the Native Peoples of the Americas I: North America, ed. Bruce G. Trigger and Wilcomb E. Washburn (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 361–369; Richter, Facing East, 59–67; Kraft, Lenape, 225; quotes from Van der Donck, 190; “Letter from Johan Thelin, Andreas Rudman, Eric Biörck, October 30, 1697,” Westin 1209, Handskriftsavdelningen (Manuscript collection), Uppsala University Library; Kalm II, 246. Such tragic reports abound. In 1634 William Bradford, governor of Plymouth Plantation, observed the effects of smallpox on the Connecticut River, that resulted in such a mortality that of a thousand inhabitants over 950 died, Kraft, Lenape, 212. 55 “Report of Governor Printz, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 97–98; “Report of Governor Printz, 1647,” in Johnson, Instruction, 127; Risingh’s Journal, 156–157; Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, note 92; Matts Bergmark, Från pest till polio (Stockholm: Natur och Kultur, 1965), 139.

216

chapter six

connection between the ship’s arrival and the disease among them. They charged the Swedes with wishing destruction upon them in bringing this evil spirit to them, a spirit that worked death and destruction among both red and white people. The Swedes defended themselves against the accusation by pointing out that there had often been epidemics among the Indians, of which whole nations had died, before the arrival of Swedish ships. Instead, the Swedes offered them the same hope and comfort that they themselves turned to in their distress, “that is, that God, who helped us when we had so many sick and with whose help we could hope to be better, could also help them to improve, if they had confidence in Him.” This was, according to seventeenth century practice, sound advice. Medical books mixed remedies of a worldly and a spiritual kind in a manner that must have been akin to the Indian manner of treating illnesses with both physical and magic means. But the Lenapes had no more trust in the Christians’ god, than the white people had in the Indian shaman and attempted to deal with the sickness in their own way. They asked to borrow a boat, in which a couple of men would travel down river to Horenkill. There dwelled a powerful sachem, Teutackan, who they suspected of having sent the sickness. If he could not be persuaded to take back the evil manitto, then Swedes and Indians would all die.56 Indian medical practices could probably alleviate the effects of dysentery, since it is a disease that primarily thrives where people are crowded together, hungry, and unable to maintain their personal hygiene. Measles and smallpox presented greater danger. Swedish children contracted measles and spread it to visiting Lenapes. The Indians attempted to use their well-proven cures for itching and fever, alternating the sweat lodge with immersion in cold water, “but this was to prematurely help oneself to the other world.” The greatest danger during a bout of measles occurs when the patient suffers high fever. He or she is then completely helpless. If the epidemic spreads to a population without immunity, the effects are devastating. Everyone is infected and no one remains with the strength to care for the others. Many thus die from starvation and dehydration. They also became easy prey to other predators. An old Swedish 56 Risingh’s Journal, 174–177; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 127–128; 130–131; on Swedish medical texts see Stina Hansson, “Afsatt på swensko”. 1600-talets tryckta översättningslitteratur (Göteborg: Rundqvists Boktryckeri, 1982), no. 357.

strangely kept and protected

217

colonist remembered: “the wolves then came, lured by the smell of corpses, and attacked those, that lay sick in their huts and caves, so that the healthy had to chase the wolves away with sticks.” Smallpox outbreaks occurred several times during the second half of the seventeenth century. In October of 1661 there was great mortality among the Susquehannocks, and in 1662 the Iroquois were dying in great numbers. “The smallpox, which is the American’s pest, has wrought sad havoc in their Villages and has carried off many men, besides great numbers of women and children; and, as a result, their Villages are nearly deserted, and their fields only half tilled.” Then, in 1663, Indians along the lower Delaware suffered the smallpox and an Indian messenger inadvertently carried the contagion to New Amsterdam. In 1680, the disease ravaged the people living around Fort Orange and in the 1680s a Lenape spokesman told English Quakers that: “as to the Small-Pox, it was once in my Grand-fathers time . . . and it was once in my Fathers time . . . and now it is in my time.”57 It is impossible to give exact figures for the decimation that Lenapes and Susquehannocks suffered due to epidemics. North of New Sweden, on the Hudson River, a nation reported in 1640 that since the arrival of the Dutch, their numbers had decreased to one tenth of the original population due to disease. For the region to the south, an estimate claims that Virginia had an Indian population of 20–25,000 in 1607. In 1700 that number had dwindled to about 2,000, while the non-Indian population had grown to around 100,000. These figures suggest a population decrease of around 90%, a rate comparable only to the Black Death in certain areas of Europe in the fourteenth century. Even though the originally 8–12,000 or more Lenape Indians had suffered epidemics prior to the advent of Swedish ships, the colonists did not notice great losses. Lindeström’s account in 1654 of the villages along the Delaware mentions “a great abundance of Savages.” It is not until the 1690s that the reports talk about great decimation, which was when most of the Lenapes had left the 57 Kalm II, 175, 246; Acrelius, Beskrifning, 103; Jesuit Relations 48, 79; Journal of Jasper Danckaerts, 181; Budd, Good Order, 69; Kraft, Lenape, 211; Grumet, Historic Contact, 62, 221, 236–237; Bergmark, Från pest till polio, 222; a definite relationship has been established proving that a population weak from hunger will more readily succumb to measles, Robert Rotberg and Theodore K. Rabb, eds, Hunger and History: The Impact of Changing Food Production and Consumption Patterns on Society (Printed in The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, vol. XIV, no. 2, Autumn 1983), 506.

218

chapter six

area. It is possible that their dispersed living in small autonomous villages initially protected them against rapid spread of infections. The Swedish population in New Sweden was never great and their relative isolation probably prevented outbreaks of epidemics. At the same time, the existence of the colony hindered the establishment of larger Dutch and English colonies. The greater European population in the area, particularly after the English take-over, and subsequent concentration of Indians in inland regions must have aided the spread of disease. Scholars have estimated that by the beginning of the eighteenth century the Lenape population had dwindled to between 2,400–3,000. The Europeans uniformly regarded the decimation of Indian populations as a result of God’s providence; a view solidly grounded in the writings of the Old Testament. The Swedes did not differ in this respect. That God sent disease seemed obvious as is seen in the letter from Rudman and Biörck quoted above. Laymen agreed and felt that God had protected them. Kalm’s “old Swedes” told that in their childhoods the Indians had been a nuisance, daily coming to the Swedish settlements, demanding to have anything that appealed to them of Swedish goods and tools. The frightened colonists dared not refuse, but recounted with sinister satisfaction that “to all joy some of the Europeans’ children happened to get the measles or smallpox, and when a group of Indians, who before had never heard of this disease came down to them and began in their usual manner to ask for what they wanted, it happened, that some of them were infected and brought the illness or measles along.”58 Disease, in itself, was not capable of destroying the Lenapes or the Susquehannocks. To do that, the epidemics had to enter into an interplay with threats against subsistence, politics, and culture which demolished people’s capacity for food production and distribution as well as the ability to administer to the health of the people. Recovery from epidemics was possible, and often did occur, as long as these other threats against the society’s infrastructure were limited. 58 Kraft, The Lenape, 212; 218f; Kraft, The Lenape-Delaware Indian Heritage, 389–390, 431; Thornton, American Indian Holocaust, 70; Bergmark, Från pest till polio, chapter I; Peter Lindeström, 1654 och 1655, “Beskrifning och karta öfver fort Kristina,” Handel och Sjöfart, nr. 196, RA; Kalm II, 175; Cotton Mather, Magnalia Christi Americana, or The Ecclesiastical History of New England (1702) (Hartford, Conn.: Silas Andrus, 1820); Alden T. Vaughan, New England Frontier: Puritans and Indians, 1620–1675 (Boston: Little and Brown, 1965), 22.

strangely kept and protected

219

Such were the conditions during the existence of New Sweden. Thus, Swedish observers could report epidemics killing great numbers at the same time as they marveled at Indian health. The colonial population itself suffered fluctuations due to diseases and malnutrition, from 120 in 1643 to ninety in 1644, to 185 in 1647, then less than seventy in 1654 and up to over 350 after Risingh’s arrival. The Lenapes and Susquehannocks still remained in charge of their homelands and food was ample. Although afflicted by European diseases enough people with knowledge and experience survived the epidemics to be able to reproduce the traditional ceremonies and subsistence patterns. As the number of whites increased along the Delaware River competition for food sources grew and cattle and pigs destroyed roots and plants important to the Lenapes. The epidemics that came could not be blamed on any particular European people as is apparent in the speech given at a meeting between Lenapes and Quakers at Burlington: “The Indians told us, they were advised to make War on us, and cut us off whilst we were few, and said, They were told, that we sold them the Small-Pox, with the Mach Coat they had bought of us.” However, the Lenapes did not believe the English had brought the disease, since it had been there before there were any English in the country and concluded, “it is the Man above that hath sent it us.” Perhaps this statement indicates that the Indians had come to believe that illness came from the Christian god, proving his strength against the Indians. A loss of faith in the power of the spirits to protect them, as well as a growing difficulty to remain in their old places and procure enough food explain why disease had forced the Lenapes to leave the land around Philadelphia by the time the first Swedish pastors arrived in 1697.59 All exchanges in the Delaware Valley, whether solemn and diplomatic or mundane and ordinary, intended or unintended, influenced and fundamentally altered life conditions for Indians as well as colonists. To deal with these people drew on a store of cultural practices and perceptions that were used to frame these changes in comprehensible patterns. Official instructions and the experiences of 59

James H. Merrell, “The Indians’ New World: The Catawba Experience,” The William and Mary Quarterly 3d ser, 41 (1984), 543, points out the loss of collective memory and history if disease struck a large number of the older generation; “Report of Governor Printz, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 110–116; “Report of Governor Printz, 1647,” in Johnson, Instruction, 121; “Report of Governor Rising, 1654,” NEP, 149; Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 59; Budd, Good Order, 67, 69.

220

chapter six

previous colonial encounters contained in them had little to offer the Swedish colonists and their leaders in this new environment. Similarly, Lenape beliefs and practices regarding health concerns or subsistence strategies could not stem the impact of germs or pigs. What remained was an increased and experimental interdependence and Swedish and Finnish colonists had the most to gain from these associations.

CHAPTER SEVEN

ALIGNMENTS—THE INTERIM YEARS 1655–1682

Swedish acceptance of native customs resulting from infrequent contacts with the home country became even more necessary in the years that followed the loss of the colony, first to Dutch and then English forces. Both Indians and Swedes remained in the region and again the Swedes became middlemen between the new administrations and Lenapes and Susquehannocks. Increasing pressures from white colonization, however, put stress both on the Lenape communities and on the Swedes and Finns who found themselves forced to choose sides. Their skills as traders, interpreters, and their personal contacts with Indians were vitally important for other Europeans in the region and influenced William Penn’s contacts with the Lenapes. It is from the end of this period that the idea of peaceful and friendly relations between Swedes and Indians emanate to become a theme in all later history writing concerning New Sweden. How did the Lenapes and Susquehannocks view the Dutch attack on New Sweden and the subsequent disestablishment of the colony which had in so many ways been an advantageous buffer and partner in trade? Numerous sources connected an Indian attack on Manhattan in 1655 with the Dutch aggression against New Sweden and suggested that the Swedes had incited the Lenapes to act against their adversaries. An urgent letter from the council in Manhattan implored Stuyvesant to return and deal with the perilous situation there. Mr. Willit, one of the Dutchmen, related to the council that “the great chief of the Minquas has been here conferring on some matters with all the afore-mentioned Indians; he thinks that the Swedes have had him bribe these Indians, and that it is through Swedish instigation that these troubles have befallen us in your absence.” According to this letter—with its somewhat ambiguous wording—the Susquehannocks were displeased with the dislodgment of the Swedish colony. This would seem logical considering the large donation of land the Susquehannocks had made to the Swedes only

222

chapter seven

a few months earlier, an offer indicating that the Indians regarded the Swedes as their preferred trading partner and that they hoped to strengthen their own position vis-à-vis the Iroquois through this arrangement. But the Susquehannocks already experienced severe pressure from both Maryland militia and Iroquois war parties, and even if they had made contacts with the Indians attacking Manhattan any direct Susquehannock participation was unlikely. The idea that the Susquehannocks would have bribed the other Indians, at Swedish request, lacks support in other sources and is more likely to be hearsay resulting from coincidental timing. Another rumor asserted that “it is a fact, that in the fall of this year [1655], Fort Casimir was assaulted by more than 500 Indians, instigated, as it is presumed, by the Swedes.” Whether these Indians were Lenapes or Susquehannocks remains unclear, as does the factual basis for the reported presumption. Instead, it appears to be yet another example of the connection increasingly made between Indians and Swedes.1 Relations between Lenape groups in the Delaware and Schuylkill River Valleys and the Swedish colony had been tense for several years before the Swedes were forced to lower their flag at Fort Christina. The official policy of encouraging the peltry trade with the Susquehannocks, seeking to bypass the Lenapes, annoyed the Indians even if Risingh’s reconfirmation of land transactions as well as the colonists’ lasting need for food stuffs continued to offer trading opportunities. Yet the loss of a Swedish colony was unlikely to produce great sorrow among the coastal Indian population who progressed with life much as they had done heretofore. That fall, in 1655, the Lenapes probably staged a large fall hunt, such as the one described by Peter Lindeström. After the harvest of corn and before the winter’s snows began, sending small hunting parties scattering in search of prey, the whole village (or perhaps several) gathered, spread out in a large circle and set fire to the dead leaves and then shot at the frightened animals within the flaming perimeter. They would continue to do so for years to come. As formerly, they gathered together to perform ceremonies and affirm their ties to the land which still gave them sustenance, and they continued, as during the 1 NYHM XVIII, 36. This attack on Manhattan was the beginning of the socalled Peach War, ignited by a Dutchman killing an Indian stealing his peaches, and was just one of many violent clashes between Dutch and Indians. See Trelease, Indian Affairs, 138–147; Hazard, Annals, 196.

alignments—the interim years

223

time of the Swedish colony, to hunt and trade locally with white neighbors. One hundred years later Israel Acrelius would write, basing his contentions partly on interviews with old Swedish settlers, that until ca. 1700 the Lenapes followed their yearly migration routes to the river or to the sea shore to fish, pick clams, and gather berries. Through these three decades from the end of official Swedish colonization to the establishment of Pennsylvania, Lenape life proceeded in important ways along familiar trails. Some movement of longhouse villages higher up in the country was perhaps discernible and occasional outbreaks of smallpox continued to take their heavy toll. Yet village structure, kin groups, and ceremonial and medicinal knowledge functioned and were passed on to the next generation.2 However, it would be erroneous to describe this period as one free from strife and contention with white neighbors, or devoid of change. On the contrary, it is my contention that it was during these decades that Lenapes honed, from their experience with the Swedes, a practice towards colonists and neighboring Indians that contributed to protecting the region from large scale bloodshed and destruction. While the white population in the middle colonies has been calculated at approximately 5000 in 1664, the Swedish and Finnish colonists with little over 500 individuals still made up the majority of the white population in the Delaware Valley well into the 1660s. The European population did not expand much beyond its previous boundaries and there is no evidence of major Indian migrations. It then becomes obvious that the Indians maintained their numerical superiority and that they were a force to be reckoned with. Their support, or at least neutrality, remained a vital concern for both Dutch and English administrations. Land sales and continued trading bear witness to a lasting contact between Lenapes and Europeans. However the period leading up to a large invasion of English settlers preceding and following Penn can be characterized in an Indian perspective as one of continuous and increasing conflict, but as yet manageable within the tribal structure and cohesion. While tension probably diminished between Lenapes and Swedish colonists, it increased in relation to the new Dutch, and particularly the later English administrations. At the same time, trade wars concerning 2 Andreas Rudman to Jacob Arrhenius, Oct. 1697, B.X.1, 63: Handlingar rörande Svenska Församlingen i Pensylvanien, RA; NYHM XX, 18, 103; Kalm II, 289; Acrelius, Beskrifning, 46; see also Kalm IV, 238.

224

chapter seven

the control of the beaver supply as well as superiority in the trade network embroiled Susquehannocks and Iroquois league members, particularly Senecas, in several devastating battles. And in 1661, the dreaded smallpox struck again. The fact that the Swedish colony had ceased to exist was less likely to pose a threat to Lenape ways of life than these conflicts between Iroquois and Susquehannocks. Seneca war parties descended upon Lenape villages as well, and at later times, Lenapes sheltered Susquehannock refugees. In that way the same violent conflicts concerning the fur trade which instigated the Dutch attack on New Sweden came to involve the Lenapes from another direction. The Dutch establishment on the Delaware River sought first and foremost to carry on the peltry trade and dislocate the Swedish competition. Yet within two years of the victory against New Sweden, the West India Company settled a debt to the City of Amsterdam for the loan of a man-of-war used at the siege of Fort Christina by transferring the whole region from Christina Kill to Bombay Hook to the Mayors of Amsterdam while retaining the northern section for the WIC. Merchants in the City planned to open their own venture and entered a profitable tobacco trade with planters in Maryland. The colony was re-christened New Amstel and Jacob Alrichs served as its first director. He died in 1659 and his successor, Alexander d’Hinojossa, quickly established a harsh and controversial rule. Internal friction wracked the two Dutch colonies but conflicts declined somewhat after the whole Delaware region was ceded to the City in 1663.3 The Lenapes immediately contacted the new administration to ascertain that trade would continue as before and to establish diplomatic relations. On December 28, 1655, several sachems of the Lenapes approached the vice-director, Andries Hudde, at Fort Casimir with some proposals. First, they wished to know if the higher prices agreed upon with the former commandant, Dirrick Smit, would be honored. Hudde, who had traded with the Lenapes before, answered that he could not promise anything yet, but wished to do away with 3 Sture Eilertz, “Nova Svecia: Den svensk-lutherska befolkningen i Delawareområdet vid 1700-talets mitt,” (Unpublished paper, Department of History, Uppsala University, 1986); Robert Grumet, “An Analysis of Upper Delawaran Land Sales in Northern New Jersey, 1630–1758,” in Papers of the Ninth Algonquian Conference, ed. William Cowan (Ottawa: Carleton University, 1978), 25–35; NYHM XVIII, xi; PA VII, 670; For the war between Susquehannocks and Senecas, see Jennings, “Glory,” and “Indians and Frontiers,” 216–241; For a rebuttal of Jennings see Tooker, “Demise.”

alignments—the interim years

225

any causes for unrest and discord “and if anything might have been done there through ignorance, it should be regarded as not having been done.” Hudde’s concern may have sprung from his knowledge that men with little experience of the region were now taking over the administration of relations. Frequently in the years to come, Dutch directors and soldiers lacked knowledge of the terrain and the language to communicate well with their Indian neighbors. Secondly, the Lenapes wished to make some alterations in trade exchange rates. Hudde answered, as he had no choice, that they were free to go and trade “wherever their purse enabled them and where the goods were to their liking.” Finally, the sachems requested that they be given the customary gifts, “it would be most appropriate now for the confirmation of this treaty.” The Indians had come to confirm relations, just as they did when Johan Risingh had arrived in 1654, and just as then, they followed their tradition of exchanging gifts as a way to establish an agreement and clear the relationship from contagious influences that would endanger both sides. Hudde lacked goods to present to them, though surely his long presence in the area must have taught him the meaning of this exchange, but declared his desire “to live with them in friendship” and promised to deliver some presents in three days time. The following day Hudde told his people at Fort Casimir about the Indian suggestions concerning trade prices and they accepted and offered contributions in order to continue the trade, all except two men who “prefer to leave the river and cease trading rather than help maintain the peace of this river along with the other good inhabitants.” As this last sentence reveals, peaceful trading relations with the Lenapes was fundamental for the existence of the Dutch population in the colony. In order to maintain this peace, orders were immediately issued banning the sale of liquor and guns to the Indians, orders which had no sooner been proclaimed than they were broken. A little over a year later the council at Fort Casimir expressed grave concern with the inflated prices in the Indian trade. They initiated an attempt to agree on fixed rates and issued orders that banned and punished anyone not obeying the agreements on trade practices.4 The end of Swedish official colonization in America left a sizable Swedish and Finnish population in the region to fend for themselves.

4

NYHM XVIII, 50–51, 60, 72, 76–79, 95.

226

chapter seven

Swedish settlements were primarily located around Fort Christina (renamed Altena by the Dutch) and north of it up to the mouth of the Schuylkill River. When Dutch forces withdrew after their successful take-over in 1655, the Swedish colonists constituted the majority of the white population in the region. The arrival of the ship Mercurius in 1656 further added to that number. Thus, the Dutch kept the official domination on the west bank of the Delaware River while in actual numeric inferiority. The easiest solution for the Dutch authorities was to appoint Swedish magistrates who were formally responsible to the Dutch “schout” (foreman). These magistrates then negotiated the contacts between Dutch authorities and the Swedish colonists. Agreements between Stuyvesant and the Swedes in 1655 and again in 1658 allowed for a relatively independent Swedish population. The Swedes were required to swear an oath of allegiance to the Dutch company but maintained the right to remain neutral in cases of disagreement. At several occasions, Swedes and Finns alluded to this neutrality when their European neighbors entered into conflicts with Indians. Company directors apparently did not trust the Swedish colonists and in 1659 demanded that they should declare their support for the Dutch colony, cease to live in separate congregations, and be unarmed. Nothing came of these demands and attempts to make Swedes move into controlled villages were unsuccessful. Instead, Swedish colonists seem to have found opportunities under Dutch rule to become freemen—similar to the tax peasant status many had coveted in their homeland—as opposed to peasants of the nobility or tenants as had been their status under New Sweden. As freemen they organized into a recognizable “Swedish nation” and as such had better opportunities to influence their situation in relation to the Dutch West India Company. Swedish colonists were successful in refusing to accept oaths of loyalty and new taxes. They demanded recognition of special privileges and declined to follow Dutch settlement directions.5

5

Eilertz, “Nova Svecia,” 12–17; Carl Sprinchorn, “Kolonien Nya Sveriges Historia,” in Historiskt bibliothek V, ed. Carl Silfverstolpe (Stockholm, 1879), 241; PA IX, 628–635; Documents Relating to the History of the Dutch and Swedish Settlements on the Delaware River (hereafter NYCD XII), ed. B. Fernow, in Documents Relative to the Colonial History of New York XII (old ser.) (Albany, 1877), 232; NYHM XVIII, 54–55; NYHM XIX, 104, 191, 342.

alignments—the interim years

227

Indian-Swedish-Dutch relations The expedition that filled the ship Mercurius left Sweden unaware that the colony no longer belonged to the Swedish Crown and its appearance displeased the Dutch authorities. A story began to circulate that the Dutch attempted to stop the ship from sailing up the River and anchoring, but the Indians in the area “who loved the Swedes” banded together, boarded the ship, and guided it past Fort Casimir to Christina. The rumor may be the same one assigned to Lambrechten in 1655 stating that 500 Lenapes attacked Fort Casimir. Other rumors and accusations in the late 1650s indicate Dutch insecurity in their new location in relation to the numerically dominant Swedish and Finnish population. Swedes were alleged to have carried on secret trade and complaints were voiced against them for allying themselves with the Indians and causing trouble. Two men in particular, Sven Skute and Jacob Svensson, were named in this connection. That these two emerged as especially threatening is not strange since both men had extensive experiences in trading and understood and spoke Indian languages. Dutch fear of a possible Swedish return coupled with the new administrator’s need for men who knew the land and could speak with the Indians fostered an uneasy truce between the two groups.6 Jacob Alrichs complained in 1657 to Peter Stuyvesant about his frustrating dealings with Hendrick Huygen, the Dutch former factor in New Sweden. Huygen, according to Alrichs, did not intend to allow the Dutch anything from Fort Christina “unless it could not be used.” The aggravation grew, moreover, when Alrichs who “was of the mind to employ for a year or more a certain Swedish servant who knew the Indian language” and Huygen advised against it stating that “the person ought not to be firmly obligated because he was still a [soldier] in the service of the Crown, and if anything happened, he would have his freedom and be without obligation.” The dispute is interesting in how it illustrates one of the confusing aspects of ethnicity in the Delaware Valley at this time. Hendrick Huygen and Jacob Alrichs were both Dutchmen, yet Huygen clearly associated himself with the Swedish crown and in later situations took the side of the Swedish colonists. He and many others of his contemporaries

6

Acrelius, Beskrifning, 91, 92; Hazard, Annals, 196, 211.

228

chapter seven

in the Swedish colony spoke several languages and the colony had a decidedly polyglot character already before the WIC took over. Yet a “Swedish nation” emerged and Huygen saw himself as part of it, in spite of the fact that he may have been related to the director of the WIC colony on the Delaware, Willem Beeckman. Huygen, of course, had been employed by the Swedish crown and could be described as a mercenary. But that does not account for his loyalties. Rather than language or country/region of origin, which later formed such important aspects of ethnicity, it may have been a position as opponents to an unwanted administration, or perhaps religious affiliations, which shaped a sense of ethnic identity.7 Alrich’s descriptions of relations with Indians also evince insecurities. In 1657, he reported on attempts to open trade with the Susquehannocks. Upon returning from their country one man, Lourens Hanssen, “was treacherously shot and killed by an Indian who took some sewant and other things which he had on his person.” This Indian may have been a Lenape or a renegade Susquehannock since some time later a Susquehannock chief came to make restitution: “Afterwards a Minquaas Indian, who commands at the nearest fort from here in the Minquaas country, came into this colony with many other Indians. They brought some sewant and other things that they had taken from the Indian who had committed the crime, which they wanted to leave with me.” The Susquehannocks appeared eager to reestablish their trading connection on the Delaware River, while the Lenapes may have been disenchanted with a continuation of a pattern which excluded them. Yet, as in the time of New Sweden the Lenapes were indispensable to the Dutch. Letters back and forth between the Delaware directors and Manhattan were practically always carried and delivered by Indians. The European colonists still needed food and in November of 1658, Alrichs informed Stuyvesant of his need for duffels and other goods “of better quality as demanded by the present market” to be able to purchase venison and corn from the Indians. He had received instructions to add land south of 7 NYHM XVIII, 105; NYHM XIX, 318; Eilertz advances the hypothesis that “lutheranism” distinguished the Swedes from other colonists, “Nova Svecia,” 29–30; The most important scholarship to date about Swedishness and the Swedish congregations is that by Daniel Lindmark. His work primarily focuses on Swedish strategies in the increasingly diverse world of eighteenth century Delaware Valley. See Daniel Lindmark, Ecclesia Plantanda: Swedishness in colonial America (Umeå: Kulturgräns norr, 2005).

alignments—the interim years

229

the colony, buying it from the Indians, but Alrichs hesitated. “It was proposed that it would require a parcel of duffels, also coats for the Indians, kettles, mirrors, knives, beads, jews’ harps, etc., of which the majority of these items are unavailable here.” Therefore, he found no point in trying. An exasperated Alrichs explained to his superior: “With respect to your expectation of knowing specifically what merchandise was necessary for the purchase of the land, I wish to say that I am unfamiliar with such dealings because I have never dealt with the Indians in such matters.” Lacking trade goods, experience, and language skills can hardly be thought a fortuitous combination for a colonial administrator. By 1659, the situation sounded much the same as it had under Swedish direction: “I find this place presently too weak, with little heart because of two years of sickness, a bad summer, a harsh winter, a scarcity of provisions without any assistance of ship being sent here . . . I have to be patient until the Lord shall be pleased to grant us some relief or deliverance.”8 The Lenapes also had concerns. The consumption of brandy which official trade bans in no way constrained led to trouble for Indians and whites alike. Upon returning to Altena on a November evening in 1659, Willem Beeckman found most of his soldiers drunk and was informed that several intoxicated Indians acted violently nearby. He sent his sergeant to investigate and he found six Indians who resisted arrest and escaped into the woods. Later that night they returned to steal blankets and a gun. Violence aggravated by alcohol increased. The same man, Jan Becker, who had supplied both soldiers and Indians with liquor continued to do so. In January 1660, two intoxicated soldiers burned an Indian canoe. Indians then threatened to set a house on fire or kill some livestock forcing Beeckman to make immediate restitution. Indian drinking finally led to death. One man, supplied from Jan Becker’s stocks, drank himself to death and was found early one morning in a thicket with the near empty jug beside him. Other Indians, presumably his relatives, threatened to kill Jan Becker who they thought had poisoned the man, but refrained from doing so when another Dutchman confessed to drinking with the man earlier in the night. The dead man was placed on a litter fastened on four large forked stakes in the woods opposite Becker’s house. He could not be buried the proper way, the Indians

8

NYHM XVIII, 106–107, 112, 124, 131, 133, 139, 145.

230

chapter seven

explained: “Some say, since he drank himself to death he was not worthy of the earth, other Indians say he must bemoan the house where he got the drink.”9 For the Lenapes, it was a novel situation. How should they deal with deaths caused by liquor? And how could they handle the dangerous effects of alcohol? To some leaders, stopping the sale of all intoxicating beverages seemed the only solution. The Indians chose to approach the Dutch authorities through the Swedes, which may appear surprising since the latter had frequently sold them spirituous drinks. Probably in this instance these particular Swedish colonists were approached as friends and not as representatives of a European colony. It was such a serious matter that it must be dealt with in a formal, ceremonial manner. Several sachems approached the Swedes living at Tinicum with their request “that the Indians not be sold any brandy or strong drink.” They produced three large wampum belts which they delivered to Hendrick Huygen, telling him that one belt was for the Swedes, one to be sent to Willem Beeckman, and the third for Alexander d’Hinojossa. All three European groups thus received a plea from the Indians, a request accompanied by the most ceremonial of gifts. Willem Beeckman, who related the incident, expressed irritation that the Swedes at Tinicum had not sent the Indians directly to him but instead had acted as if they had authority. However, the request was justifiable and corresponded with Dutch ordinances and Beeckman decided to go to Tinicum and meet with the Indians to discuss the matter. This led to renewed prohibitions, a fine of 300 florins to anyone breaking the law, and an authorization for Indians to plunder anyone who brought them alcohol.10 This was not the first or only case when Swedes appeared as intermediaries or messengers. Finding messengers and mail carriers could be difficult. Sometimes it appears as though a Swede might do as well as an Indian to carry messages between the south and north Dutch colonies. In 1662, urgent matters induced Stuyvesant to order Beeckman to hire a Swede or a Dutchman to carry immediate notices to New Amsterdam. Beeckman’s answer is revealing. He replied “that there were presently no Swedes or Indians to send over; also, that 9

NYHM XVIII, 179–180, 185. For accusations against the Swedes see Hazard, Annals, 219; PA VII, 678; NYHM XVIII, 266, 269. Again in 1668 a renewed Indian request to stop liquor sales to Indians came via a Swede, Peter Rambo. Hazard, Annals, 372. 10

alignments—the interim years

231

none of our soldiers understood the Indian language and would therefore be unfit to send overland to Manhattan.” In January 1660, Willem Beeckman complained that yet again the Indians had disappointed him and not agreed to carry his mail to Manhattan. In this case, Lenape disenchantment may well have resulted from the recent killing of two Indians, supposedly by Dutchmen. A little later two Lenapes and one Susquehannock were murdered on the farm of the now deceased Alrichs by two of his servants. Furious Indians threatened the entire settlement at New Amstel unless some restitution was made. Settlers fled to the town from isolated farmsteads. Beeckman sent an urgent letter to van Dyck, the Swedish schout, and asked the Swedish magistrates to come and be present at New Amstel when the Indians came to discuss the murders, “since they were better acquainted with the nature and customs of the Indians than we newcomers.” The Swedes chose this moment to refer to their neutrality, especially since the Indians “have told them that they should not concern themselves in this affair since the people of Sand Hoeck or New Amstel were not of their people.” Yet later they heeded Beeckman’s plea to assist in order to prevent bloodshed and participated in a conference with the Indians concerning settlement for the murders. A satisfactory agreement was concluded and the Indians withdrew their threats against the Dutch colony.11 Indians—Lenapes and Susquehannocks as well as other nations— also used the Swedes as go-betweens. During the height of the Esopus war with the Dutch in New Amsterdam, the Esopus sent messages and presents to their relatives in the south using Jacob Svensson to deliver the message to Stuyvesant that they had 1800 warriors and would march against him if anything was done against them. Jacob Svensson, who had been Johan Risingh’s most valuable trader, apparently spoke both Lenape and Susquehannock and was called upon on several occasions to serve as interpreter. In May 1660, he appeared as translator with a Susquehannock sachem who requested goods from the Dutch in order to open trade. Jacob Svensson was in no way in the service of the Dutch as interpreter but pursued his own agenda as a trader. He was said to have presented the chief with ten fathoms of cloth, four blankets, a gun, and some other objects in order to promote his own trade. He eventually became quite successful

11

NYHM XIX, 305; NYHM XVIII, 186, 188, 189.

232

chapter seven

and even supplied the Dutch with necessary provisions and goods. He also demonstrated his independent status in other ways such as refusing to return a runaway slave to Maryland in 1662.12 Indian wars in surrounding regions touched both Swedes and Lenapes despite their attempts to stay out of conflicts. In 1661, Seneca war parties killed twelve Lenapes and according to one report attacked Swedish/Finnish settlements in Maryland. Chickenpox (smallpox?) had struck the Susquehannocks and in combination with Seneca attacks, it led to a disastrous trade year. This time the Indians carried the message to the Dutch. They also informed Jacob Svensson and Andries Hudde that the Lenapes did not trust the English, saying, “the English have killed some of us and we some of them.” The state of war between the Susquehannocks and the Senecas left the others in the region badly frightened. As a consequence, the Lenapes had to forgo their winter hunt in 1661/62 because of fighting which threatened to embroil them and thus had little to trade with the following spring. Irritation continued among Lenapes during 1662. Unidentified Indians killed a Dutchman, probably as retaliation after an Indian had been injured near New Amstel earlier in the year. The Dutch believed that the murderer must be a Lenape Indian, while other rumors fingered a Seneca living among the Susquehannocks. The conflict dragged on throughout the year and at the end, Swedish interpreters again emerged as intermediaries. On December 9, five Susquehannock chiefs arrived in Altena with their retinue. The Swedish magistrates requested to come to Altena with Huygen and Svensson as interpreters, probably on the invitation of the Susquehannocks. These were eager to restore good relations with the Europeans for reasons which became increasingly clear. The murderer, they said, was a young captive Seneca. They then pointed out that they had always avoided violence against whites “on the contrary, they have always shown them friendship and have always let themselves be employed as mediators in disputes between Christians and other Indians.” Now they desired to maintain an alliance with Governor Stuyvesant and his representatives. The Dutch would have preferred to punish the young Seneca according to their laws, but the Susquehannock delegation reminded them of a recent murder of an Indian which had been ignored and the Dutch representatives

12

NYHM XVII, 193, 201, 204, 244; PA VII, 639; NYHM XIX, 309.

alignments—the interim years

233

decided on a more prudent course and accepted the Indian invitation. The two sides exchanged gifts, as was customary, and when they had finalized the settlement, the real reason for the Susquehannocks’ visit became apparent. The chiefs informed the Dutch that they had firmly resolved to attack the Senecas the following spring and that 800 Black Minquas were arriving to their aid. “Therefore, they requested that we Christians not be negligent in furnishing them with materials of war, for which they would pay.” The 1663 battle did take place although the Senecas may have precipitated the attack by attempting a siege on the Susquehannock fort, but the latter managed to rout their enemies taking ten prisoners and killing an unknown number.13 It is difficult to ascertain just how much this struggle between the Susquehannocks and the Iroquois affected the Lenapes. At the battle in 1663, 100 Lenape warriors were said to be among the Susquehannocks in their fort. English support for the Senecas apparently angered the Lenapes, who by now obviously viewed the Susquehannocks as their allies and friends. In the fall of the same year, a Susquehannock delegation visited the Mohawks to offer gifts and propose peace, but the Mohawks rejected the offer killing five, among them two Lenape women. Unrest in the area continued throughout the summer. The Esopus, a Munsee speaking group occupying the Hudson watershed area in present New York State, attacked Manhattan. They sent delegations to the southern Lenapes to ask for support and assistance. Again, the Lenapes used their channels in the Swedish community to communicate with the Dutch. A sachem, Erwehong, with a party of men had passed the Swedish settlement at Upland on their way north and while stopping there asked Peter Cock to relay to Beeckman that they would not take part in a war against the Dutch but would instead do their best to arrange a peace.14

13

NYHM XIX, 235, 243, 264, 306f, 313–314, 321; The Lenapes’ comment about violence between them and the English probably referred to the killings of four Maryland colonists, which caused great strain between Dutch and Maryland leaders and Indians, before the Dutch as mediators were able negotiate a settlement. Jennings, “Indians and Frontiers,” 223; Jesuit Relations 48, 77–79. 14 NYHM XIX, 337.

234

chapter seven Indian-English-Swedish relations

In 1664, the area in the Delaware Valley that Europeans had colonized changed hands again. Charles II’s expansive grant to his brother James precipitated an expeditionary force under Sir Robert Carr, which after a brutal struggle seized control of the Delaware region. For nine years following that event the area remained under New York control, to be briefly recaptured by Dutch troops in 1673 who then lost it almost immediately as a result of the 1674 Treaty of Westminster. The colony continued under New York administration until 1680, when the Duke of York recognized the Quakers Edward Byllynge’s and John Fenwick’s claim to the east bank of the River. Then in 1682, William Penn arrived to take his domain into possession. The English who took over the rule and renamed Altena New Castle were under instructions to seek peace with the “Swedish nation” and continue the existing system. With them began a centralization of administration and magistrate courts. Local courts, now comprised of both Dutch and Swedes, continued to rule according to Swedish law and tradition. Magistrates remained Swedish. However, from 1664 the English began to outnumber the Dutch and Swedes in the area. English fiscal policy, particularly concerning land rents, agitated many Swedes, and in 1669 led to the so-called Long-Finn rebellion. Some eighty Swedes and Finns were arrested but dealt with mildly. In a 1673 meeting between English authorities and Swedes the latter’s privileges were renewed.15 Neither Lenapes nor Susquehannocks had reason to celebrate the change of administration. Their previous experiences with English colonization, particularly Maryland, did not bode well and they had expressed their distrust on several occasions. There may have been cause for this unease. While Dutch directors in general recognized their lack of knowledge, advised caution, and sought the aid of experienced traders and interpreters, the English administrators followed a more confrontational course, at least this is the conclusion to be drawn from their reports to the governor in New York. To their defense, perhaps, it should be mentioned that the various English colonies, with overlapping and contestable charters and grants, found

15 NYHM XX, xi–xii, 1, 2; NYCD XII, 462, 508; Eilertz, “Nova Svecia,” 21; PA IX, 628–635.

alignments—the interim years

235

themselves in controversies where alliances with certain Indian groups compounded the violence. The Susquehannocks in particular, contended with efforts to draw them into colonial schemes. In 1670, for example, a war brewed on the banks on the Delaware River. The Indians informed the English colonists that the reason they threatened war was that “where the English come they drive them from there [sic] lands and bring for instance the North Virginia and Maryland and feare if not timely prevent [. . .] shall doe so here.” Local officers, William Tom and Peter Alrichs (son of Jacob), advised Governor Lovelace to tread a cautious path and come to the region to treat with the Indians. The Europeans were, they proclaimed, “most certaine under the power of the Heathen and no power to defend.” Thus they needed a reprieve: “if your honor could spare so much time as to come over to treat with the Sachems without dispute the reverence to your person would procure us 4 or 5 yeares respect and by that time the numerous issue by the assistance of god wilbe able to defend themselves.” However, the governor must be careful not to antagonize the Indians. It would be best, said the report, not to come with more than twenty-five men or the Indians might view it as a provocation and attack. War did not break out that summer, but apprehensive colonists secretly improved the protection on the fort at New Castle, hoping not to arouse the suspicions of the Indians. Citizens of New Castle agreed to pay for the fortifications with their own labor and means. Swedish colonists Israel Helm, Peter Rambo, and Peter Cock were among the signers of the proposition—all of them men who at times served as interpreters or intermediaries.16 That fall, in connection with the harvest ceremonies among the Lenapes when several sachems gathered at a village called Annockeninck, an English delegation of colonists among whom were Helm, Rambo, and Cock, traveled to confer with the Indians concerning past years’ hostility and violence, which had resulted in the deaths of several white people. The Indians appeared to be in no hurry to hear the colonists’ grievances but finally agreed to try to find the culprits and wished to atone for the deaths by offering wampum. The colonists stated that they could not accept this form of retribution because their “great sachem . . . was not satisfied with money

16

NYHM XX, 11, 15.

chapter seven

236

but wants you to bring in the murderers.” Some Susquehannocks were present in the gathering and the Lenapes now asked them not to kill any more Christians, after which the Indian and English delegations exchanged gifts. The Lenapes explained that they did not want war and brought to the attention of the Susquehannocks that “Christians are living here and Christians are living there, and . . . since they lived scattered among the Christians and if they made war, where would they get their gunpowder and lead, along with many more similar things.” This admission however, did not imply compliance with the English demands. They vaguely promised to look for the guilty men but evaded direct questions and denied any culpability in one recent case. The meeting, in fact, followed the common Indian pattern for diplomacy without suggesting any sense among the Indians for a need to obey colonial orders.17 Although no records remain, we may surmise that Indian councils convened and debated how to respond to the English presence. Even if the sachems spoke for peace not all Indians agreed. A group of some twenty warriors passed by Finnish colonist Anders Andersson’s house saying they would do them no harm but that they marched towards New Castle intending to kill all inhabitants there and burn it to the ground. The attack did not occur, or at least there is no record of it, but the English remained uneasy. Governor Lovelace apparently decided that a war on the Indians would be the best response and William Tom and Peter Alrichs set about preparing for a campaign. Since Tom lacked experience in the affairs of the region and did not know any Indian language, he sought out the Swedish magistrates at Upland to discuss the matter with them. The Swedes hedged, saying that it was too late in the year to begin such a campaign, but Tom argued vehemently for war: all the Kings interest in this part of the world depends upon itt (for this river lying in the middle and the worst to be wonne from the Indians by reason of the broken lands and [thickets] which are a shelter for them against any Christian force without helpe of other Indians) if deserted Mary land has noe strenght [sic] to follow them there . . . [while] the Indians as is dayly found not caring bee itt middle winter to march 4 or 5 hundred mile for 2 or 3 heads of Haire much more when they can have that with plunder.

17

NYHM XX, 17–18.

alignments—the interim years

237

The Swedish magistrates responded with a letter to the governor explaining that they would not be able to feed themselves or their horses and cattle if they went to war now, but by spring they could lay up provisions and fight the Indians with the assistance of the governor’s men. They promised to recommend outlying settlements to move to concentrated towns at Passajung, Tinicum, Upland, and Verdrietes Hook and endorsed the plan of establishing the fronts at Mattinaconck Island and Wicacoa. Finally, they recommended hiring fifty or sixty Northern Indians “who will doe more than 200 men in such a warr.”18 Again, nothing seems to have come of these belligerent plans and the situation calmed down. However, the interesting question in this context is why the Swedish magistrates participated in planning such a venture when at earlier conflicts between Dutch and Indians they had claimed neutrality. As before, their advice was sought because of their experience and language skills. Why would they now decide to side with the English? Several explanations are possible. First, since nothing came of the suggested campaign, their excuse that they had insufficient provisions may have been a ruse to defer war to a later time, in the hope that these plans would lapse. However, there is nothing that speaks for this solution. A second proposition seems more probable. Two of the three Swedish signers had held magistrate positions since 1657 and Peter Cock had also been collector of tolls since 1663. These men had begun to establish a position in the community and had accumulated some land. They no longer identified with the opposition, may not have viewed themselves as a marginalized Swedish/Finnish group, and in all likelihood they did not live “like Indians” without access to European goods as did some of their former countrymen. Their skills and experience gave them an important role to play in the English colonial community and they had everything to gain by offering their support. They maintained, however, cordial relations with their Indian contacts and it may have been lucky indeed for them that nothing came of the proposed war on the Lenapes. In May 1675, Governor Edmund Andros from New York visited the Delaware colony. His agenda included efforts to assure the neutrality of different Lenape groups. Indians, with their sachems Renowewan,

18

NYHM XX, 19, 30, 49–50.

chapter seven

238

Ihakickan, Ketmarcas, and Manichty from the New Jersey side of the river arrived to be present at an English trial against an Englishman, James Sandylands, who stood accused of killing an Indian. They came in the company of their Swedish interpreters and old acquaintances Lasse Cock, Israel Helm, Peter Rambo, and Peter Cock. Andros took advantage of the gathering to initiate a friendship treaty. He asked the Indians not to kill cattle and swine and in return, he would ensure that the English did them no harm, “but Justice shall be done, as they might see today in the Case of James Sandylands.” After exchanges of wampum and colonial gifts the trial began. In the previous fall, James Sandylands had entered into a brawl with an Indian named Peeques and ended it by throwing the Indian out of his house. Peeques had been severely injured by the fall and died some time later. The governor and magistrates apparently decided to make Sandylands’ trial a showcase for the Indians to observe English justice at work. The court sent for the Indians living in the vicinity of Upland, where Sandylands’ home stood, to present their witnesses. Lasse Cock and Israel Helm personally fetched the Indians (who remain nameless in the colonial documents) and Helm acted as interpreter. Sandylands pleaded not guilty and when the charges and witnesses had been heard, the court asked Helm to explain to the Indians “[t]he difference betweene wilfull murder and accidentall.” After deliberations, the jury found the prisoner not guilty and ordered that he be cleared of all charges “by Proclamacion.” What the Indians thought of the trial and its conclusion has not been preserved in the historic record. However, it is reasonable to speculate that they remained unimpressed with this display of colonial justice. Willful or accidental causes did not change the fact that Peeques had died, and in Indian justice, his death demanded restitution. Did the Indians just quietly accept the English verdict? Again we do not know, but the exchange earlier in the day does not suggest the presence of a submissive Indian population. The friendship treaty with Andros developed as a ritual ceremony, dealing with friction in the Indian way, seeking through the sacred exchange of wampum to clear the channels between peoples, and ended in ceremonial dancing. This clearly represented an Indian approach to conflict, and it was facilitated through the intermediary actions of their trusted Swedish acquaintances Cock, Rambo, and Helm.19 19

NYHM XX, 67, 73–77.

alignments—the interim years

239

Israel Helm, Peter and Lasse Cock, and Peter Rambo continued with their services as interpreters and the pattern which became discernible with the 1670 support for war plans prevailed. They became, as the Swedes had been earlier, indispensable to the colonial administrators and officers because of their contacts and language skills, but they had now clearly chosen their loyalties. They still considered themselves Swedes but they belonged among the white population and followed colonial policies. The remuneration for their services established them further in the white community. In 1677, Israel Helm aided surveyor Matthias Nicolls with a land purchase and Helm was promised 200 acres of land in payment. In 1677–78, these men for the first time helped Quakers purchase land from the Indians. Together with commissioners for London and Yorkshire Quakers, they explored on the east side of the river for possible sites for two future colonies. Due to their fluency in the Lenape tongue Helm, Rambo, and Cock aided the Quakers in concluding deeds of purchase for what was to become Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester counties. By the end of the 1670s, some Swedish colonists had thus established themselves firmly as interpreters and intermediaries with both Lenapes and Susquehannocks. Earlier experiences had forged connections between Swedes and Indians, which developed into some form of trust and mutual respect. When William Penn arrived to establish his colonial domain, he could build not only on these available skills but also on this pattern of relationships. His administration thus inherited a good probability of continuing ordered and relatively peaceful relations with the Lenape Indians. Without these existing networks, he would have found it extremely difficult to gather the Indians to conferences. In fact, not infrequently the contacts between Indians and Quakers resulted from an Indian initiative relayed through their Swedish contacts.20

20 NYHM XX, 175; NYHM XXI, 275; Peter S. Craig, The 1693 Census of the Swedes on the Delaware (Winter Park, Florida: SAG Publications, 1993), 70–71; For Swedes as interpreters see also “The Records of Upland,” in John Fanning Watson, Supplement to Watson’s Annals, Am 3011, Historical Society of Pennsylvania (HSP); for Swedish identity see names on letter requesting Swedish pastors in 1693, in Acrelius, Beskrifning, 211; Robert W. Harper, Friends and Indians in South Jersey (Harrison Township Historical Society, 1981), 60–61; Memoirs of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania II:2, 27; for indications that operating outside this contact system was unsuccessful see NYHM XVIII, 243; James O’Neil Spady, “Colonialism and the Discursive Antecedents of Penn’s Treaty with the Indians,” in Friends & Enemies in Penn’s Woods.

240

chapter seven

Men like Rambo, Helm, and the Cocks could tap into a generation of reciprocally useful relations between Swedish/Finnish colonists and Indians. But the men (and women) who established the closest contacts did not act as interpreters. Maybe they lacked the cultural capital necessary to negotiate the English world and be trusted as intermediaries. Their networks nonetheless offered vital connections for the work carried out by official interpreters. Recent historical research emphasizes the roles of “cultural brokers” in the meeting between Indians and whites. Their skills did not necessarily place them in a position of high status, but they were indispensable to the other parties involved. Some of the interpreters seem to have used their personal influence to establish their contacts, or such is the impression the sources give us. Yet, although men like Rambo, Helm, and the Cocks had personal acquaintances among the Lenapes they were not the only ones and their whole operation depended on the status of the “Swedish nation” as a separate group which posed no threat to the Indians. If the Indians had associated them with the English without any differentiation, it is unlikely that their remarkable position as wilderness negotiators would have persisted.21

Swedish colonists in the wilderness How and when did this special relationship between Swedish/Finnish colonists and Indians develop and what can it tell us about interethnic contacts in the Delaware Valley? Close Indian contacts became a necessity for the stranded Swedish and Finnish settlers after 1655. Ships from the home country had been scarce during the period of active colonization but now they lived in almost total isolation. When their stores of European goods and materials had been used up many saw no other option than to adopt Indian habits. Men began to wear leather vests and trousers while women dressed in skirts and

Indians, Colonists, and the Racial Construction of Pennsylvania, ed. William A. Pencak and Daniel K. Richter (University Park, Pa: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004), 18–40. 21 For discussions on cultural brokers see Margaret Connell Szasz, ed. Between Indian and White Worlds. The Cultural Broker (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1994), 16–18; Daniel K. Richter, “Cultural Brokers and Intercultural Politics: New York-Iroquois Relations, 1664–1701,” The Journal of American History 75:1 ( June 1988): 40–67; Merrell, Into the American Woods, 106–107.

alignments—the interim years

241

shirts made out of skins. All wore a type of homemade, soft leather shoes that appear to have resembled moccasins. For blankets and bedcovers, they used animal hides from bears, wolves, and the like. When Pehr Kalm arrived in Pennsylvania and New Jersey in 1748 he heard stories about how the Swedes had become like Indians from some of the old settlers who still remembered from their childhood that “since they had no other people than wild Indians to associate with, they declined more and more in gestures from Europeans and old Swedes, and began to resemble more and more the Indians, so that when the English arrived here the Swedes, for a major part, were not much better than wild Indians.” Their frequent associations with the Lenapes also gave them opportunities to participate in Indian feasts and gatherings. Måns Keen, grandson of one of Printz’ German-born soldiers, remembered how he and his father had taken part in a feast at the time of the ripening corn. The Indians had prepared large amounts of bear’s meat and deer meat, crushed corn together with beans and made cakes and bread which, Keen asserted, tasted delicious. The celebration occurred in the “house of the king,” apparently a long house, and the meal had been followed by dancing. Swedes adopted Lenape knowledge of medicinal and edible herbs, often with the Indian names intact. They learned ways to plant and prepare corn, squashes, and pumpkin as well as how to hunt and dress the birds and animals of the area. The Lenapes acquired some European technology in tool making and building, got European cooking wares, tools, and weapons, and adopted European textiles and shoes. At times each sought refuge in the homes of the other as when Finnish participants in the LongFinn rebellion hid out among Indians, or when Indian children could be found in Swedish homes.22 This and other instances of continuous and mundane contacts between Swedish/Finnish settlers and Lenape Indians help explain the intermediary position of the reliable and indispensable interpreters of Swedish origin. A number of Swedes and Finns made their living, or significant parts thereof, in the Indian trade. Long after the end of official Swedish colonization men who had learned from the first generations of traders, such as Hendrick Huygen and Jacob

22 Kalm II, 139, 289–290, 412; See Jordan and Kaups, American Backwoods Frontier, 88–93.

242

chapter seven

Svensson, carried on contacts and exchanges and thus continued learning and using Indian languages. Måns Cock, a son of interpreter Peter Cock, made a part of his living as an Indian trader as well as assisted Penn in land negotiations. So did Israel Helm, but many of the Swedish settlers left the Delaware and traded also in New Jersey and the Chesapeake area. In this function they came to assist not only Penn in his Indian treaties, but also Lord Baltimore. Gotfried Harmer, Israel Friend, and John Hansson Steelman all facilitated Maryland negotiations concerning Indian land. The latter made his career in Indian trading. His first trading post, at the fork of the Big and Little Elk creeks, became known as Sahakitko. His commercial activities, however, brought him into trouble with Pennsylvania jurisdiction, and when in 1701 he sought to establish another trading post on the Lehigh River in Pennsylvania Penn had his goods confiscated and informed him that Thou hast often promised to visit this place in order to treat with me about thy Indian trade, but hast as often disappointed me. Thy present management thereof amongst us is directly contrary to our Laws. I have therefore stopped thy goods intended for Leehay, till according to thy frequent engagements thou come hither thyself and give further satisfaction than thou has yet done.

Steelman evidently found it wise to visit immediately with Penn and brought along several leading Indians from the Susquehanna River, aiding Penn in a peace treaty between him and the Indians. Another family which established and maintained far-reaching contacts with their Indian neighbors originated with Olle Stille and his wife who arrived in New Sweden in 1641 after Olle had received two court sentences in his native parish. They first settled at Techoherassi (on the north side of Ridley Creek) and continued a life of independence, in 1653 signing a complaint against Printz’ dictatorial rule. Stille became a magistrate at the Upland court in 1657, but he is never mentioned as interpreter at any of the Indian treaties. Yet he maintained constant and cordial relations with Indian neighbors. Indians often visited him in his home and “were fond of the old man.” His large, black beard caused consternation and ridicule: “of his thick black beard they made a monster, and gave him a strange name thereof.” We cannot know the extent of his relations to the Lenapes but it is interesting that one hundred years later a Delaware named Isaac Stille figures prominently in interactions with the English in Jersey and Pennsylvania. He served several times as interpreter

alignments—the interim years

243

between Indians and English and between different Indian nations. He is first mentioned as living at the Forks of the Delaware but he also had interests in southern New Jersey. His origins and lineage remain obscure but whatever his relations to Swedish colonists, by the 1750’s he clearly identified as an Indian. Stille’s grandson Peter Peterson Yocum, who also worked in Indian trading and spoke several languages, aided in the negotiations of Indian treaties for William Penn. In 1697, the Wicaco church census mentioned that an Indian boy, the same age as Peter and Judith Yocum’s oldest son, lived with the family.23 The occurrence of continuous and mundane contacts between Swedish and Finnish settlers and Lenape and Susquehannock Indians help explain why many of the former could maintain intermediary positions as reliable and indispensable interpreters. Many years of adjustment to life in rural settlements with little or no contact with Europe had taught them excellent survival skills, yet these did not guarantee them a respected position in the English colonial world. It is evident that this close association between Indians and Swedish colonists was not only an advantage. In fact, the ties and similarities placed both groups as lower class in the concepts of colonial society. What was viewed as crude behavior and stubborn independence branded both Indians and Swedes as a lower sort. Some of the Swedish and Finnish colonists were viewed as an embarrassment both by other Europeans and by members of their own ethnic group seeking to advance in colonial society. Kalm reported that the Swedes had a bad reputation among the English as a consequence of their love for rum and liquor. Others accused the Swedes and Finns of charging exorbitantly for their services, and being unreliable in general, in addition to their drunkenness. When William Penn landed in the New World, he became dependent on Swedish intermediaries in his contacts with the Indians, yet his verdict over the Swedes is well known:

23

block quote from PA 1st ser. I, 144–147; Peter S. Craig and Henry W. Yocom, “The Yocums of Aronameck in Philadelphia, 1648–1702,” National Genealogical Society Quarterly 71:4 (Dec. 1983), 257–258; Craig, 1693 Census, 30, 43, 46, 70–71, 126–127; Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 78; on Stille, see Acrelius, Beskrifning, 47; Grumet, “Minisink Settlements,” 206–207; Wallace, King of the Delawares, 212, 243; Other men who at one time or another served as interpreters were Peter Jochimsson, Anders Friend, Måns Jonasson, Jöns Gustafsson, Peter Ericsson, and Hendrick Jacobsson Falkenberg (originally from Holstein).

244

chapter seven they are plain, strong, industrious people, yet have made no great progress in culture, or propagation of fruit trees, as if they desired rather to have [ just] enough than plenty or traffic. But I presume the Indians made them the more careless by furnishing them with the means of profit, to wit, skins and furs, for rum and such strong liquors.24

In spite of, or perhaps because of, their crudeness many Swedes assumed a role as middlemen between the new administrations and Lenape and Susquehannock Indians. Their skills as traders, interpreters, and their personal contacts with Indians were vitally important for other Europeans in the region and undoubtedly influenced William Penn’s contacts with the Lenapes. However, pronouncements such as this one stung. Men, who offered their indispensable services both to the men under the Duke of York and to William Penn, may have sought to establish their respectability through adherence to their own church, with their own pastors, preaching in their language. The Swedes, noted Thomas Paschall in 1683, had lived in the country for forty years, at ease but “ordinarily Cloathd,” a statement which clearly indicated their inability to establish status as well as maintain boundaries, “but since the English came, they have gotten fine Cloaths, and are going proud.”25 In 1697, three Swedish pastors arrived in the colony, armed with bibles and ABC-books, officially sent out under the auspices of the bishop of Skara, Jesper Swedberg, to tend to the Swedish flock. The renewed New Sweden-mission came as a response to a letter signed by thirty Swedish colonists in Pennsylvania expressing their desire for the proper Swedish way of preaching God’s word and administrating the sacraments. They also feared losing the Swedish language

24

Penn, NEP, 237. For references to Swedish interpreters and negotiators in Penn’s treaties with Indians see Acrelius, Beskrifning, 121, Craig and Yocom, “Yocums of Aronameck;” Kent, ed. Pennsylvania and Delaware Treaties, 58–64, 87–91; Coates list #6, 19, Cadwalader Collection, HSP; Minutes of the Provincial Council of Pennsylvania (MPCP) I, 334–335, 340, 372–373, 435–437; MPCP II, 15, 253–255, 531, Memoirs of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania 3:2, 131–138; PA 1 ser. I, 47–49, 62–65; Negative comments on Swedish settlers: Kalm II, 159; Journal of Jasper Danckaerts, 142; NYHM XX, 93; XXI, 299; Augustine Herrman, NEM, 315–316; A curious and perhaps significant detail is found in The Pennsylvania Gazette from Dec. 24, 1735. Two men were sought after for a theft in Kent Co., Delaware, and one of them was “a tall Fellow, of a Swedish swarthy Complexion.” Swarthy is not usually a word used to describe generally blond Swedes and is more likely a reference to a character reputation; Craig, The 1693 Census, 18; Penn, NEP, 237; Paschall, NEP, 251. 25

alignments—the interim years

245

unless teachers arrived who could instruct their children. An estimated 1200 persons spoke Swedish in 1697, constituting over 5 % of the total white population in the area and more than 10 % of the rural population. The numerically and politically dominant Swedish-Finnish population from the 1650’s had become a minority. Although they had maintained certain special privileges, they no longer possessed the influence they once had. With this renewed link between Sweden and America the colonial “Swedish nation” continued its existence as a distinct ethnic group until the end of the eighteenth century. The independent status of the Swedish colonists which developed under Dutch rule had persisted under the various English administrations. By the 1680s, pressures from the quickly increasing English population and perceived threats to land holdings induced in some of the leading Swedes a sense of insecurity about their position in the new land. The unfair treatment of which some of the settlers complained heightened their perception of themselves as a nation set apart and led to the ethnic mobilization evident in the letter to Sweden in which they expressed their desire to have Swedish pastors and Swedish education. Perhaps the most obvious aspect of “being Swedish” in the new country consisted not of language or place of origin but of religious affiliation. Being Swedish meant being Lutheran.26 The years following the fall of the Swedish colony and the arrival of Penn in many ways made up an interim period in the lower Delaware Valley for both Swedish colonists and Lenape Indians. The colonists were forced to contend with new authorities under consecutive Dutch and English administrations. Some colonists moved westward, perhaps settling with Indians, creating family connections, but they are lost to the historical record. Others stayed in the area and became part of the English community, served it with their skills, and when forced to choose sides found that their allegiance lay with other Europeans and not with the Indians. Many surely balanced in between as long as it was possible. The Lenapes sought to maintain their lifeways in the Delaware Valley and increasingly used their

26 Eilertz, “Nova Svecia,” passim for discussion of the renewed links between old and new Sweden; Mattias Tydén and Ingvar Svanberg, “I nationalismens bakvatten,” in Bryta, bygga, bo, ed. Gunnar Broberg, Ulla Wikander, and Klas Åmark (Stockholm: Ordfronts förlag, 1994), 226–227, for an interesting view on what constituted Swedishness during the great power epoch.

246

chapter seven

Swedish contacts as intermediaries. Through the Swedish links, the Lenapes ensured a significant influence on the pattern of negotiation and agreement in the Valley at least until the end of the century. Their flexible political system, autonomous village settlements, and these links to Swedish go-betweens offered the Lenapes a certain amount of protection from an increasing white population, diseases, alcohol, and war. The Susquehannocks dwindled in number more than the Lenapes, and their connection with Swedish colonists could not help them in their constant conflicts with surrounding white and Indian enemies. When William Penn arrived, Lenapes still lived in scattered villages throughout Lenapehoking, while displaced Susquehannocks together with some refugee Lenapes and Shawnees had withdrawn to the town of Conestoga on the upper Susquehanna River.

CHAPTER EIGHT

STORIES—SWEDISH COLONIAL ENCOUNTERS IN A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

New Sweden and Lapland—two Swedish colonies? Whether one defines colonial expansion as the process of peopling and cultivating land by encouraging migration from the core area of a state, or as the conquest, control, and exploitation of areas beyond the colonizers primary territory, both New Sweden and the Lappmarks can be described as Swedish attempts at establishing colonies. Likewise, if one focuses on colonization as a struggle over the hearts and minds of people by way of education, missionization, and legal intervention, the two regions provide us with examples of such strategies. Can the comparison between the two attempts point towards certain processes and events in these encounters that add to our understanding of colonial interaction and of Swedish, Lenape, and Saami history? I think so. The seventeenth century by no means marked the beginning of Swedish-Saami contacts, but it contained intensification of the efforts to bring them under the control of the Swedish Crown. With Karl IX followed a concrete policy of integrating the Saamis, a policy which I argue meant that Lapland’s status came to resemble that of a colony. This policy consisted mainly of three parts: taxation, education, and conversion, all three important measures in dealing also with other subjects, but the effort and the royal protection differed from elsewhere in the realm. This period of intensification did not prove to be easy. For reasons of trade and defense, the Saamis had to be kept as Swedish subjects. Their radically different culture proved a problem. They had no a priori respect for the Swedish crown, laws, and religion. Somehow this had to be inculcated, and the regents chose a method later adopted by English kings and American presidents towards Indians, as that of protectors of this group. This benevolent stance, paired with an emphasis on civilizing the Saamis would hopefully open this alien population to the influence of the colonizing culture. Swedish official policy towards the Saamis accorded

248

chapter eight

with an ideology that emphasized the kingdom as an organic structure in which each member had its designated role. If subjects fulfilled their part, the Crown with its official power performed its role as protector. The disciplining program carried out throughout the country through the agencies of law, church, and taxation appeared relentless and punished heavily those who transgressed. To this extent, the policy did not differ in regards to the Saamis. The New Sweden Company commenced as a trading company and its main objective was to trade and make a profit for its financial backers through the establishment of a colony. Queen Christina issued specific instructions to the first governor, Johan Printz, and these primarily contained policies for maximizing trade returns. The Indians only entered into consideration peripherally, although the Queen and her chancellors realized that they were necessary trading partners. The instructions mention Indians in four contexts. Swedish administrators should treat them with “humanity” in order to protect the colony from Indian violence, the governor should establish good trade relations with them through offering better prices than surrounding colonies did, every opportunity should be grasped to influence the Indians with true Christian religion and civility, and land should be bought from the Indian owners. Governor Printz apparently did not find his instructions sufficient. He wrote several letters to Chancellor Axel Oxenstierna and to his friend and benefactor Count Per Brahe asking further advice. Several of these letters dealt with the policy towards Indians. Per Brahe was particularly eloquent on the subject and applied the same theory towards Indians as he had towards the “uncivilized” inhabitants in the northern regions of Finland, of which he was governor. He placed emphasis on benevolent treatment, education, and religious influence through Swedish church ceremonies and exemplary living by the colony’s leaders. It is through these clarifications that we may glimpse the parallels that Swedes made between alien populations in various parts of the realm.1 Thus, the Swedes did not arrive in the New World with a wellformulated policy towards the native inhabitants. Yet, well-formed ideas concerning the Indians’ place in the hierarchy existed and

1 “Instructions for Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 68, 79–81, 86–87, 96–97; “Brahe to Printz, November 9, 1643,” in Johnson, Instruction, 156.

stories—swedish colonial encounters

249

guided the expectations and sense of obligation in the Swedish colonial leaders. The use of the word civility in instructions both from the Queen and high-level administrators in Sweden suggests a hierarchical concept of society as well as of cultures. It was a Swedish duty to extend the laws, religious obligations, and behavioral expectations of a society marked by civility. However, the ideology of the state also emphasized the necessity of bringing all subjects into the pact with the Almighty in order to persevere as a Christian nation. This meant, of course, that subjects of the Swedish state were more important to influence than Indians, who could not be viewed as proper members of the Swedish realm. In New Sweden, trade was to begin with the only major concern and, consequently, policy aimed at regulating Swedish-Indian contacts developed in an ad hoc fashion. Swedish colonial policies have little to say about how those meetings unfolded.

The question of land, trade, and cultural practices Swedish attitudes towards land in Lapland and in New Sweden could hardly have been more different during the first half of the seventeenth century. In northern Sweden, land existed in plenty and throughout the seventeenth century, direct competition for land remained local and scattered. The Swedish nation state, represented by the Crown, concerned itself with sovereignty, which in the concept of the time emanated from taxation. Oral accounts suggest that conflict regarding taxation and autonomy had been violent in previous centuries, but during the seventeenth century as a whole, records indicate that Saamis had accepted a status as subjects to the Swedish Crown. Yet Saamis offered no unqualified acceptance. Their acquiescence depended on the Crown fulfilling its respondent obligation to protect those who paid their tribute. Although the expansion of the judicial system and legislation must be seen as instruments in the process of disciplining the subjects, the work of integrating the entire nation under the same laws proved difficult to achieve. Throughout the century, courts retained the prerogative to judge according to local tradition where national legislation wanted. This became evident in the North where courts moved from consisting of appointed magistrates, to consisting almost exclusively of Saamis. Through this agency, then, Saami concepts concerning land use and transactions

250

chapter eight

prevailed, while the courts could also serve as forums for complaints directed against local administrators. This also influenced the efforts of the courts to resolve conflicts between Saamis and colonists. Following upon the discovery of silver and copper in the Lapland mountains, the Crown sought to encourage settlers to move into Saami territory through generous offers of tax exemptions and “start-help.” Few peasants, however, availed themselves of the opportunity and no large-scale immigration resulted from this policy. The Saamis probably viewed a minor influx of sedentary settlers as an advantage as farmers and Saamis aided one another in times of scarcity. Different Lappmarks, however, felt pressure from settlers in varying degrees. In Kemi lappmarks, for example, the courts dealt with numerous cases where Saami villages complained that Finnish settlers illegally moved onto their land and threatened their livelihood with their slash-and-burn cultivation, while other areas hardly saw any colonization activity during this century.2 In Kemi lappmarks, as elsewhere, the authorities generally took the Saami side, but possessed little power to evict the Finns. While the courts supported Saami legal rights to land, changing fiscal policies and the Crown’s interest in the northern forests foreshadowed limitations on Saami ownership. Mining enterprises also demonstrate paradoxical consequences for Saamis. On the one hand, they presented serious threats to adjacent Saami populations. To escape the duties at the mines Saamis moved from their lappmarks and villages. The pressures probably caused internal conflicts as well, when Saamis revealed the existence of lodes to the Swedish authorities. Often richer Saamis could buy freedom from services at the expense of poorer people who suffered greatly from these demands. Other times, however, Saamis supported one another in withholding information from Swedish prospectors.3 Yet, the occurrence of precious metals in the mountains in the north also strengthened the position of some Saamis because of their knowledge of where to find lodes and because of the need to treat them with caution to ascertain that they supported Swedish territorial claims against Denmark-Norway. Examples show, I suggest, that the Saamis endured a forceful Swedish presence in certain regions and 2 Fellman, Handlingar och uppsatser III, 5, 18, 31, 35; Hoppe, Den äldsta fasta bosättningen, 77. 3 Court at Arjeplog, 1704 (Dombok för Västernorrlands län 22, RA).

stories—swedish colonial encounters

251

at certain times, but that they used available channels to make their displeasure known. They were not unaffected by state efforts, but neither were they passive nor helpless. In fact, Saami choices set limits for what the Crown and its representatives could achieve in the North. Using royal decrees and letters as an argument, they could pressure the Crown into fulfilling its role as protector and their movements across the mountains exacted a powerful influence on Swedish officers to respect mountain Saami requests in particular regarding trade and land issues. In New Sweden, establishing a foothold on the land remained a primary concern throughout the span of colonial administration. Without safe access to strategic land areas, no trade could be conducted successfully. The need for the best locations pitted Europeans against one another and the Swedes had to device ways to argue against the pretensions of seasoned colonizers. Swedes could in no way claim discovery and learned from the Dutch the practice of purchasing land from the Indians, writing and signing deeds as confirmation. Both Swedish and Dutch legal concepts of the time could allow for native land possession, a right not automatically erased through royal charters, but the primary value of the land deeds were their usefulness against rival European claims. The Dutch use of a deed first influenced the English in Plymouth in 1633. Although English monarchs continued to pretend that they could dispose of land in the New World according to their whims, deeds became, in reality, the most common proof of European land rights. The practice of acquiring deeds to parcels of land as opposed to claiming a royal grant may also indicate the realities of military strength. In the Delaware Valley, there were other and more compelling reasons for a Swedish land policy emphasizing purchase. There, as elsewhere in North America, Europeans depended on Indians for access to land. The Lenapes populated the riverbanks quite densely and when the Swedes arrived, tribes in the area had already begun fighting for access to the European trade. The Lenapes welcomed a Swedish trading post on their land and they allowed the Swedes to locate on their land so long as they could provide trade goods. When these were lacking, as was often the case in New Sweden, the Indians demonstrated their displeasure by burning abandoned houses and threatening the existence of the entire colony. The strategic significance of land was thus directly connected to trade and both Lenapes and

252

chapter eight

their inland neighbors, the Susquehannocks, attempted to manipulate land transactions to their benefit. Both Lenapes and Susquehannocks clarified through their actions and words that they meant to be in control of who settled on their land, and where. Through donations, they sought to locate Europeans to areas of their choosing, and the conditions frequently included a demand for exclusive trade and mutual protection. Stockholm policies held little power on the banks of the Delaware River. Queen Christina discovered this when she attempted to donate company land to one of her officers and this ran into problems with Indian practices. New Sweden could not enforce Swedish feudal land tenure and had to adopt the policy of purchasing land from the Indians, who were designated as “rightful owners.” An unexpected consequence of this was that Swedish officers developed one of the strongest arguments for Indian ownership of land anywhere in North America. It was not planned; it grew out of necessity and an assessment of the real power relations in the area. Governor Printz expressed doubt of the efficacy of deeds. Conquest would, he argued, firmly establish ownership and control. However, this position held no realistic possibilities and Printz soon demonstrated that he had learned how to employ the deeds against adversaries, as the exchanges with Winthrop in 1643, and Hudde and Stuyvesant in 1650 indicate. When Johan Risingh arrived in 1654 he began immediately to renegotiate deeds to the colony and sent them home to Sweden as proof. He found the colony in a weak position after years of neglect. In his journal, he strongly defended the primacy of Indian rights to land, and this position strengthened after the Dutch attack on the colony. His reasons were likely to protect himself from reproach for the loss of the colony, but the fact remains that he forcefully argued for Indian possession and for legal measures being the only justifiable means of extinguishing the same.4 For the Lenapes, land constituted the primary resource with which to entice Europeans into trading with them, and it is therefore not surprising that it is in these circumstances that internal Lenape friction becomes evident as sachems began to act individually to reap trade benefits. Conflicts between Lenape kin groups and villages

4 Jennings, “Dutch and Swedish,” 14–15; Trelease, Indian Affairs, 40; “Instruction for Governor Printz,” Johnson, Instruction, 68; “Report of Governor Printz, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 117; Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 91.

stories—swedish colonial encounters

253

developed as a consequence, as well as disrupting the traditional spiritual bond between the Lenapes and the land. In this case, however, the conflict of cultural values provides the key to understanding the process. Some Indians saw an opportunity to manipulate the European desires to their own, or their own group’s advantage. Yet European predisposition and policy to view men as owners and chiefs, and to seek out individual men to negotiate with, disregarding the influence of women on production and policies of the villages or the importance of the council’s unanimous decisions, offered these men hitherto unaccustomed chances to advance personal strategies. It is within the context of these conflicts embroiling both Indians and whites that we must place the two attempts to tie Swedes closely into alliances with Lenapes and Susquehannocks respectively. The meetings in 1654 and 1655 both followed a format of diplomatic negotiations and practices that established a group of strangers as kin. Risingh, realizing the importance of both connections, nonetheless lacked the wherewithal in terms of a steady supply of trade goods with which to uphold the Swedish end of the agreement. His disappointment is starkly real, yet perhaps these links had a greater impact than he, or his contemporaries could have anticipated. Both Lenape and Susquehannock Indians continued to honor pacts with individual Swedes throughout the century and these friendships bore fruit in later negotiations with the newly arrived Quakers. A near century of relatively peaceful relations between Native Americans and arriving colonists was no small feat and the interactions along the Delaware River between Lenapes, Susquehannocks and Swedes no doubt formed a significant precedent for this development. If Swedish colonial practices concerning recognition of native land title seem unintended and a consequence of the interactions and relative balance of power, the opposite at first sight may be said to characterize Swedish trade relations with Native peoples. This was such a central concern that much deliberation went into instructions, planning, and execution of this trade. In Lapland, Swedish Kings had sought to gain control of the trade and regulate it on a northsouth axis since the middle of the sixteenth century. Using the market places in the different Lappmarks to create a nexus for Swedish influence was part of this strategy. Attempts at punishing off-market trade demonstrate the importance of excises and goods from the north. The Saamis accepted this organization, but also protested successfully when it proved inconvenient. The simultaneous trade in an

254

chapter eight

east-west direction, as well as local bartering, continued to challenge Swedish authorities while at the same time adding important items to the market trade, such as dried fish from the Norwegian coast. The barter between forest Saamis and the local population formed part of a subsistence pattern, and sources speak of this trade being conducted by “poorer” Saamis. Swedish attempts to stem this exchange, to fine or imprison Saamis for vagrancy and begging, were in line with the ideology of separate trades. As was the case with land, mountain Saamis had more power to enforce their conditions than forest Saamis did. Their traditional trading contacts were threatened by Swedish legislation and their subsistence practices rendered them more vulnerable to Swedish assimilation pressures. The existence of mountain Saami silver treasures suggest that the trade between the coasts was profitable and that some reindeer herders were in a position to take advantage of that. Instructions to the governors of New Sweden emphasized the trade with the Indians and stipulated its regulation. The New Sweden Company was to maintain a monopoly on trade and the traders operated as company agents. Later, as the Crown took direct control of the colony, other interests vied with trade for dominance, but New Sweden remained a trading colony. Mainly due to the lack of provisions from Sweden, trade flourished only with the aid of English merchants in New England. Europeans in the New World shared many trade strategies, and most of them operated from trading posts located on paths to the interior tribes. All colonial leaders attempted to control the trade, or maintain monopolies for their companies. They relied on Indian traders to bring their furs to the posts and carry out their transactions at these locations. Colonial leaders also followed each other in attempting or desiring to eliminate the coastal Indians, whom they considered useless for the trade. The Swedish position forced them to make certain adaptations. Due to the irregularity of their supplies of trade goods, Swedish colonists could not simply wait for the natives to come to them. Instead, the governors would send their men to find the Indians as soon as shipments arrived. This necessity compelled many of the Swedish colonists and traders to learn enough of the geography and the languages to be able to act as interpreters and messengers for later administrations who lacked this knowledge. Tension between the European colonies over trade issues led to accusations and confrontations. All denounced each other for trading guns to the Indians. Each colony viewed the

stories—swedish colonial encounters

255

gun trade of their neighbors as dangerous to their own security, but they all found that Indian demand forced them to continue. Not only did Swedish trade efforts antagonize the Dutch in New Netherland and the English in New Haven, the English colonies struggled with each other as well. One of the most bitter controversies developed between Virginia and Maryland and ended with the demise of the beaver trade in the Chesapeake Bay. Similarly, the Dutch-EnglishSwedish competition for the trade with the Susquehannocks in the late 1640s practically ruined the trade for all involved.5 Three facts seem to be of special importance in understanding the trade relations during the middle of the seventeenth century. First, Lenapes and Susquehannocks did not need the Swedish trade for their survival. Second, Sweden did not need the Indian trade for its economic survival. Third, the colonists were entirely dependent on the Indian trade for survival, as well as it providing them with their reason to be there. These facts resulted in the Swedish settlers and traders being the weak link. They were expendable and trade would make or break them. This situation forced the colonists to bargain both with Indians and with the home government. Desperate calls for measures can be read in the governors’ reports home, as well as in the behavior of individual traders who cheated and traded with forbidden items, such as guns and liquor. A conclusion of this is that if there had not been a definite interest from the perspective of Lenapes and Susquehannocks, the Swedish colonists would not have persisted at all. They would not have been able to relate accounts of solemn gatherings with promises of friendship and support or offers of partnerships in trade and defense. The Lenapes and Susquehannocks welcomed the Swedish trading presence. They knew

5 On Dutch trading see Trelease, Indian Affairs; Simon Hart, The Prehistory of the New Netherland Company. Amsterdam Notarial Records of the first Dutch voyages to the Hudson (Amsterdam: City of Amsterdam Press, 1959), 17, 18, 22, 34, 38; Van Cleaf Bachman, Peltries or Plantations. The Economic Policies of the Dutch West India Company in New Netherland 1623–1639, The Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, 89 (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1969); Kupperman, “Scandianvian Colonists,” for the irony of official competition between the colonies and cooperation in the trade; Fausz, “To Draw Thither,” 45, 61–64; on accusations and competition “Report of Governor Printz, 1647,” in Johnson, Instruction, 133–134; Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 225, 227; NEM, 190, 195; Hazard, Annals, 94–95; Plantagenet, “Description,” 25; Davies, North Atlantic World, 273–275; See Zimmerman, “European Trade Relations,” 67 for a summary on competition and accusations in the Delaware Valley.

256

chapter eight

the value of European trade goods, but could also see the possibility of controlling trade through manipulating the European colonies. The Susquehannock Indians actively sought a new trading partner after the eviction of William Claiborne from Kent Island. They had fought several wars against coastal populations in order to secure their access to the European trading posts and they controlled the interior supply of furs. The Swedes actively courted the Susquehannocks with, among other things, supplies of guns and ammunition. A trade network developed, involving interior tribes, Susquehannocks, Swedes, and English merchants. Both Susquehannocks and Swedes found it beneficial and began to see each other as necessary partners, but only as long as the Swedes could supply goods. During the long intervals when Governor Printz struggled to assemble trade stocks, the Susquehannocks moved to establish connections with Dutch traders. A different trade developed between Lenapes and Swedes. The latter needed corn, meat, and other foodstuffs for their survival, but nevertheless considered this secondary to the fur trade. Some Lenapes probably responded to Swedish requirements by increasing their maize production. They were able to use maize, together with land, as a useful tool in acquiring trade goods in spite of the fact that the beaver supply diminished rapidly in the coastal region. Swedish lack of trade goods and their insistence on favoring the Susquehannocks proved frustrating to the Lenapes. The council in 1645 to determine what to do with the Swedish colony followed as a response to this situation. In 1654, the Lenapes also took over the middleman position in the beaver trade, taking furs from interior tribes (probably including Susquehannocks) directly to Manhattan where they fetched better prices. This arrangement did not satisfy the Susquehannocks who answered by donating land to the Swedes, in order to establish a direct trade link. It is quite possible that the if-only syndrome I have identified in Swedish sources had a corollary among the Susquehannocks. If only the Swedes could have established themselves as a reliable counterpart, if the Swedish crown had mounted an expedition to take back the colony from the Dutch, maybe the Susquehannocks could have contended with the Iroquois confederacy for supremacy in trade for decades to come. As it were, the Susquehannocks’ miscalculated, or acted on their only option, and both they and the Swedes found themselves beset from all sides and their

stories—swedish colonial encounters

257

trade cooperation reduced to a mere footnote in the history of colonial North America. Early on in the seventeenth century, King Gustavus Adolphus expressed concern for the spreading of the Protestant faith to both Saamis and Indians. His concern for the poor souls in the north who knew nothing of their salvation led to his support for the first pastors to work among the Saamis in Umeå and Piteå. Likewise part of the attraction of the colonial venture that Willem Usselinx proposed to the King was its insistence on bringing civility and Christian religion to those who lived ensnared by abominable heathen idolatry.6 The missionary work in the Lappmarks represented one form of influence on Saami life ways that had as its goal a complete transformation. It came to effect every Saami individual, as they were all required to participate in church services during the annual visits to the market places. During most of the century this presence intruded only little into the everyday lives of Saamis, but with the tightening of orthodox control in Sweden in the 1680s and the King’s discovery of the scant success of the missionary influence in the Lappmarks conflicts increased. The reports from Swedish ministers and the periodical “purges” against those Saamis who practiced their ancient rites demonstrate a determination from the Swedish side to integrate Saami families and villages in line with state policy. The church and the judicial system, as representatives of a centralized power, attempted to control and regulate intimate aspects of individual subjects’ lives. This, however, also held true for the rest of the Swedish peasantry, whose superiors forcefully admonished them to discontinue old folk practices and rites learned in the catholic era. All Swedish subjects had to do their part to uphold the contract between God and the nation. Policy makers hoped that the establishment of parishes and the building of chapels would accomplish this among the Saamis. But this is where conflicts emerge most clearly between Saamis and Swedish officials. The attempts to force Saamis to abandon their culture led to stress within the Saami communities that should not be minimized. One can summarize the Swedish integration strategies to involve teaching and education, backed with destruction of drums and seitar, and use of the legal system to punish those individuals

6

Jacobsson, Svenskar och indianer, 3–16.

258

chapter eight

who did not comply with the new religion. It becomes clear that Saamis, particularly those dwelling in the mountain region, ably defended their culture against the intrusion. Verbal resistance was accompanied by evasive strategies and sometimes outright force in defense of cultural and religious practices. Swedish officers and clergy at no time had the capacity to enforce complete compliance, and their fear of Saami power—especially magic—prevented many of them from carrying out their orders. However, the pressure was not similar in all Lappmark regions and whether conscious or not the state devised a strategy of dividing Saami resistance to colonization by employing different approaches to forest and mountain Saamis. This policy exacerbated differences among Saami villages and resulted in full-blown patriarchal measures further dividing Saami people during following centuries. Likewise, in America, all colonists emphasized the importance of spreading Christianity to the Indians. Many believed that a colonizing effort could not succeed unless devoted to this end and thus blessed by God. Converting Indians meant, to all these concerned, the adoption of European civilization. Civilization, and the state which embodied it, relied heavily upon concepts of justice and law. Thus, all colonial powers emphasized that their law, whether English, Swedish, or Dutch, should prevail in the colonies and include all those living in the area, regardless of origin. The ability or willingness to carry out such a policy varied among the colonies.7 In New Sweden, an interest in spreading both the gospel and Swedish legal institutions suffused the language of colonization, but specific instructions emphasized the necessity of treading with care in relations with Indians as well as with European neighbors. Instructions to the Swedish governors in New Sweden emphasized the extension of Swedish law to the new country. My investigation of the interactions between Swedes and Indians shows that in practice the governors always permitted conflicts to be settled according to Lenape law. Governor Printz verbally emphasized Swedish control in legal matters, but also in this respect lacked the power to enforce it. The examples of conflicts between the different nations demon7 Andrews, Trade, Plunder and Settlement, 31; Kupperman, Settling With the Indians, 159, 166; Vaughan, New England Frontier, 235; “Instruction for Governor Printz,” in Johnson, Instruction, 79; Trelease, Indian Affairs, 37–39; Francis Paul Prucha, The Great Father. The United States Government and the American Indian (abridged edition) (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1986), 3–4.

stories—swedish colonial encounters

259

strate that the Lenapes expected and received Swedish compliance with their terms. This is particularly clear in the cases of murder, where the Swedish governors accepted the Indian custom of offering wampum as restitution. English and Dutch colonial officers were less willing to adjust to Indian practices, although Amsterdam directors also ordered prudence in concern for the colony’s safety. English charters were even more explicit in spelling out the rights of the proprietors to employ English justice. The royal grant to Lord Baltimore gave the power to ”pursue the Enemies and Robbers . . . and (by Gods assistance) to vanquish and take them . . . to put them to death by the Law of warre.”8 Towards Indians, this led to a tendency to react to all violent encounters with the maximum of force. The objective of English security in the wild new land motivated this policy. Lord Baltimore’s answer to the Wicomese Indians in 1634 that offenders must be punished by English law conformed to this attitude. Indians showed no interest in conversion to Christianity and Swedish governors did not have the power to enforce an observance of Swedish religious practices. Both Lenapes and Susquehannocks did engage in verbal debates with Swedes concerning religion, but neither Indians nor Swedes put much effort into converting the other. Like the Saamis, Indians forcefully defended their worldview, often in similar words.9 Cultural contacts between Indians and Swedes contained both beneficial and troublesome aspects. An exchange of knowledge concerning cooking, hunting, and fishing benefited all. Native cognizance of medical herbs definitely aided and impressed the Swedes. The Lenapes acquired tools and wares such as copper kettles, axes, hoes, and fishhooks, which alleviated their work. On the negative side came diseases, which ravaged both populations but that had greater consequences for the Lenapes to whom many of these illnesses had hitherto been unknown. This was also the case with alcohol, which Lenapes came to view as a curse. During the existence of New Sweden, however, Lenape groups were capable of feeding themselves and maintaining their own world view against that of the 8

“Charter of Mary Land,” NEM, 107. See James P. Ronda, “‘We Are Well As We Are’: An Indian Critique of Seventeenth-Century Mission,” The William and Mary Quarterly 34:1 ( January 1977): 66–82; Gunlög Fur, “Svar på tal. Indianer och samer bemöter europeisk kolonisation,” in Universitet 2000. Föreläsningar hållna under humanistdagarna 15–16 oktober 1999, ed. Christina Angelfors, Gunilla Byrman, Magnus Nilsson (Växjö: Rapporter från Växjö universitet 3, 1999), 20–28. 9

260

chapter eight

Europeans, and could withstand the attacks of both alcohol and disease. This marks a distinct difference to the situation in Lapland. The Saamis had the same resistance to European diseases as Swedes and were often, because of the climate, protected from them. Neither did alcohol present a greater problem to them than to Swedes in general. This of course, may not suggest a difference in the amounts of alcohol consumed or the physical effects of intoxication, but rather differing attitudes and perceptions of its place in society. It may be that the demarcation line ran between Swedes and Indians and their patterns of alcohol consumption on the one hand, as representatives of inferior groups in an English context, and on the other hand official colonial English attitudes to drinking. Such a conclusion can be drawn from the fact that Swedish sources do not once mention actual problems in either Indian or Saami society resulting from the misuse of alcohol, while such comments are evident in English (and Dutch) sources concerning both Indians and Swedes. Yet, against this must be heard the pleas from Lenape sachems, frequently through their Swedish contacts and aimed to the Dutch or English administrations, to end the sale of liquor to Indians. It is, however, extremely difficult to draw any conclusions from the existing sources whether alcohol in itself constituted the problem in the eyes of Indian sachems or whether it exemplified a symptom of disintegrating cultural values and internal stress. Alcohol consumed within the village feast tradition may not have presented a problem, as Biörck’s account of designated non-drinkers suggest, while brandy as a trade item, in the context of the colonial trading station constituted a threat and a disintegrating and impoverishing influence. Saami and Lenape responses that influenced and determined the formation of Swedish activities can now be summarized. Both Saamis and Lenapes actively defended their land base against unwelcome intrusion. In Lapland, this was accomplished through the local courts, while in the Delaware Valley the Lenapes adhered to their customs in reclaiming and reselling land. Native legal customs predominated in mutual concerns, although this is most obvious in New Sweden, where the unequal balance of power forced the Swedes to accept Lenape practices. Susquehannock and Lenape active participation in the trade was necessary for the Swedish colony. Turbulence in the surrounding colonies and tribes either helped or hindered the Swedes in their sensitive position as middlemen in the fur trade. Swedish officials failed to restrict the trade to designated market places in America as they had done in Lapland. Saami complaints led to solu-

stories—swedish colonial encounters

261

tions which at least favored the mountain Saamis. Finally, both Saamis and Lenapes showed a lack of interest in the Swedish civilization and Christianization goals. Although some Saamis became pastors, schoolmasters, and farmers, most Saami subjects offered major opposition to cultural integration, while the Lenapes found no compelling reason to pay attention to these efforts. Internal criticism within the clergy and the renewed efforts under Karl XI suggest the severity of this lack of success. At the end of the 1680s, integration had occurred to the extent that Saamis appear to have regarded themselves as subjects to the king. This clearly differed from the Lenapes who by no means considered themselves connected with the Swedish state. In spite of Swedish declarations, Saami and Lenape villagers considered themselves autonomous in their homelands. They continued to trade where it was most advantageous to them, resulting in the incorporation of Swedish tools, weapons, and alcohol into viable, independent cultures. Native belief systems continued to prevail and guided choices concerning culture, religion, and education. In the everyday experience of life in New Sweden or in Lapland, the distinctions and expectations from noblemen in the highest echelons of society must have appeared extremely distant and unrealistic. Colonizers experienced considerable doubts when they observed that they, in spite of supposedly superior religion and technology, suffered from undernourishment and short life spans.10 Moreover, their spiritual superiority appeared doubtful. Pastors in the New World, such as Erik Biörck, were noticeably upset by debauched practices of their countrymen which undermined their efforts to influence Indians to conversion: “Thus the poor heathens remain unconverted for the sake of the depraved lives of wicked Christians.”11 Similar views were heard from the Lappmarks where one of the major obstacles to Christianization of the Saamis appeared to be the deplorable morality of Lappmark pastors. “One chief reason why they [the Saamis] so stifly adhere to their superstition and impiety,” wrote Schefferus, “proceeds from the miscarriage of their Priests.”12 An inquisition concerning persistent idolatry among the Saami, held in 1686 on royal command, concluded that one of the major causes was that

10 This experience, though real enough, was also subjective. We must not forget that Indians suffered heavily from hitherto unknown diseases, and therefore Indian weakness must have been quite apparent as well. 11 Biörck, in Swedberg, America Illuminata, 70–71. 12 Schefferus, History of Lapland, 33.

262

chapter eight

the pastors were worn out in the wilderness, fell into depravity, and were thus incapable of leading the Saamis to the right and only faith. Other ministers, like Jonas Aurén in New Sweden, were profoundly affected by their conversations with Indians and found among them superior religious philosophers. Thus, unfolding cultural encounters shaped the form of Swedish colonialism. With hindsight we know that both Saamis and Lenapes lost self-determination and their landbase. Three hundred years ago this could not have been predicted.

Swedish-Indian relations in an American perspective European relations in the area may in part explain the design of Swedish policies towards Indians, but they do not explain how these policies developed in practice. Swedish policy formulations clearly resemble that of their Dutch contemporaries. Dutch-Indian relations developed as a result of trade contacts and governors received no instructions from the West India Company. Willem Kieft (governor 1639–1645) was in many ways Johan Printz’ counterpart. Both exercised a stern discipline among their own and acted confrontationally when dealing with neighboring Indians, while courting the tribes that offered pelts for trade. Yet, they also differed in their practices. In 1643, Willem Kieft involved his colony in a protracted and devastating war with most of the tribes in the Hudson Valley. Kieft’s superiors disapproved of his leadership and started an investigation that led to his removal. The reactions of the company directors came, however, after the fact, which undoubtedly caused much damage to Indian-Dutch relations. Peter Stuyvesant, Kieft’s successor, pursued a more appeasing policy. Kieft and Printz did not have the same resources. More Dutch ships than Swedish crossed the Atlantic with trade goods. The military strength at their disposal was sufficiently equal however, discouraging Kieft from using force to evict the Swedes from the lucrative trade in the Delaware Valley.13 These 13 See P.C. Emmer, “The West India Company, 1621–1791: Dutch or Atlantic?” in Companies and Trade. Essays on Overseas Trading Companies during the Ancien Régime, ed. L. Blussé and F. Gaastra, Comparative Studies in Overseas History, 3 (Leiden: Leiden University Press, 1981), 94, who states that the West India Company developed not one single policy in relation to Africans or Indians; Trelease, “IndianWhite Contacts,” 137, 140; Trelease, Indian Affairs, 37, 60–84; Jennings, “Dutch and Swedish,” 14; Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall, 69–72.

stories—swedish colonial encounters

263

considerations make it tempting to interpret the differences between European-Indian relations in New Netherland and New Sweden as a consequence of differing policies or personalities of its leaders. Many restrictions compelled Printz to refrain from employing violence against Indians, among them were the unwillingness or inability of company directors to deploy more soldiers to the colony. However, the most compelling reason for Printz’ relatively peaceful relations with Indian neighbors is to be found not in Swedish policies or lack of support, but in the actual relations of power in the region and in the actions of his counterpart, the Lenapes. Printz’ infamous request for more soldiers “until we broke the necks of all of them in this River” has been treated as the first Swedish policy of extermination or as proof of Swedish racism or sense of superiority. Printz’ feelings on the matter may be difficult to ascertain, but we can suggest a broader picture of the environment from which the quote emerged.14 Printz began governing the colony in a time of great insecurity and violence in the immediate surroundings. Indians fought against the Dutch in New Netherlands and against the English in Virginia and Maryland. Fighting and hostility upset trade and spread to the Swedish colony. Printz reported that Indians had killed people in the Swedish colony and two of the forts, at Christina and Tinicum, had been “made so strong that those who are therein need not fear for any Savages, even if they were several thousands.”15 The tensions certainly aggravated the Swedes and Printz expressed himself as a soldier. He wanted manpower to be able to fight back and determine, once and for all, who owned this river. Did his belligerence stem from an ideology of superiority towards the Indians? To understand his context we should look forward one year in time, to 1645, when Mattahorn and his son Aggahorn convened the meeting to discuss future relations with Swedes and other Europeans in the region. The council met for several days and the participants expressed divergent opinions. Mattahorn argued vehemently against allowing the Swedes to remain on Lenape land since they had no

14 Printz did not receive any reply to his demand of two hundred more soldiers “to break the necks” of the Lenapes. “Oxenstierna to Printz, September 7, 1647,” in Johnson, Instruction, 168–169; as extermination policy see Englund, Ofredsår, 499–500. 15 “Report of Printz, 1644,” in Johnson, Instruction, 112.

264

chapter eight

trade goods to barter. Other men answered that they held nothing against the Swedes and that they expected good trade as soon as a ship arrived from Sweden again. This line of argument eventually won support although Mattahorn initially received backing from several other council members. If Mattahorn and the men who followed his line were convinced that the Swedes would become useful trading partners, or if they just realized the futility of further argument remains obscure. He may have accepted that in a society without a central, hierarchical authority there existed no institutional power which could command an army so that if one could not muster sufficient support for war plans one must accept that one lacked resources to implement such designs. What is clear, however, is that no one, Swede or Indian doubted the Lenapes’ capacity to wipe out the Swedish colony if they decided to do so. Johan Printz had to live in the real world, not in one sketched out in the minds of initiators in Stockholm. He saw his colony’s weakness and disadvantage and he protested to his superiors in the only way he saw fit—by asking for men trained to fight to alter the power balance in the region to Swedish favor. He must have known that the likelihood of the Company directors deploying two hundred more soldiers to add to the twenty he had under his command was infinitesimal. His plea did not indicate a planned extermination program; it constituted a roar of frustration. Initially, both the New England and Virginia colonies declared their good will towards the Indians, but they soon alienated them through the practice of claiming great areas of land by royal charter. In contrast to the Swedish instructions, the English colonial charters generally contained full authorization for the grantees to use military force. The grant to Lord Baltimore, for example, clearly empowered the proprietor to use force and suggests that it was to be expected: “the incursions as well of the barbarians themselves, as of other enemies, pirates and ravagers, probably will be feared, therefore we have given . . . full and unrestrained power . . . to wage war, and to pursue, even beyond the limits of their province, the enemies and ravagers aforesaid.”16 Colonial leaders and colonists in Virginia displayed the same confrontational readiness and expectations. Hostilities were anticipated and thus it seemed reasonable to prepare for full military defense and English colonists relied upon 16

“Charter of Mary Land,” NEM, 107.

stories—swedish colonial encounters

265

their previous experience with militia. Men with military backgrounds governed the English colonies or were hired by them. During the period of harsh rule in Jamestown, all three of the leading men were seasoned soldiers with experiences from Ireland and the European continent. Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth employed professional soldiers, Miles Standish and John Underhill, to lead their defense. A larger white population perhaps made violence seem a possible alternative while in New Sweden open confrontation almost certainly would have led to annihilation of the Swedes. The personal connections between the British subjugation of Ireland and subsequent colonization in America clearly indicate preparedness to employ brutal violence. However, the same must be said of Swedish officers who arrived fresh from the Thirty-Year war, as cruel as any war in Europe’s history.17 Instructions, then, or previous disposition for violence, add little to our understanding of why English and Swedish experiences with Indian contacts came to differ so markedly in America. It is more helpful to look at the modes of existence in the colonies. While settlement and land tenure constituted a major reason for English exploitation in the New World, the Swedish venture depended almost entirely on trade. We have seen that the Lenapes, in the case of Swanendael and of the council in 1645, were willing, and even eager, to welcome European settlement if it included abundant trading opportunities. They viewed mere agricultural settlements as undesirable. English emphasis on settlement probably triggered Indian hostility and this in combination with white readiness for violent conquest could only result in bloody clashes. Not only did Swedish instructions stress trading but the lack of continuous contact with Sweden left 17

Wilbur Jacobs, “British Indian Policies to 1783,” in Handbook of North American Indians IV: History of Indian-White Relations, ed. Wilcomb E. Washburn (Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1988), 7–9; Prucha, Great Father, 3–8; Nicholas P. Canny, “The Ideology of English Colonization: From Ireland to America,” in Colonial America. Essays in Politics and Social Development, ed. Stanley N. Katz and John M. Murrin (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1983); Bruce Watson, “Fortifications and the ‘idea’ of force in early English East India Company Relations with India,” Past & Present 88 (Aug 1980): 75, 81, 86. Watson argues that the English arrived with an expectation of ‘fear’ as the key to Anglo-Indian relationship. The English were afraid of Indian resistance and therefore sought to redress this imbalance by making Indian rulers fear them; Douglas E. Leach, Arms for Empire. A Military History of the British Colonies in North America, 1607–1763 (New York: Macmillan Company, 1973), 9–11; for an understanding of the cruelties during the Thirty-Years War in terms related to today’s European conflicts, see Englund, Ofredsår.

266

chapter eight

the colonists in such a precarious position that they had to develop a role as middle men between others who could supply goods. Their balancing act did not threaten the Lenapes, and at times provided an actual preferred partner for the Susquehannocks. Whatever the inclinations of Swedish governors and officers, initiating violence could not have been an option.

Stories and their power An interpretation that disregards any particularity in Swedish official policy or predisposition towards Indians as a sufficient explanation for peaceful relations, seems to receive support from the generation of Swedes who ended their days in English Pennsylvania but remembered their time as children in New Sweden. Their memories and stories from the colony, retold to Pehr Kalm contained a mixture of dread and pride. They evoked an atmosphere of apprehension, in which Swedish colonists had to carry their guns with them while plowing their fields for fear of Indian attacks. However, they also with apparent relish passed on stories which no longer contained any shreds of reality but served to counteract their sense of dependence and weakness. One of these myths, told by a man whose father came on the ship Mercurius several years after the end of Governor Printz’ reign, recounted how Printz cruelly made fun of Indian ignorance. Printz, said the old man, had fired a cannon when a number of Indians were present and then gave the cannon to the surprised natives. He told them to walk in a row in front of the gun to pull it, then told another Indian to light the fuse which resulted in a number of dead people in front. The rest of the Indians fled to the other side of the river where Printz continued to fire at them at random, killing several more. In another story, Printz entertained a sachem, who often ate at his table. Printz had received information that the Indians plotted against the Swedes but gave no sign of his knowledge when the sachem arrived. The meal began and suddenly Printz got up, revealed his awareness of the sachem’s deceit and kicked him out of the house to lay among the dogs.18 Wishful 18 Kalm IV, 268; Also, Kalm II, 142. The old man who relayed the stories to Kalm, Jacob Bengtsson, was born in 1684. The story about the cannon also flourished in English settlements, see Kalm III, 276.

stories—swedish colonial encounters

267

thinking, or the need to compensate for years of dependency may account for such stories, for which there is no basis in actual occurrences during Printz’ administration. Whatever the case they do not suggest any sense of, or pride in, a special Swedish treatment of and relationship to Indians. Such stories, however, have not dominated the memories of the Swedish colony. Instead, there exists a powerful legacy of stories that link colonists and Indians as friends and allies. The Swedish and Finnish colonists who remained in North America had to fend for themselves, cut off from contact with the home country and its products, and preferred to live in dispersed settlements within lenapehoking. They built on their experiences from the trade and their knowledge of Indian languages. These deserted Swedes and Finns, who found themselves forced to adjust to the “wilderness,” created through their associations with Indians (Lenapes as well as Susquehannocks) a population “in between” who acted outside and beyond the parameters of Dutch and English colonization, but who came to be indispensable to these administrations. They became cultural brokers, but not so much between their own culture and another, as between two alien cultures who needed mediators and translators to be able to communicate. The Swedish colonists stood in-between, a position that proved to be as precarious as their role as middlemen in the trade balance during the time of the New Sweden colony. Developed out of necessity this position offered certain advantages, such as the possibility to develop an intermediary and thus somewhat independent place—a “Swedish nation” defined as much by what they could do, and how they lived, as by their ethnic or linguistic origin. Yet it was not possible for long to maintain an independent position, and when English settlement became overpowering the Swedes had to choose sides. They stayed “white” but remained indispensable for their contacts in both worlds, a contact which facilitated English-Indian relations, but did not offer Swedes an obvious advantage in the white world. Losing their actual contacts and importance as middlemen, Swedish settlers turned to Lutheranism and the Swedish language to augment their status in Penn’s colony and the Indian contacts, as they faded in memory, were transformed and mythologized. It is from this period, when links between Indians and Swedes began to be exchanged for an established position within the white community, that stories began to circulate which emphasized and perpetuated the picture of a special relationship between Swedish

268

chapter eight

colonists and Lenape Indians in the New Sweden colony. Stories which grew out of the reality of more than forty years of mutual coexistence, but developed mythical proportions. All except one of the earliest sources, which proclaim this friendship and suggest that it resulted in Indian action on Swedish behalf, appeared at the end of the seventeenth century. The only source sufficiently close in time to the event it recounts relays only a rumor that the Swedes lay behind the Indian attack on Manhattan. Contemporaries did connect Swedes and Indians, primarily the Susquehannocks, but did not view it as anything other than a political alliance. This is the connection suggested in the Dutch documents. Jesuits in New France spoke of the Susquehannocks as “Savages of New Sweden” and even confused the war between Iroquois and Susquehannocks as a war with New Sweden. The Susquehannocks could even be called “Swedish Minquas.” But by the 1690s, this Swedish-Susquehannock alliance no longer existed. Instead, in letters from the former colony and in books printed in Sweden, the picture of a close association between Swedish colonists and Lenapes began to emerge. “The wild people and our Swedes are like one people,” wrote Eric Biörck, one of the first three pastors to arrive in 1697. His colleague, Andreas Rudman, characterized the Lenapes: “they are a peaceful people, particularly towards ours, who they call brothers, which they don’t do the English. [They] say to the Swedes they don’t believe Sweden exists, as they have been told, since no one comes from there [anymore].” In 1691, Peter Lindeström presented his manuscript Geographia Americae to the young Crown Prince Karl and his description of the Lenapes. He included a story of an Indian attack on Manhattan in 1655 but in his version, the attackers became Lenapes: When the Hollanders surprised us Swedes in New Sweden with hostility, then our river savages showed their friendship and faithfulness towards us. Now this intention of the Hollanders was known to our river savages, wherefore they betook themselves (unknown to us) and went to Manhattan town, in Nova Battavia, to exact revenge on our behalf, doing great damage to the Hollander. And the women, whom they took prisoners, they raped.

Lindeström’s manuscript, albeit unpublished until the twentieth century, had an immense impact on later writings on the colony, not least through Thomas Campanius Holm’s use of it when he crafted his 1702 book on New Sweden. Lindeström’s version of the attack on Manhattan is inaccurate in several respects. The Lenapes had

stories—swedish colonial encounters

269

nothing to do with it; the attack did not come as retaliation for the Dutch aggression against New Sweden, and Indian warriors in battle were unlikely to rape prisoners. Holm certainly did not know this, but elaborated on Lindeström’s story. Not only did the Lenapes attack Manhattan to revenge the Swedes, but they also gave the Swedish colonists a warning of the impending Dutch attack and to all of this, Holm asserted, Lindeström was a witness. This is also the first printed statement of the particular friendship between Lenapes and Swedes: “The wild people and ours is like one people, much more intimate than with the English, as they also in their language call these Swedes their own people . . . they are very keen to learn something from association with us, and willing to serve and care for the Swedes.” A little later Andreas Hesselius wrote in his brief account of the Swedish churches in America, published in 1725, that the Indians expressed no interest in conversion, but that in all other things “they are a good towards the Swedes, whom they call their brothers and love them far more than the English.”19 The stories growing out of the encounter between Swedes and Indians consist of a rather mixed bag. On the one hand we have the tall tales told to Kalm about Printz’ dominant displays, while on the other there are claims that there was a special connection between Swedish colonists and Indians, and that the latter even rose to arms to protect their friends after the Dutch attack on Fort Christina in 1655. Whatever the truth in these allegations, and in spite of the confusion as to whether these friendly Indians were Lenapes or Susquehannocks, from this time forward similar statements abound in Swedish literature and have become part of the lore surrounding the colonial experience. A large number of publications dwell on the nature of this special relationship between Swedes and Indians. Histories published from the eighteenth century until the present have 19 On connections between Swedes and Minquas, Jesuit Relations 47, 109; vol. 49, 141; Albany Records, in Hazard, Annals, 329; Dahlgren and Norman, Rise and Fall of New Sweden, 39–40; on warriors and rape see Dowd, Spirited Resistance, 9–10; Holm, Kort Beskrifning, 99–100, 122; see also Acrelius, Beskrifning, 91–92; Kalm II, 142. Quotes: “. . . like one people,” “Biörck to Carl Wiström,” October 29, 1697, Handskrifter E.S., B.X.1, 63, KB; “no one comes from there . . .” “Rudman to Arrhenius,” October 29, 1697, KB; “. . . prisoners, they raped” and “. . . care for the Swedes,” Lindeström, Geographia Americae, 235–236 (partly my translation from Swedish); “. . . far more than the English,” Andreas Hesselius, Kort Berettelse om Then Swenska Kyrkios närwarande Tilstånd i America, Samt oförgripeliga tankar om theß widare förkofring, (Norkiöping 1725), 4.

270

chapter eight

proclaimed it and not only Swedes spread this image but also American authors.20 Much of what has been said about friendship and love between the peoples is based only on scant evidence. The foundation for this view was laid in the 1650s, but it was thriving as late as 1988 in a commemorative volume over the colony. While acknowledging that peaceful relations can be accredited to both parties, the author stated: The Swedes treated their Indian neighbors justly and humanely. They never attacked the Indians and never were guilty of such massacres as the English and Dutch committed against the Indians and that affected not only the warriors but also women and children. . . . In comparison the Swedish colonists’ friendly contacts with their Indian neighbors is an idyllic example.21

Similar views can be found in a number of publications regarding the relationship between the Swedish colony and its Indian neighbors. The Dutch and English are charged with taking “over lands that pleased them without any qualms,” and treating Native peoples “in such a manner that a fiery hatred towards the white man was awakened in them.” In contrast, it was remarkable that the Swedes and the Indians enjoyed a relatively pacific relationship. The reason for this, it is suggested, lay in the decent manner in which the Swedes treated the Indians.22 At times, the claim went even further. Nils Jacobsson in his extensive treatise on Swedes and Indians in the colony argued that William Penn learned from the Swedes how to treat the Indians with gentleness, “for which he and the quakers have reaped such praise.” It was through Swedish interpreter Lars Kock that Penn was introduced to the Lenapes and that gave him the opportunity to deal with them peacefully.23

20 I.e. Acrelius, Beskrifning, 40, 91–92; Kalm II, 142; J. Thomas Scharf and Thompson Westcott, History of Philadelphia 1609–1864 I (Philadelphia, 1884), 31; Ingvar Andersson, Sveriges historia (4th edition) (Stockholm: Natur o. Kultur, 1953), 411–412; Aleksander Loit, “Sveriges kolonilotter,” in Den dolda historien. 27 uppsatser om vårt okända förflutna, ed. Ronny Ambjörnsson and David Gaunt (Malmö: Författarförlaget, 1984), 380–381; Edsman, “En religionsdialog,” 191–192; The New Sweden Project. Final Report, New Sweden Commemorative Commission (New Jersey Department of State, 1988); Englund, Ofredsår, 559–560; Det Nya Sverige i landet Amerika. Ett stormaktsäventyr 1638–1655, ed. Rune Ruhnbro (Förlags AB Wiken, 1988). 21 Nils Erik Baehrendtz, “Nybyggarnas indianska grannar,” in Det Nya Sverige, 116. 22 Quotes from Frank Blomfelt. En god hövding. Johannes Campanius i Frösthult 1601–1683 (Heby Tryckeri, 1983). 23 Jacobsson, Svenskar och indianer, 170–172.

stories—swedish colonial encounters

271

All Europeans experienced insecurity in the new land to which they came. When the Dutch had overpowered the Swedish forces, they found themselves a minority among the white settlers in the Valley, lacking necessary skills to negotiate the new situation. It is not surprising that they feared Swedish influence with the Indians, whose language most of the Dutch administrators did not speak. Stories of Swedish involvement in the attack on Manhattan emanated from this environment of unease and from the very real trade connection that had existed between the Swedish colony and the Susquehannocks. On the other hand, Swedish and Finnish colonists who remained in America deepened their reliance upon Indian neighbors out of necessity, leading to increased knowledge of the languages and of the environment. The stories of Lenape-Swedish association thus have two roots: Dutch insecurity and the paranoia common among European settlers and the Swedish dependence on and interaction with Lenapes after the Swedish colony officially ceased to exist. These two strands flowed together in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries to produce an image of a particular friendship, mythologized by later generations who placed its origin in the first years of the colony. Amicable Indian-Swedish relations were not a result of colonial policies and activities, but of the increased mutual interdependence of the years that followed after official colonization. While Swedes and English forged the historical record into stories that spoke of their kindness and friendship in past interactions, the Lenapes too insisted on framing their version of events (and presumably so did the Susquehannocks, even though we may never know their contents). Preserved in wampum belts and stored in memory these accounts are much more difficult to access, but some evidence in the written record indicates what they were about. Already in the first decades of the eighteenth century, Lenape-Delaware spokesmen emphasized their responsibility for maintaining peaceful relations with the white community. Sassoonan related in a council how when William Penn arrived “it was agreed that both Christians & Indians should joyn in removing all Difficulties, & if any Stone or Stump should ly in the Way, that both should joyn their Hands together & help to remove it, that old men & Children might walk safely.”24 In the 1740s, when the Delawares had been forced to leave

24

MPCP, III, 334.

272

chapter eight

Figure 7. Commemorative stamp In 1938 and in 1988 commemorative stamps were issued depicting equitable relations between Swedes and Indians. This stamp from 1938 shows Governor Johan Printz “negotiating with an Indian chief.” Printz is recognizable in authentic seventeenth century garb, but the chief appears to be modeled on a generic image of an Indian. Designer: Olle Hjortzberg. Engraver: Sven Evert. Postcard issued by the Association of Postal History in Jönköping, Sweden. Courtesy of Bo E. Karlsson, Länsmuséet, Jönköping.

all of their lands on the eastern seaboard, Civility described how one of the chief articles in the agreement between the Indians and Penn had been that “if any Mischief or Hurt should befall either, they should assist one another, and constantly have their Eyes open to watch for each other’s Safety.” The first written account of such a pact was made almost one hundred years earlier in the council in 1654 upon Risingh’s arrival in New Sweden. The language of kinship in that meeting reverberated a century later when Teedyuscung, who accompanied the Moravian Christian Frederick Post on a diplomatic mission to Delaware Indians in the Ohio country, recalled how Penn “was Adopted & received into their Family as a Child.

stories—swedish colonial encounters

273

Further that it had been formerly agreed to by all ye Nations that the Delaware Country shod. never be incommoded with War, but always enjoy an undisturb’d Peace & Tranquility.”25 When Lenapes remembered the past, it was their role in establishing peace that stood out. There is an abundance of sources depicting Lenapes or Delawares, emphasizing the peaceful nature of their relationships with Swedes and Pennsylvania’s English. The treaty with William Penn was regarded as special and consigned to the care of a specially appointed person. It remained in Delaware hands for 180 years, before perishing in flames when Black Beaver’s house was burned to the ground after the Civil War. Duane K. Hale writes that the Delawares “more than any other tribe had served as peacemakers, and as ambassadors between various Indian tribes and the United States.” Delaware elders recounted in the twentieth century how their forefathers and mothers had traded with the Swedes on the East Coast and treated with William Penn.26 Let us return to that moment at Tinicum Island on June 17 in the year of 1654, when Lenapes from villages all along the river gathered to receive the arriving Swedish governor in order to renew a special relationship with him and his people. Past ill deeds were to be forgotten, presents exchanged to reinforce the message of friendship that the Lenape spokesman expressed through symbolic language and movements. He caressed his arm to symbolize the connection between the peoples; he likened the unity of the Swedes and Indians to the growth of a calabash. It should be round, smooth, and without fissure. This event may well be seen as the apogee of the Swedish colonial presence in America, especially when taken together with the offer of alliance that came from the Susquehannocks a year later. Yet, this had no sooner happened than the Swedish colonial venture

25 Sassoonan: MPCP, III, 334; Civility: MCPC III, 598 (1735); Teedyuscung: “Journal of Mr. Christn Fred Post, in Company with Teedyuscung, Mr. John Hays, Isaac Still, & Moses Tattamy, to the great Council of the different Indian Nations, 1760,” (copied from Mrs. Henry P. Grummere, Upper Darby, PA, in 1942), APS. 26 Duane K. Hale, Peacemakers on the Frontier: A History of the Delaware Tribe of Western Oklahoma, Anadarko, 1987: xv; Duane K. Hale, ed., Turtle Tales: Oral Traditions of the Delaware Tribe of Western Oklahoma, (Anadarko: Delaware Tribe of Western Oklahoma Press 1984), p. 45; Interview with Miss Ruth Parks, Indian Pioneer History ( June 24, 1937), Oklahoma Historical Society; Interview with Bessie Hunter Snake ( June 18, 1967), The Doris Duke Collection, American Indian Oral History, T-88, Western History Collections; Interview with Leona Parton (April 22, 1938), Indian Pioneer History, Oklahoma Historical Society.

274

chapter eight

ended abruptly when Dutch troops attacked. Thus, zenith and nadir existed in close proximity suggesting dramatic changes and giving to the saga of New Sweden an aura of romance from which it has never quite recovered. From a Lenape perspective the rise and fall of New Sweden must have resembled more of a bump in the road. Their strategy for dealing with newcomers and aggressors in their territory developed and strengthened with this experience and was, for some time, honed to fit the next generation of colonists that emerged to ask for their land and cooperation. Perhaps it was the blueprint from Tinicum in 1654 that was used to launch the vision of a lasting friendship with William Penn’s people, a vision most cruelly crushed in the aftermath of the Walking Purchase of 1737. From a Lenape perspective the founding and loss of the Swedish colony did not form the most significant chronology and Swedish policy in the region did not determine their choices or set the boundaries for their strategies. The Susquehannocks, meanwhile, presented their offer of land and alliance at a time when their main concern was directed at other threatening neighbors— the Maryland colony in the south and the Iroquois confederacy to their north. Meanwhile, in Lapland during this period, Swedish presence was not accompanied by pronouncements of friendship and alliance; here officials spoke rather with the voice of hierarchy and domination. The reality of the encounters may not have warranted such displays of power and policies had to be reformulated in the face of Saami resistance, yet no romantic colonial tale was born to reiterated by later generations. And so, New Sweden placed in this web of contexts present us with a different picture of the limits, consequences, and vagaries of colonial encounters. *

*

*

This book is about Swedish colonization and remembrances thereof; thus, I have focused on how Swedes have been perceived as the architects and tools of peaceful relations. I have tried to demonstrate that the reality of encounters and coexistence in the Delaware Valley may have been neither particularly friendly, nor always peaceful. Nevertheless, people did coexist, however uneasily, to an extent that makes the history of the region different from colonies to the north and south. Therefore, the Swedish part in this history warranted study. However, it is relevant—and urgent—also to ask what these

stories—swedish colonial encounters

275

historic circumstances meant to the Lenapes and how they were a part in shaping them. This task remains to be done. Here I have only offered a few suggestions. Clearly, the Lenapes’ New World spelled devastation, death, and alienation, but they also struggled to maintain a culture of matrilineal decision making and an emphasis on peace chiefs that shaped the nature of Indian-white interaction in the entire region.27 What if the Swedes were fortunate to land in an area dominated by Lenape villages and what if William Penn was just lucky to get his fiefdom in the region where Lenapes had for a couple of generations perfected an idea and practice of peaceful coexistence which favored women and peace chiefs, and awarded status to those who held power over the rituals and functions of peace making? Just providential to land in a place where disease had certainly decimated a population but not weakened it almost to the point of extinction as further north, or where mutual fear and misunderstanding had caused bloody clashes which made impossible any foundation for trust. The Swedes were a small, but perhaps vital part in the process which allowed the Lenapes to work out an approach to white people which they would strive to keep all the way up to—and past—the American war of independence. Uneasy truce throughout the official colony’s existence turned into a mutually beneficial—and on the Swedish part necessary—coexistence in the interim years before Pennsylvania was founded. By the time William Penn arrived he could build on half a century of established patterns of treaties for each piece of land, mutual gift-giving to maintain the relationship, and Swedish interpreters who enjoyed the trust of both Lenapes and Susquehannocks. William Penn was not the first to forge a chain of friendship. The Lenapes and Susquehannocks had done so almost fifty years earlier in relation to the Swedes upon Governor Risingh’s arrival and when Penn came, the Indians built on that tradition. As they informed the Penns, their “ancient men” remembered every word of these treaties.28 In retrospect, some things stand out as remarkable. One is that Swedish colonial encounters with indigenous populations were so 27

Some work has indeed emerged that does just this, see the collection of articles in Friends & Enemies in Penn’s Woods. Indians, Colonists, and the Racial Construction of Pennsylvania, ed. William A. Pencak and Daniel K. Richter (University Park, Pa: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004). 28 MPCP, IV, 742; Indian Treaties Printed by Benjamin Franklin 1736–1762, ed. Julian P. Boyd and Carl Van Doren (Philadelphia, 1938), 152.

276

chapter eight

relatively non-violent. Many have commented upon this and it has often been explained with reference to a specific Swedish kind of colonial policy. When American historian Robert F. Berkhofer wrote in 1978 that “[i]n theory and in practice, each colonizing power, except Sweden, asserted the same basic legal power over the persons and territory of Native Americans,” he was only expressing a general notion long perpetuated by Swedish and Swedish-American authors.29 . These chroniclers held that somehow Sweden was a different kind of colonizer, and no doubt this exceptionalism to some extent made up for the spectacular lack of success of Sweden’s American project. This chapter has dealt with this notion on two levels. On the one hand, I have discussed how to understand Sweden’s relations with indigenous populations in Delaware in the light of the experiences in Lapland, and on the other, it is an exploration of the stories about this encounter. I claim that far from being an isolated and rather curious aside in Swedish history, the colonial venture in America flowed out of and suffered under the momentum, needs, and constraints of Swedish expansion in the seventeenth century. The stories of cultural encounters are thus inevitably linked to other such meetings in other parts of the Swedish realm. These encounters gave birth to stories, some of which combined to make historical truths. One is the powerful image of Sweden as a forceful, yet benign colonizer that deigned to treat its Indian neighbors with justice and gentility. But while this study gives evidence of comparatively peaceful interactions, it also suggests that causes may be sought in other places. This encounter allowed for other stories and practices to develop, practices that set the Lenapes on a course that would influence later developments in the Pennsylvania forests and Delaware Valley. While European policies towards native peoples have received much attention from scholars, if only because they are accessible to us through the historical record, they fail to account for the differences in colonial-Indian experiences. Swedish-Saami and Swedish-Lenape relations during the latter half of the seventeenth century offer an intriguing picture of economic, religious, and cultural conflict. The key to understanding Swedish-Indian relations lie in analysis of the Lenape interest and actions in response to Swedish colonial presence in their home land. The comparison with Saami-Swedish relations

29

Berkhofer, White Man’s Indian, 119.

stories—swedish colonial encounters

277

in northern Scandinavia makes it abundantly clear that benevolent Swedish policies cannot explain the relatively peaceful interaction between Swedes and Lenapes. Moreover an emphasis on policies obscures the processes by which Swedish colonists and Lenape Indians developed a unique albeit precarious partnership which aided both sides in maintaining and adapting their own cultures throughout the turbulent years of the seventeenth century. The power balance in the two regions developed in such a way that it is justified to speak of a “middle ground,” where each side balanced their needs and desires against those of the other.30 Power in this context was not simply a matter of numbers or quality of weapons, or of men. Power, or influence, depended also on contacts with surrounding peoples, knowledge of terrain and climate, ability to survive the periods of greatest want as when food was scarce or contacts with the home country few. In this situation, the Swedish experience as a great military force in Europe had little significance. Those were not the skills that were needed. Instead, the negotiating skills of the Lenapes and their time-honored position as mediators in matters of war and retribution proved to be the most valuable asset and perhaps the greatest influence in maintaining peaceful relations in the area.

30

See White, Middle Ground, ix–xv.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

I. Primary Sources A. Manuscripts American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia Heckewelder Letters. “Journal of Mr. Christn Fred Post, in Company with Teedyuscung, Mr. John Hays, Isaac Still, & Moses Tattamy, to the great Council of the different Indian Nations, 1760.” (Copied from Mrs. Henry P. Grummere, Upper Darby, PA, in 1942). Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Watson’s Annals, Am 3011. Cadwalader Collection Härnösands Landsarkiv (Regional Archives) Härnösands domkapitel arkiv: Protokoll 1693–1696. (Härnösand Cathedral chapter.) Piteå landsförsamlings arkiv: Skrivelser från Kungl. Maj:t, Konsistorium m.fl. 1692–1768, J:I:1, no. 3. Kungliga Biblioteket (Royal Library), Stockholm Rålambs samling, Folder No. 201 Handskrifter, E.S., B.X.1, 63: Handlingar rörande Svenska Församlingen i Pensylvanien ifrågn År 1697 till 1704. Moravian Archives, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania Gnadenhütten, Pa, Diaries 1746–1750. Oklahoma Historical Society, Oklahoma City Indian Pioneer History interviews Riksarkivet (National Archives), Stockholm Lappmarkens silverbruk—GIX:1, 1637–1685 Svea Hovrätts renoverade domböcker Västerbottens läns landsböcker med verifikationer 1671–1700 Handel och Sjöfart, nr. 194: Kolonier, Nya Sverige I Handel och Sjöfart, nr. 196: Kolonier, Nya Sverige II E1055, ser. B, Brev R R 1100—Svenska ecklesiastika handlingar 1686–1694 Umeå University Library Nordbergs arkiv 25:24 Uppsala universitetsbibliotek Handskriftssamlingarna, K3 Uppsala Landsarkiv, Uppsala Handlingar angående svenska församlingar i Amerika F VIII Western History Collection, Norman The Doris Duke Collection, American Indian Oral History

280

bibliography

B. Published Primary Sources Acrelius, Israel. Beskrifning Om De Swenska Församlingars Tilstånd, Uti Det så kallade Nya Swerige. Stockholm: Harberg & Hesselberg, 1759. Biörck, Tobias Eric. The Planting of the Swedish Church in America. Translated and ed. by Ira Oliver Nothstein. Rock Island: Augustana Library Publications 19, 1943. Blomfelt, Frank, ed. Andreas Sandels dagbok 1701–1743. Uppsala: Erene Bok & Musik AB, 1988. Budd, Thomas. Good Order Established in Pennsylvania and New-Jersey in America (1685). New York: Burt Franklin, 1971. van der Donck, Adriaen. “New Netherlands.” In Collections of the New York Historical Society, 2d ser., I. New York, 1841. Documents Relating to the History of the Dutch and Swedish Settlements on the Delaware River. Translated and Compiled from Original Manuscripts, ed. B. Fernow. In Documents Relative to the Colonial History of New York XII (old ser.) Albany, 1877. Ecclesiastical Records of the State of New York I. Albany, 1901. Fellman, Isak. Handlingar och uppsatser angående Finska Lappmarken och Lapparne I–IV. Helsingfors, 1910–1915. Graan, Olaus Stephani. Relation, Eller En Fullkomblig Beskrifning om Lapparnas Ursprung, så wähl som heela dheras Lefwernes Förehållande [1672], in Bidrag till kännedom om de svenska landsmålen och svenskt folkliv 17:2. Uppsala, 1899. Hazard, Samuel. Annals of Pennsylvania from the Discovery of the Delaware. Philadelphia: Hazard and Mitchell, 1850. Högström, Pehr. Beskrifning Öfwer de til Sweriges Krona lydande Lapmarker År 1747. Reprinted in facsimile in Norrländska skrifter nr 3. Umeå: Två Förläggare Bokförlag, 1980. Holm, Thomas Campanius. Kort Beskrifning om Provincien Nya Swerge uti America Som nu förtjden af the engelska kallas Pensylvania. (Stockholm, 1702). Facsimile Suecica Rediviva. A Collection of Facsimile Reprints of Swedish Books 112. Stockholm: Bokförlaget Rediviva, 1988. Indian Treaties Printed by Benjamin Franklin 1736–1762, ed. Julian P. Boyd and Carl Van Doren. Philadelphia, 1938. Kent, Donald H., ed. Pennsylvania and Delaware Treaties, 1629–1737. Vol. I, Early American Indian Documents: Treaties and Laws, 1607–1789, by Alden T. Vaughan. University Publications of America, 1979. “Magister Andreæ Hesselii anmärkningar om hans resa till Amerika och vistande där 1711–1724,” ed. Nils Jacobsson. Svenska Linné-Sällskapets Årsskrift 21 (Uppsala, 1938): 95–145. The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents: Travel and Explorations of the Jesuit Missionaries in New France, 1610–1791, ed. Reuben Gold Thwaites. Cleveland: Burrows Brothers, 1896–1901. Johnson, Amandus. The Instruction for Johan Printz, Governor of New Sweden. Philadelphia: The Swedish Colonial Society, 1930. Jones, David. A Journal of Two Visits Made to some Nations of Indians on the West Side of the River Ohio, In the Years 1772 and 1773. Reprinted for Joseph Sabin, 1865. Journal of Jasper Danckaerts 1679–1680, ed. Bartlett B. James and J. Franklin Jameson. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1913. Kalm, Pehr. Resejournal över Resan till Norra Amerika II, ed. Martti Kerkkonen and John E. Roos. Helsingfors: Svenska Litteratursällskapet i Finland, 1970. Körningh, Johannes Ferdinand. Berättelse om en missionsresa till Lappland 1659 –60. Nordiska Muséet, Acta Lapponica IX:1. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1956. Lindeström, Peter. Geographia Americae with an Account of the Delaware Indians. Translated by Amandus Johnson. Philadelphia: The Swedish Colonial Society, 1925. Lundius, Nicolaus. Descriptio Lapponiae [late 1670s]. In Bidrag till kännedom om de svenska landsmålen och svenskt folkliv 17:5. Uppsala, 1905.

bibliography

281

Lutheri Catechismus Öfwersatt på American-Virginiske Språket (Stockholm, 1696). In Kungliga Bibliotekets samlingar (Royal Library collections), Stockholm. Mather, Cotton. Magnalia Christi Americana, or The Ecclesiastical History of New England (1702). Hartford, Conn.: Silas Andrus, 1820. “More Missing Evidence: Two Depositions by Early Swedish Settlers,” ed. A.R. Dunlap and C.A. Weslager. Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 91 (1967). Narratives of Early Maryland 1633–1684, ed. Clayton Colman Hall. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1910. Narratives of Early Pennsylvania, West New Jersey and Delaware 1630–1707, ed. Albert Cook Myers. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1912. Narratives of New Netherland 1609–1664, ed. J. Franklin Jameson. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1909. New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch, II, translated and edited by Arnold J.F. Van Laer. Baltimore: Genealogical Company, 1974. New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch, XVIII–XIX, ed. Charles T. Gehring. Baltimore: Genealogical Company, 1981. Niurenius, Olaus Petri. Lappland eller beskrivning över den nordiska trakt, som lapparne bebo i de avlägsnaste delarne av Skandien eller Sverge [ca. 1640]. In Bidrag till kännedom om de svenska landsmålen och svenskt folkliv 17:4. Uppsala, 1905. Nordberg, Erik. Källskrifter rörande kyrka och skola i den svenska lappmarken under 1600talet. Umeå: Kungliga Skytteanska samfundets handlingar no. 11, 1973. “Papers relating to the Colonies on the Delaware, 1614–1682.” In Pennsylvania Archives, 2d ser. V. Harrisburg, 1877. “Papers relating to the Dutch and Swedish Settlements on the Delaware River.” In Pennsylvania Archives, 2d ser. VIII. Harrisburg, 1878. The Pennsylvania Gazette. Dec. 24, 1735. Plantagenet, Beauchamp. “A Description of the Province of New Albion, 1648.” In Tracts and Other Papers Relating Principally to the Origin, Settlement, and Progress of the Colonies in North America, from the Discovery of the Country to the Year 1776, II, ed. Peter Force. Washington, 1838. Poignant, E. Samling af författningar angående de så kallade lappmarksfriheterna. Stockholm: Ivar Hæggströms boktryckeri, 1872. “Record of Pennsylvania Marriages prior to 1810.” In Pennsylvania Archives, 2d ser. IX. Harrisburg, 1890. Rheen, Samuel. En kortt Relation om Lapparnes Lefwarne och Sedher, wijd Skiepellsser, sampt i många Stycken Grofwe wildfarellsser [1671]. In Bidrag till kännedom om de svenska landsmålen och svenskt folkliv 17:1. Uppsala, 1897. Schefferus, Johannes. The History of Lapland, wherein Are shewed the Original, Manners, Habits, Marriages, Conjurations, & c. of that People. Oxford, 1674. Swedberg, Jesper. America Illuminata (1732). Stockholm: Proprius Förlag, 1985. Tornaeus, Johannes. Berättelse om Lapmarckerna och Deras Tillstånd [1672]. In Bidrag till kännedom om de svenska landsmålen och svenskt folkliv 17:3. Uppsala, 1900. Van Rensselaer Bowier Manuscripts, ed. A.J.F. van Laer. Albany: New York State Library, 1908.

II. Secondary Sources Ahnlund, Nils. “Nya Sverige. (Delaware). Föredrag i Svenska Sällskapet för antropologi och geografi Vegadagen 1937.” Ymer 4 (1937): 259–269. Albers, Patricia C. “Marxism and historical materialism in American Indian History.” In Clearing a Path. Theorizing the Past in Native American Studies, ed. Nancy Shoemaker, 107–136. New York and London: Routledge, 2001.

282

bibliography

Anderson, Virginia DeJohn. “King Philip’s Herds: Indians, Colonists, and the Problem of Livestock in Early New England.” The William and Mary Quarterly 3d ser. LI:4 (October 1994): 601–624. Andersson, Gudrun. Tingets kvinnor och män. Genus som norm och strategi under 1600-och 1700-tal. Uppsala: Studia Historica Upsaliensia 187, 1998. Andersson, Ingvar. Sveriges historia (4th edition). Stockholm: Natur o. Kultur, 1953. Andrews, Kenneth R. Trade, Plunder and Settlement. Maritime enterprise and the genesis of the British Empire, 1480–1630. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. Arell, Nils. Rennomadismen i Torne lappmark—markanvändning under kolonisationsepoken i fr. a. Enontekis socken. Umeå: Kungliga Skytteanska samfundets handlingar, no. 17, 1977. Awebro, Kenneth. Luleå silververk. Ett norrländskt silververks historia. Luleå: Norrbottens museum, Bothnica 3, 1983. ——. “Var samerna en maktlös grupp på 1600–talet?” In Kring Alkavare lappkapell, ed. Kenneth Awebro, 6–31. Stockholm: Studia Laplandica 9, 1988. Axtell, James. The Invasion Within. The Contest of Cultures in Colonial North America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. ——. After Columbus. Essays in the Ethnohistory of Colonial North America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. Bachman, Van Cleaf. Peltries or Plantations. The Economic Policies of the Dutch West India Company in New Netherland 1623–1639. The Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, 89. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1969. Bäckman, Louise. “Female—Divine and Human. A Study of the Position of the Woman in Religion and Society in Northern Eurasia.” In The Hunters—Their Culture and Way of Life, ed. Åke Hultkrantz and Ørnulv Vorren, Tromsø Museum Skrifter, XVIII, 143–162. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1982. Baehrendtz, Nils Erik. “Nybyggarnas indianska grannar.” In Det Nya Sverige i landet Amerika. Ett stormaktsäventyr 1638–1655, ed. Rune Ruhnbro, 103–116. Höganäs: Förlags AB Wiken, 1988. Barbour, Violet. Capitalism in Amsterdam in the 17th Century. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1976. Beach, Hugh. Reindeer-Herd Management in Transition. Uppsala: Uppsala studies in cultural anthropology 3, 1981. Becker, Marshall J. “Lenape Maize Sales to the Swedish Colonists: Cultural Stability During the Early Colonial Period.” In New Sweden in America, ed. Carol E. Hoffecker, Richard Waldron, Lorraine E. Williams, and Barbara E. Benson, 121–136. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1995. Behre, Göran, Lars-Olof Larsson, Eva Österberg. Sveriges historia 1521–1809. Stormaktsdröm och småstatsrealiteter. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1985. Bergman, E.W. “Anteckningar om Lappmarken. Särskilt med hänseende till kristendomens införande därstädes.” Historisk Tidskrift (1891): 209–232. Bergmark, Matts. Från pest till polio. Stockholm: Natur och Kultur, 1965. Berkhofer, Robert F. The White Man’s Indian. Images of the American Indian from Columbus to the Present. New York: Vintage Books, 1978. Blanck, Dag. “History at Work: The 1988 New Sweden Jubilee.” The Swedish-American Historical Quarterly XXXIX:2 (April 1988): 5–20. Blomfelt, Frank. En god hövding. Johannes Campanius i Frösthult 1601–1683. Heby Tryckeri, 1983. Boëthius, B. “Swedish Iron and Steel, 1600–1955,” The Scandinavian Economic History Review VI:2 (1958): 144–175. Boxer, C.R. The Dutch Seaborne Empire, 1600–1800. London: Hutchinson, 1977. Brauner, Sabine. “Cannibals, Witches, and Shrews in the ‘Civilizing Process.’” In “Neue Welt”/“Dritte Welt”. Interkulturelle Beziehungen Deutschlands zu Lateinamerika und der Karibie, ed. Sigrid Bauschinger & Susan L. Cocalis, 1–27. Tübingen & Basel: Francke Verlag, 1994.

bibliography

283

Broberg, Gunnar. Homo sapiens L. Studier i Carl von Linnés naturuppfattning och människolära. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1975. Bromé, Janrik. Nasafjäll. Ett norrländskt silververks historia. Stockholm, 1923. Burke, Peter. Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe. London: Temple Smith 1978. Cadzow, Donald A. Archaeological Studies of the Susquehannock Indians of Pennsylvania. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Historical Commission, 1936. Callicott, J. Baird. “American Indian Land Wisdom? Sorting Out the Issues.” Journal of Forest History 33:1 ( January 1989): 35–42. Campbell, Åke. “Om lapparna i svensk folktradition och etnocentrism.” In Scandinavica et Fenno-Ugrica. Studier tillägnade Björn Collinder den 22 juli 1954, 253–276. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1954. ——. Från vildmark till bygd. En etnologisk undersökning av nybyggarkulturen i Lappland före industrialismens genombrott. Umeå: Två Förläggare Bokförlag, 1982. Canny, Nicholas P. “The Ideology of English Colonization: From Ireland to America.” In Colonial America. Essays in Politics and Social Development, ed. Stanley N. Katz and John M. Murrin, 47–68. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1983. Carlsson, Sten. “The New Sweden Colonists, 1638–1656: Their Geographical and Social Background.” In New Sweden in America, ed. Carol Hoffecker, Richard Waldron, Lorraine E. Williams, and Barbara E. Benson, 171–187. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1995. Chakrabarty, Dipesh. “Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History: Who Speaks for ‘Indian’ Pasts?” In The New Historicism Reader, ed. H. Aram Veeser, 342–367. London: Routledge, 1994. Cooper, Fredrick. “Conflict and Connection: Rethinking Colonial African History.” American Historical Review 99 (1994): 1516–1545. Cooper, Frederick and Ann Laura Stoler, eds. Tensions of Empire. Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press, 1997. Cooper, John M. “Is the Algonquian Family Hunting Ground System Pre-Columbian?” American Anthropologist, n.s. 41 (1939): 66–90. Craig, Peter S. and Henry W. Yocom, “The Yocums of Aronameck in Philadelphia, 1648–1702.” National Genealogical Society Quarterly 71:4 (Dec 1983): 243–279. Craig, Peter S. The 1693 Census of the Swedes on the Delaware. Winter Park, Florida: SAG Publications, 1993. Cramér, Tomas. “Right of the Same to Land and Water.” In Lapponica. Essays presented to Israel Ruong May 26, 1963, 55–62. Lund: Studia Ethnographia Upsaliensia XXI, 1964. ——. “Samernas historia vantolkad,” Die,ut 1 (1982): 19–28. Cronberg, Marie Lindstedt. Synd och skam. Ogifta mödrar på svensk landsbygd 1680–1880. Lund: Lund University Press, 1997. Cronon, William. Changes in the Land. Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England. New York: Hill and Wang, 1983. Crosby, Alfred W. The Columbian Exchange. Biological and Cultural Consequences of 1492. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1972. Dahlgren, Stellan. “Estates and Classes.” In Sweden’s Age of Greatness 1632–1718, ed. Michael Roberts, 102–131. London: Macmillan, 1973. —— and Hans Norman. The Rise and Fall of New Sweden. Governor Johan Risingh’s Journal 1654–1655 in its Historical Context. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1988. ——. “The Crown of Sweden and the New Sweden Company.” In New Sweden in America, ed. Carol Hoffecker, Richard Waldron, Lorraine E. Williams, and Barbara E. Benson, 54–68. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1995. Dahlgren, Stellan, Anders Florén, Jan Lindegren. Kungar och Krigare. Tre Essäer om Karl X Gustav, Karl XI och Karl XII. Stockholm: Atlantis, 1992. Daunton, Martin and Rick Halpern, eds. Empire and Others. British Encounters with Indigenous Peoples, 1600–1850. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999.

284

bibliography

Davies, K.G. The North Atlantic World in the Seventeenth Century. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1974. De Vries, Jan. The Economy of Europe in an Age of Crisis, 1600–1750. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976. Det Nya Sverige i landet Amerika. Ett stormaktsäventyr 1638–1655, ed. Rune Ruhnbro. Höganäs: Förlags AB Wiken, 1988. Dowd, Gregory Evans. A Spirited Resistance. The Native American Struggle for Unity, 1745–1815. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992. Edsman, Carl-Martin. “En religionsdialog år 1700 från mötet mellan svenskar och indianer.” In Studier i religionshistoria: tillägnade Åke Hultkrantz, 175–263. Löberöd: Plus Ultra, 1991. Eilertz, Sture. “Nova Svecia: Den svensk-lutherska befolkningen i Delaware-området vid 1700-talets mitt.” Unpublished paper, Department of History, Uppsala University, 1986. Emmer, P.C. “The West India Company, 1621–1791: Dutch or Atlantic?” In Companies and Trade. Essays on Overseas Trading Companies during the Ancien Régime, ed. L. Blussé and F. Gaastra, 72–94. Comparative Studies in Overseas History, 3. Leiden: Leiden University Press, 1981. Enewald, Nils. Sverige och Finnmarken. Svensk Finnmarkspolitik under äldre tid och den svensknorska gränsläggningen 1751. Lund: Gleerup, 1920. Ernby, Eibert. Adeln och bondejorden. En studie rörande skattefrälset i Oppunda härad under 1600-talet. Uppsala: Studia Historica Upsaliensia 64, 1975. Exhibition review, The Journal of American History 80:1 ( June 1993). Fahlgren, Karl. Hädare och kättare i Norrland under vår stormaktstid. Umeå: Botnia, 1969. Fausz, J. Frederick. “‘To Draw Thither the Trade of Beavers’: The Strategic Significance of the English Fur Trade in the Chesapeake, 1620–1660.” In Le Castor fait Tout. Selected Papers of the Fifth North American Fur Trade Conference, 1985, ed. Bruce G. Trigger, Toby Morantz and Louise Dechêne, 42–71. Montreal: Lake St. Louis Historical Society, 1987. Fjellström, Phebe. Lapskt silver. Studier över en föremålsgrupp och dess ställning inom lapskt kulturliv. Skrifter utgivna genom Landsmåls- och folkminnesarkivet i Uppsala, ser. C:3. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1962. ——. Samernas samhälle i tradition och nutid. Stockholm: P.A. Norstedt & Söners Förlag, 1985. Florén, Anders. Disciplinering och konflikt. Den sociala organiseringen av arbetet: Jäders bruk 1640–1750, Studia Historica Upsaliensia 147. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1987. Forsberg, Lars. “Protosaami Bronze Age in northern Scandinavia.” In Readings in Saami History, Culture and Language III, ed. Roger Kvist, 1–8. Umeå: Miscellaneous Publications from the Center for Arctic Cultural Research 14, 1992. Foster, Michael K. “Another Look at the Function of Wampum in Iroquois-White Councils.” In The History and Culture of Iroquois Diplomacy, ed. Francis Jennings, 99–114. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1985. Friends & Enemies in Penn’s Woods. Indians, Colonists, and the Racial Construction of Pennsylvania, ed. William A. Pencak and Daniel K. Richter. University Park, Pa: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004. Fur, Gunlög. “Skattelapp-fattiglapp? Kronan och samerna 1670–1700 med särskild hänsyn till skatteväsende och nybyggesverksamhet.” Unpublished paper, Department of History, Uppsala university, 1983. ——. “Cultural Confrontations on Two Fronts: Swedes Meet Lenapes and Saamis in the Seventeenth Century.” Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Oklahoma, 1993. ——. “Svenskarnas uppfattning av samer från stormaktstiden till 1700-talets mitt.” In Främlingen—dröm eller hot, 34–44. Stockholm: Nationalmuseum, 1996. ——. “Ädla vildar, grymma barbarer och postmoderna historier.” Historisk Tidskrift 4 (1999): 637–654.

bibliography

285

——. “Svar på tal. Indianer och samer bemöter europeisk kolonisation.” in Universitet 2000. Föreläsningar hållna under humanistdagarna 15–16 oktober 1999, ed. Christina Angelfors, Gunilla Byrman, Magnus Nilsson, 20–28. Växjö: Rapporter från Växjö universitet 3, 1999. ——. “Kampen om orden.” In Hembygden & Världen. Festskrift till Ulf Beijbom, ed. Lars Olsson and Sune Åkerman, 195–206. Växjö: Svenska Emigrantinstitutets skriftserie 13, 2002. van Gastel, Ada. “Van der Donck’s Description of the Indians: Additions and Corrections.” William and Mary Quarterly XLVII: 3 ( July 1990): 411–421. Goddard, Ives. “The Delaware Language, Past and Present.” In A Delaware Indian Symposium, ed. Herbert C. Kraft, 103–110. Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1974. ——. “Delaware.” In Handbook of North American Indians 15: Northeast, ed. Bruce Trigger, 213–239. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1978. Granqvist, Karin. Samerna, staten och rätten i Torne lappmark under 1600-talet. Makt, diskurs och representation. Umeå: Skrifter från institutionen för historiska studier 8, 2004. Gren, Erik. “Ett bidrag till Nya-Sverigeminnet. Johan Paulinius’ avskedsbrev till Johan Risingh 1653.” Lychnos, (1938): 391–399. Grumet, Robert S. “An Analysis of Upper Delawaran Land Sales in Northern New Jersey, 1630–1758.” In Papers of the Ninth Algonquian Conference, ed. William Cowan, 25–35. Ottawa: Carleton University, 1978. ——. “Sunksquaws, Shamans, and Tradeswomen: Middle Atlantic Coastal Algonkian Women During the 17th and 18th Centuries.” In Women and Colonization: Anthropological Perspectives, ed. Mona Étienne and Eleanor Leacock, 43–62. New York: Praeger, 1980. ——. Historic Contact. Indian People and Colonists in Today’s Northeastern United States in the Sixteenth through Eighteenth Centuries. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1995. Gustafsson, Harald. Nordens historia. En europeisk region under 1200 år. Lund: Studentlitteratur, 1997. Gutiérrez, Ramón A. “A Gendered History of the Conquest of America: A View from New Mexico.” In Gender Rhetorics. Postures of Dominance and Submission in History, ed. Richard C. Trexler, 47–63. Binghamton, New York: Medieval & Renaissance Texts & Studies, 1994. Hale, Duane K., ed., Turtle Tales: Oral Traditions of the Delaware Tribe of Western Oklahoma. Anadarko: Delaware Tribe of Western Oklahoma Press, 1984. ——. Peacemakers on the Frontier: A History of the Delaware Tribe of Western Oklahoma. Anadarko: Delaware Tribe of Western Oklahoma Press, 1987. Hallquist, Göran. “Samiska domstolar, samiska rättsfall.” In Samernas Vita Bok VI:1, Stockholm: Svenska samernas riksförbund, 1979. Hansen, Lars Ivar. “Handel på Nordkalotten ca. 1550–ca. 1750.” In Nordkalotten i en skiftande värld—kulturer utan gränser och stater över gränser, ed. Kyösti Julki, 216–243. Rovaniemi: Studia Historica Septentrionalia 14:1, 1987. ——. “Konstruksjonen av etniske og religiøse skillelinjer i landskapet.” In Stat, religion, etnisitet: rapport fra Skibotn-konferansen 27.–29. mai 1996, ed. Bjørn-Petter Finstad, Lars Ivar Hansen, Henry Minde, Einar Niemi, Hallvard Tjelmeland, 321–340. Universitetet i Tromsø, Senter for samiske studier 4. Tromsø, 1997. Hansson, Stina. “Afsatt på swensko”. 1600-talets tryckta översättningslitteratur. Göteborg: Rundqvists Boktryckeri, 1982. Harper, Robert W. Friends and Indians in South Jersey. Harrison Township Historical Society, 1981. Harrington, Mark R. “Some Customs of the Delaware Indians.” The Museum Journal I:3, University of Pennsylvania (1910): 52–60. ——. “A Preliminary Sketch of Lenape Culture.” American Anthropologist, n. s. 15 (1913): 208–235.

286

bibliography

Hart, Simon. The Prehistory of the New Netherland Company. Amsterdam Notarial Records of the first Dutch voyages to the Hudson. Amsterdam: City of Amsterdam Press, 1959. Hazell, Bo. Resandefolket. Från Tattare till Traveller. Stockholm: Ordfront, 2002. Henrysson, Sten. Prästerna i lappmarken före 1850. Ursprung och arbetsuppgifter. Umeå: Forskningsarkivet, Scriptum no. 19, 1989. Hirsch, Adam. “The Collision of Military Cultures in Seventeenth-Century New England.” The Journal of American History 74:4 (March 1988): 1187–1212. Hodacs, Hanna. Converging World Views. The European Expansion and Early-NineteenthCentury Anglo-Swedish Contacts. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2003. Hodgen, Margaret T. Early Anthropology in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1964. Hoppe, Gunnar. Den äldsta fasta bosättningen i Norrbottens läns Lappmarker. Uppsala: Geographia no. 15, 1940. ——. En gammal marknadsplats i lappmarken. Stockholm: Meddelanden från Uppsala universitets Geografiska institution A 22–29, 1940. Hultblad, Filip. Övergången från nomadism till agrar bosättning i Jokkmokks socken. Stockholm: Acta Lapponica XIV, 1968. Hunter, William A. “The Historic Role of the Susquehannocks.” In Susquehannock Miscellany, ed. John Witthoft and W. Fred Kinsey, III, 8–18. Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1959. Hultkrantz, Åke. “Religion and Experience of Nature among North American Hunting Indians.” In The Hunters—Their Culture and Way of Life, ed. Åke Hultkrantz and Ørnulv Vorren, 163–186. Tromsø Museum Skrifter, XVIII. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1982. Isberg, Alvin. Karl XI och den livländska adeln 1684 –1695. Lund: Lindstedts Universitetsbokhandel, 1953. Israel, Jonathan I. Dutch Primacy in World Trade, 1585–1740. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989. Jacobs, Wilbur. Wilderness Politics and Indian Gifts: The Northern Colonial Frontier, 1748–1763. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1966. ——. Dispossessing the American Indian. Indians and Whites on the Colonial Frontier. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1972. ——. “British Indian Policies to 1783.” In Handbook of North American Indians IV: History of Indian-White Relations, ed. Wilcomb E. Washburn, 5–12. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1988. Jacobsson, Nils. Svenskar och Indianer. Stockholm: Svenska Kyrkans Diakonistyrelses Bokförlag, 1922. Jaenen, Cornelius J. “Amerindian Views of French Culture in the Seventeenth Century.” Canadian Historical Review 55 (1974): 261–291. Jennings, Francis. “Glory, Death and Transfiguration: the Susquehannock Indians in the Seventeenth Century.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 112:1 (February 1968): 15–53. ——. The Invasion of America. Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 1975. ——. “Indians and Frontiers in Seventeenth-Century Maryland,” in Early Maryland in a Wider World, ed. David B. Quinn, 216–241. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1982. ——. “Dutch and Swedish Indian Policies.” In Handbook of North American Indians. Vol. 4: History of Indian-White Relations, ed. Wilcomb E. Washburn, 13–19. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1988. Johnson, Amandus. The Swedish Settlements on the Delaware 1638–1664 (2 vols). Philadelphia: Swedish Colonial Society, 1911. Jones, Dorothy V. “British Colonial Indian Treaties.” In Handbook of North American Indians IV: History of Indian-White Relations, ed. Wilcomb E. Washburn, 185–194. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1988.

bibliography

287

Jordan, Terry G. and Matti Kaups. The American Backwoods Frontier. An Ethnic and Ecological Interpretation. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989. Juricek, John T. “English Territorial Claims in North America Under Elizabeth and the Early Stuarts.” Terrae Incognitae VII (1976): 7–22. Katajala, Kimmo. “Early Modern People(s) in the Borderlands: Linguistic or Religious Definitions of ‘Us’ and ‘Other’.” In Border Crossings: Territory, History and Memory in North and East Europe, ed. Madeleine Hurd. (Forthcoming, Stockholm: Gondolin, 2006). Kawashima, Yasuhide. Puritan Justice and the Indian: White Man’s Law in Massachusetts, 1630 –1763. Middletown: Wesleyan University Press, 1986. Kent, Barry C. Susquehanna’s Indians. Anthropological Series no. 6. Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1984. Kirby, David. Northern Europe in the Early Modern Period. The Baltic World 1492–1772. London: Longman, 1990. Korpijaakko, Kaisa. Samerna och jordäganderätten 1. Kautokeino: Die,ut 3, 1985. ——. “Land Ownership Among the Saami of Sweden-Finland: Theory and Practice.” In Readings in Saami History, Language and Culture III, ed. Roger Kvist, 79–90. Umeå: Miscellaneous Publications from Center for Arctic Cultural Research 14, 1992. Kraft, Herbert C. The Lenape. Archaeology, History, and Ethnography. Newark: New Jersey Historical Society, 1986. ——. The Lenape-Delaware Indian Heritage: 10,000 BC to AD 2000. Lenape Books, 2001. Kupperman, Karen Ordahl. “Apathy and Death in Early Jamestown.” The Journal of American History 66:1 (1979): 24–40. ——. Settling With the Indians. The Meeting of English and Indian Cultures in America, 1580 –1640. Totowa: Rowman and Littlefield, 1980. ——. “Scandinavian Colonists Confront the New World.” In New Sweden in America, ed. Carol Hoffecker, Richard Waldron, Lorraine E. Williams, and Barbara E. Benson, 89–111. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1995. ——. Indians & English. Facing Off in Early America. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 2000. Kvist, Roger. “Review of Kaisa Korpijaakko.” Historisk Tidskrift 3 (1986): 365–368. ——. “Swedish Saami Policy, 1550–1990.” In Readings in Saami History, Culture and Language III, ed. Roger Kvist, 63–77. Umeå: Miscellaneous Publications from the Center for Arctic Cultural Research 14, 1992. Leach, Douglas E. Arms for Empire. A Military History of the British Colonies in North America, 1607–1763. New York: Macmillan Company, 1973. Leacock, Eleanor. “The Montagnais ‘Hunting Territory’ and the Fur Trade.” American Anthropologist 56:5(2): Memoir 78 (1974). Le Goff, Jacques. History and Memory. New York: Columbia University Press, 1992. Lennartsson, Malin. I säng och säte. Relationer mellan kvinnor och män i 1600-talets Småland. Lund: Lund University Press 1999. Lepore, Jill. The Name of War. King Philip’s War and the Origins of American Identity. New York: Vintage Books, 1998. Lilja, Sven. Europa Sverige Världen. Europeisk integration och expansion 1500–1800. Lund: Studentlitteratur, 2001. Lindegren, Jan. “The Swedish ‘Military State’, 1560–1720.” Scandinavian Journal of History 10 (1985): 305–336. Lindmark, Daniel. “Syndiga hedningar och ädla vildar. Synen på samer och indianer i tidigmoderna svenska missionsskildringar.” In Mellem Gud og Djævelen. Religiøse og magiske verdensbilleder i Norden 1500–1800, ed. Hanne Sanders, 203–230. Nord 2001:19. København: nordisk ministerråd, 2001. ——. “Hustavlan i folkundervisningen.” In Västsvensk fromhet. Jämförande studier av västsvensk religiositet under fyra sekler, ed. Christer Ahlberger and Göran Malmstedt, 43–76. Göteborg: Humanistiska fakulteten, 1993. ——. “Utbildning och kolonialism. Svensk skolundervisning i Sápmi på 1700-talet.” Tidskrift för lärarutbildning och forskning 3–4 (2004): 13–31.

288

bibliography

——. Ecclesia Plantanda: Swedishness in colonial America. Umeå: Kulturgräns norr, 2005. Ling, Sofia. Kärringmedicin och vetenskap. Läkare och kvacksalverianklagade i Sverige omkring 1770 –1870. Uppsala: Studia Historica Upsaliensia 212, 2004. Loit, Aleksander. “Sveriges kolonilotter.” In Den dolda historien. 27 uppsatser om vårt okända förflutna, ed. Ronny Ambjörnsson and David Gaunt, 376–395. Malmö: Författarförlaget, 1984. Losman, Arne. “Skokloster—Europe and the World in a Swedish Castle.” In The Age of New Sweden, 85–101. Stockholm: Livrustkammaren, 1988. Lowe, Joan L. “Colonial Gender Discourse and the Delaware Indians.” Unpublished senior thesis, University of Pennsylvania, 1991. (copy at American Philosophical Society) Lundkvist, Sven. “The Experience of Empire: Sweden as a Great Power.” In Sweden’s Age of Greatness 1632–1718, ed. Michael Roberts, 20–57. London: Macmillan, 1973. Lundmark, Lennart. Uppbörd, utarmning, utveckling. Lund: Arkiv avhandlingsserie 14, 1982. Lurie, Nancy Oestreich. “The World’s Oldest On-Going Protest Demonstration: North American Indian Drinking Patterns.” Pacific Historical Review XL:3 (August 1971): 311–332. Mackintosh, Michael Dean. “New Sweden, Natives, and Nature.” In Friends & Enemies in Penn’s Woods. Indians, Colonists, and the Racial Construction of Pennsylvania, ed. William A. Pencak and Daniel K. Richter, 3–17. University Park, Pa: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004. MacLeod, William C. “The Family Hunting Territory and Lenape Political Organization.” American Anthropologist, n.s. 24 (1922): 448–463. Malmstedt, Göran. Bondetro och kyrkoro. Religiös mentalitet i stormaktstidens Sverige. Lund: Nordic Academic Press, 2002. Mancall, Peter C. Deadly Medicine. Indians and Alcohol in Early America. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995. McClintock, Anne. Imperial Leather. Race, Gender and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest. New York and London: Routledge, 1995. McNeil, Kent. Common Law Aboriginal Title. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989. Merchant, Carolyn. Ecological Revolutions. Nature, Gender, and Science in New England. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1989. Merrell, James H. “The Indians’ New World: The Catawba Experience.” The William and Mary Quarterly 3d ser. 41 (1984): 537–565. ——. Into the American Woods. Negotiators on the Pennsylvania Frontier. New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1999. Myrhaug, May-Lisbeth. I modergudinnens fotspor. Samisk religion med vekt på kvinnelige kultutovere og gudinnekult. Oslo: Pax Forlag A/S, 1997. The New Sweden Project. Final Report, ed. Beth Linnerson-Daly. Trenton: The New Sweden Commemorative Commission. New Jersey Department of State, 1988. Newcomb, William W., Jr. The Culture and Acculturation of the Delaware Indians. Anthropological Papers 10. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, 1956. Newcomer, Peter. Foreword to The Cheyenne Nation. A Social and Demographic History, by John H. Moore, xvii–xx. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1987. Nilsson, Sven A. De stora krigens tid. Om Sverige som militärstat och bondesamhälle. Studia Historica Upsaliensia 161. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1990. Nováky, György. Handelskompanier och kompanihandel. Svenska Afrikakompaniet 1649–1663. En studie i feodal handel. Studia Historica Upsaliensia 159. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1990. Oakley, Stewart. Scandinavian History: 1520–1970. A list of books and articles. London: Historical Association, 1984. Öberg, Ingemar. Mission och evangelisation i Gellivare-bygden ca. 1740 –1770. Åbo: Kyrkohistoriska arkivet, meddelanden 7, 1979. Observance of the Three Hundredth Anniversary of the First Permanent Settlement in the Delaware River Valley 1938. US Gov. Printing Office, 1940.

bibliography

289

Odhner, C.T. “The Founding of New Sweden, 1637–1642.” Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 3 (1879): 269–284, 395–411. Oja, Linda. Varken Gud eller natur. Synen på magi i 1600-och 1700-talets Sverige. Eslöv: B. Östlings Bokförlag Symposion, 1999. Omwake, H. Geiger. “White Kaolin Pipes from the Oscar Leibhart Site.” In Susquehannock Miscellany, ed. John Witthoft and W. Fred Kinsey, III, 126–136. Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1959. Ong, Walter J. Orality and Literacy. The Technologizing of the Word. New York and London: Routledge, 1982. Östberg, Wilhelm, ed. Med världen i kappsäcken. Samlingarnas väg till Etnografiska museet. Borås: Etnografiska museet, 2002. Österberg, Eva and Dag Lindström. Crime and Social Control in Medieval and Early Modern Swedish Towns. Uppsala: Studia Historica Upsaliensia 152, 1988. Österberg, Eva. “Bönder och centralmakt i det tidigmoderna Sverige. Konflikt— kompromiss—politisk kultur.” Scandia 55:1 (1989): 73–91. ——. “Gender, Class, and the Courts: Scandinavia.” In Crime History and Histories of Crime. Studies in the Historiography of Crime and Criminal Justice in Modern History, eds. Clive Emsley and Louis A. Knafla, 47–66. Westport, Conn., and London: Greenwood Press, 1996. Österberg, Eva and Sølvi Sogner, eds. People Meet the Law. Control and Conflict-Handling in the Courts. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 2000. Osterhammel, Jürgen. Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview. Kingston, Jamaica: Ian Randle Publishers, 1997. Päiviö, Nils-Johan. Lappskattelandens rättsliga utveckling i Sverige. Kautokeino: Nordiska sameinstitutet Die,ut 3, 2001. ——. “Skattemannarätt eller Privilgium Odiosum.” In Samer och ursprungsbefolkningars rättigheter, ed. Bo Claesson, 137–146. Göteborg: Rapport 6 från Värdegrunden Göteborgs universitet, 2003. Pedersen, Steinar. “State or Saami Ownership of Land in Finnmark?” In Readings in Saami History, Language and Culture II, ed. Roger Kvist, 69–84. Umeå: Miscellaneous Publications from Center for Arctic Cultural Research 12, 1991. Pentikäinen, Juha. “The Forest Finns and Transmitters of Finnish Culture from Savo via Central Scandinavia to Delaware.” In New Sweden in America, ed. Carol Hoffecker, Richard Waldron, Lorraine E. Williams, and Barbara E. Benson, 291–301. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1995. Pleijel, Hilding. Hustavlans värld. Kyrkligt folkliv i äldre tiders Sverige. Stockholm: Verbum 1970. Potter, Stephen R. Commoners, Tribute, and Chiefs. The Development of Algonquian Culture in the Potomac Valley. Charlottesville and London: The University of Virginia Press, 1993. Prawitz, Gunnar. “Samernas rätt.” In Samernas skattefjäll III:I, appendix III. Stockholm: Svenska samernas riksförbund, 1966. Prucha, Francis Paul. The Great Father. The United States Government and the American Indian (abridged edition). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1986. Raestad, A. “Lappeskatten og lappenes rettigheter i Norge for 1751.” In Festskrift til rektor J Qvigstad. Tromsø: Tromsø Museums skrifter II, 1928. Revera, Margareta. “The Making of a Civilized Nation. Nation-Building, Aristocratic Culture and Social Change.” In The Age of New Sweden, 103–131. Stockholm: Livrustkammaren, 1988. Richter, Daniel K. “Cultural Brokers and Intercultural Politics: New York-Iroquois Relations, 1664–1701.” The Journal of American History 75:1 ( June 1988): 40–67. ——. The Ordeal of the Longhouse. The People of the Iroquois League in the Era of European Colonization. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1992. ——. Facing East from Indian country. A Native History of Early America. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press, 2001.

290

bibliography

Roberts, Michael. Gustavus Adolphus: A History of Sweden, 1611–1632, 2 vols. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1958. ——. The Swedish Imperial Experience, 1560–1718. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Rody, Caroline. “Toni Morrison’s Beloved: History, ‘Rememory,’ and a “Clamor for a Kiss.” American Literary History 7:1 (Spring 1995): 92–119. Ronda, James P. “‘Singing Birds’—European Perceptions of the Delaware People.” In The Lenape Indian, a Symposium, ed. Herbert C. Kraft, 11–18. New Jersey: Archaeological Research Center, Seton Hall University, pub. no. 7, 1984. ——. “‘We Are Well As We Are’: An Indian Critique of Seventeenth-Century Mission.” The William and Mary Quarterly 34:1 ( January 1977): 66–82. Rotberg, Robert and Theodore K. Rabb, eds. Hunger and History: The Impact of Changing Food Production and Consumption Patterns on Society. Studies in Interdisciplinary History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Rubel, Margaret. Savage and Barbarian. Historical Attitudes in the Criticism of Homer and Ossian in Britain, 1760–1800. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company, 1978. Runeby, Nils. “Ett fostrat folk.” In Braheskolan under fyra sekler, ed. Gunnar T. Westin, 7–17. Stiftelsen Braheskolan på Visingsö, 1980. ——. “Barbarei oder Zivilität? Zur Entwicklung einer organisierten Gesellschaft im 17. Jahrhundert.” In Europe and Scandinavia: Aspects of the Process of Integration in the 17th Century, ed. Göran Rystad, 203–218. Lund: Esselte, 1983. Ruong, Israel. Samerna i historien och nutiden. (4th revised ed.) Stockholm: Bonnier Fakta, 1982. ——. “Sami Usage and Custom.” In The Sami National Minority in Sweden, ed. Birgitta Jahreskog, 23–35. Stockholm: Published for Rättsfonden by Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1982. Rydving, Håkan. The End of Drum-Time. Religious Change among the Lule Saami, 1670s– 1740s. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 1995. Sahlins, Marshall. Islands of History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985. Salisbury, Neal. Manitou and Providence. Indians, Europeans, and the Making of New England, 1500 –1643. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982. Samerna i Sverige. Statens Offentliga Utredningar 1975:99. Stockholm: Liber/Allmänna förlag, 1975. Sayre, Gordon M. Les Sauvages Américains. Representations of Native Americans in French and English Colonial Literature. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1997. Scharf, J. Thomas and Thompson Westcott. History of Philadelphia 1609 –1864 I. Philadelphia, 1884. Schönenberger, Regula Trenkwalder. Lenape Women, Matriliny, and the Colonial Encounter. Resistance and Erosion of Power (c. 1600–1876). Bern: Peter Lang, 1991. Schybergson, Carl Magnus. “Per Brahes visitationsresa i Nord-Finland år 1639.” Historisk Tidskrift för Finland (1921): 47–59. Sheehan, Bernard W. Seeds of Extinction: Jeffersonian Philanthropy and the American Indian. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1973. Shoemaker, Nancy. A Strange Likeness. Becoming Red and White in Eighteenth-Century North America. New York and London: Oxford University Press, 2004. Sjöberg, Marja Taussi. Rätten och kvinnorna. Från släktmakt till statsmakt i Sverige från 1500-och 1600-talen. Stockholm: Atlantis, 1996. Snow, Dean R. and Kim M. Lanphear. “European Contact and Indian Depopulation in the Northeast: The Timing of the First Epidemics.” Ethnohistory 35:1 (Winter 1988): 15–33. Solem, Erik. Lappiske rettsstudier. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1970. Spady, James O’Neil. “Colonialism and the Discursive Antecedents of Penn’s Treaty with the Indians.” In Friends & Enemies in Penn’s Woods. Indians, Colonists, and the

bibliography

291

Racial Construction of Pennsylvania, ed. William A. Pencak and Daniel K. Richter, 18–40. University Park, Pa: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004. Speck, Frank G. A Study of the Delaware Big House Ceremony, 2. Harrisburg: Publications of the Pennsylvania Historical Commission, 1931. Sprinchorn, Carl. “Kolonien Nya Sveriges Historia.” In Historiskt bibliothek V, ed. Carl Silfverstolpe, 165–267. Stockholm, 1879. Steensgaard, Niels. “The Companies as a Specific Institution in the History of European Expansion.” In Essays on Overseas Trading Companies During the Ancien Régime, ed. L. Blussé and F. Gaastra, 245–264. Comparative Studies in Overseas History, 3. Leiden: Leiden University Press, 1981. Steward, William and Theophilus G. Steward. Gouldtown—a very remarkable settlement of ancient date. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Co., 1913. Sundin, Jan. För Gud, staten och folket: brott och rättskipning i Sverige 1600–1840. Stockholm: Institutet för rättshistorisk forskning, 1992. Svanberg, Ingvar and Mattias Tydén. Tusen år av invandring. Stockholm: Gidlunds Bokförlag, 1998. Swahn, Jan-Öjvind. “En värld av rikedom och monster.” In Det Nya Sverige i landet Amerika. Ett stormaktsäventyr 1638–1655, ed. Rune Ruhnbro, 117–128. Wiken: Förlags AB, 1988. Szasz, Margaret Connell, ed. Between Indian and White Worlds. The Cultural Broker. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1994. Tantaquidgeon, Gladys. Folk Medicine of the Delaware and Related Algonkian Indians. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1972. Thornton, Russell. American Indian Holocaust and Survival. A Population History Since 1492. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1987. Thurman, Melburn D. “Delaware Social Organization.” In A Delaware Indian Symposium, ed. Herbert C. Kraft, Anthropological Series no. 4, 111–134. Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1974. Tooker, Elisabeth. “The Demise of the Susquehannocks: A 17th Century Mystery.” Pennsylvania Archaeologist 54, nos. 3–4 (1984): 1–10. Trelease, Allen W. Indian Affairs in Colonial New York: The Seventeenth Century. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1960. ——. “Indian-White Contacts in Eastern North America: The Dutch in New Netherland.” Ethnohistory 9 (1962): 137–146. Trigger, Bruce G. and William R. Swagerty. “Entertaining Strangers: North America in the Sixteenth Century.” In The Cambridge History of the Native Peoples of the Americas I: North America, ed. Bruce G. Trigger and Wilcomb E. Washburn, 325–398. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Tvengsberg, Per Martin. “Finns in Seventeenth-Century Sweden and Their Contributions to the New Sweden Colony.” In New Sweden in America, ed. Carol Hoffecker, Richard Waldron, Lorraine E. Williams, and Barbara E. Benson, 279–289. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1995. Tydén, Mattias and Ingvar Svanberg. “I nationalismens bakvatten.” In Bryta, bygga, bo, ed. Gunnar Broberg, Ulla Wikander, and Klas Åmark, 221–249. Stockholm: Ordfronts förlag, 1994. Upton, A. F. “Sweden.” In Absolutism in Seventeenth-Century Europe, ed. John Miller, 99–121. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990. Vahtola, Juoko. “Den medeltida befolkningens etniska sammansättning i norra Österbotten.” In Stat, religion, etnisitet: rapport fra Skibotn-konferansen 27.–29. mai 1996, ed. Bjørn-Petter Finstad, Lars Ivar Hansen, Henry Minde, Einar Niemi, Hallvard Tjelmeland, 313–320. Universitetet i Tromsø, Senter for samiske studier 4. Tromsø, 1997. Vaughn, Alden T. New England Frontier: Puritans and Indians, 1620–1675. Boston: Little and Brown, 1965.

292

bibliography

Vorren, Ørnulv and Ernst Manker. Samekulturen. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1976. Vorren, Ørnulv. “Samisk bosetning på Nordkalotten, arealdisponering og ressursutnytting i historisk-økologisk belysning.” In Nord-Skandinaviens historia i tvärvetenskaplig belysning, ed. Evert Baudou and Karl-Hampus Dahlstedt, 238–247. Umeå: Acta Universitatis Umensis 24, 1980. Wacker, Peter O. Land and People. A Cultural Geography of Preindustrial New Jersey: Origins and Settlement Patterns. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1975. Wallace, Anthony F.C. “Women, Land, and Society: Three Aspects of Aboriginal Delaware Life.” Pennsylvania Archaeologist XVII:1–2 (1947): 1–35. ——. King of the Delawares. Teedyuscung 1700 –1763. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1949; reprint, Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1990. Wallerstein, Immanuel. The Modern World-System I–II. New York: Academic Press, 1974 and 1980. Wallerström, Thomas. “De historiska källornas ‘folknamn’ som analysenheter.” In Stat, religion, etnisitet: rapport fra Skibotn-konferansen 27.–29. mai 1996, ed. Bjørn-Petter Finstad, Lars Ivar Hansen, Henry Minde, Einar Niemi, Hallvard Tjelmeland, 383–424. Universitetet i Tromsø, Senter for samiske studier 4. Tromsø, 1997. Washburn, Wilcomb E. Red Man’s Land—White Man’s Law. A Study of the Past and Present Status of the American Indian. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1971. Watson, Bruce. “Fortifications and the ‘idea’ of force in early English East India Company Relations with India.” Past & Present 88 (Aug. 1980): 70–87. Weslager, C.A. The Delaware Indians; A History. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1972. ——. The Swedes and Dutch at New Castle. New York: Middle Atlantic Press, 1987. Westin, Gunnar, ed. Övre Norrlands Historia II. Umeå: Norrbottens och Västerbottens läns landsting, 1965. ——, ed. Övre Norrlands historia III. Umeå: Norrbottens och Västerbottens läns landsting, 1974. White, Richard. The Middle Ground. Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650–1815. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991, 1995. Widén, Bill. “Stormaktstidens prästerskap och lapparnas mytologi.” Historisk Tidskrift för Finland (1961): 145–167. Witgen, Michael. “‘They Have for Neighbors and Friends the Sioux’: The Migration, Adaptation, and Transformation of the Western Ojibways in the Dakota-Ojibwa Alliance.” Working Paper No. 98–21, International Seminar on the History of the Atlantic World, 1500–1800, Harvard University, 1998. Witthoft, John. “Comparison of Delaware and Susquehannock Settlement Patterns.” In The Lenape Indian, a Symposium, ed. Herbert C. Kraft, 33–36. New Jersey: Archaeological Research Center, Seton Hall University, Publication no. 7, 1984. Wolf, Eric R. Europe and the People Without History. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press, 1982, 1997. Zachrisson, Ingrid. “Saami Prehistory in the South Saami area.” In Readings in Saami History, Culture and Language III, ed. Roger Kvist, 9–24. Umeå: Miscellaneous Publications from the Center for Arctic Cultural Research 14, 1992. Zimmerman, Albright G. “European Trade Relations in the 17th and 18th Centuries.” In A Delaware Indian Symposium, ed. Herbert C. Kraft, 57–70. Anthropological series, no. 4. Harrisburg: The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 1974.

GENERAL INDEX

Ackahorn (Aggahorn) 127, 129–130, 156 Ahopameck 122, 132, 134, 157, 183 alcohol 64, 80, 198, 207, 209–210, 211 n. 51, 230, 246, 259–261, 299 Alrichs, Jacob 224, 227, 229, 231 Alrichs, Peter 235–236 Amisackan Falls 123 Ångermanna, see also Lappmarks 69 Aqualiquanes 165 Arjeplog, see also market place 50 n. 13, 61, 63, 64 n. 31, 67, 71 n. 40, 77, 81 Arvidsjaur, see also market place 63, 81 Åsele, see also Lappmarks, market place 63, 66, 68, 73 n. 43, 74 Aurén, Jonas 194–195, 195 n. 33, 196, 200, 262 Baltic 6, 18, 21, 22 n. 5, 38, 77, 86, 88, 93, 96, 99, 185 Baltimore, Lord 140, 180, 242, 259, 264 bath-houses 206 Beeckman, Willem 210, 228–231, 233 birkarl 51–52, 55, 63 Black Minquas 148, 148 n. 12, 149, 164, 168–169, 233 Brahe, Per 25–26, 38, 97, 118 n. 20, 124, 166, 188, 248 Campanius, Johannes ( Johan) 28, 36, 157 n. 25, 189, 199, 202 Chakakitque Falls (Sakakitqz) 123 Chesapeake Bay 123 n. 26, 140, 153, 180, 255 Christina, queen of Sweden 23, 32, 76, 76 n. 45, 89, 97, 100, 131, 144, 162, 185, 248, 252 – instructions 26, 77, 92, 94, 97–98, 100, 117, 119, 144–145, 178, 185, 187, 248–249, 258, 264–265 Claiborne, William 140, 144, 168, 180, 256

clothing 30, 37, 49–50, 106, 141, 205–207 Cock, Lars (Lasse) 238–239 Cock, Peter 233, 235, 237–238, 242 colonialism 7, 11, 204 n. 42 – colonial policies 3, 17, 239, 249, 271 – expansion 8, 17–18, 21, 40, 89, 247 – integration 10, 40, 54 – internal colonization 6, 17 commemorations 1–2, 270, 272 Conestoga, see also Susquehannocks 195–196, 246 Connecticut 117, 147, 149, 172 n. 2 contagious diseases, see disease 214 corn, see also maize 61, 96, 102, 104–106, 112, 121, 144, 154, 157–158, 167, 184–185, 201, 222, 228, 241, 256 cultural encounters 4, 6, 9–10, 13, 67, 276 culture 3, 4, 7–14, 19, 19 n. 2, 25, 27, 31, 33, 35, 38, 41, 60, 68, 71, 74–75, 77, 82, 84, 95 n. 8, 97, 100–101, 101 n. 2, 102, 174, 176, 193, 197–200, 218, 244, 247, 249, 257, 261, 267, 275, 277 Delaware Indians, see Lenapes Denmark, see also Norway 4, 18, 21, 51, 56–57, 60, 78 n. 46, 145, 250 diplomatic exchanges 82 disease, also contagious diseases, illness 4, 158, 158 n. 27, 182, 198, 207, 210–219, 246, 259–260, 275 – measles 214, 216–217, 217 n. 57, 218 – smallpox 214, 215 n. 54, 216–218, 223–224, 232 drums 78, 83, 86, 257 Dutch settlements 148 Dutch West India Company 116, 117 n. 18, 146, 226 Esopus

150, 160, 231, 233

294

general index

Finland 18, 25, 38, 41–42, 188, 248 forest Finns 95, 95 n. 8, 96 Finnmarken, also Finnmarksvidda 51, 52 n. 16, 56 Finnmarksvidda, see Finnmarken 42 Fort Casimir 151, 222, 224–225, 227 Fort Christina, see also Swedish settlements 135, 141, 148, 157, 165–166, 173, 190, 222, 224, 226–227, 269 Fort Elfsborg, see also Swedish settlements 120, 151–152 Fort Göteborg, see also Swedish settlements 150–151 Fort Korsholm, see also Swedish settlements 121 Fort Nassau 90, 143–145, 150, 181 friendship 2, 4, 21, 132 152, 157, 165, 168, 173, 182–184, 196, 202, 225, 232, 238, 253, 255, 268–271, 273–275 – stories of 6, 33, 62 n. 29, 83, 271, 276 gender, Lapland 49, 65, 127, 185, 204, 204 n. 42 – men’s roles 9, 240 – sexual relations and courts 71, 74, 86, 196, 197 n. 35 – women’s roles 75 gender, Lenapehoking 5, 87, 101–102, 112, 126, 179, 211, 246, 267 – and power 2, 110 – men’s roles 9, 240 – sexual relations 71, 74, 86, 196, 197 n. 35 – women’s roles 75 go-betweens, see middlemen 210, 231, 246 Graan, Johan 57, 86 Gran, see also sii"da 67 guns 45, 64, 123, 129, 147, 150, 150 n. 151, 164–165, 172, 184, 205, 208, 225, 254–256, 266 Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden 2, 18, 21, 23, 34, 89, 114 n. 15, 174, 257 hållapp 61 health, Indian 219 – healers (medew, powow) 212–213 – medical practices 211, 216

Helm, Israel 238–239, 242 Hesselius, Andreas 193, 201, 205, 269, 269 n. 19 d’Hinojossa, Alexander 224, 230 Holm, Thomas Campanius 28, 36, 36 n. 19, 157, 166, 174, 202, 268–269 Hudde, Andries 126, 150, 181, 224–225, 232, 252 Huygen, Hendrik 94, 144, 148–149, 210, 227–228, 230, 232, 241 Hvivan 122, 166 illness, see disease 158, 213, 218–219 interpreters, Swedish 147, 170, 221, 232, 238, 241, 244 n. 25, 275 Iroquois 137, 139, 140, 140 n. 1, 152–153, 153 n. 20, 154 n. 20, 169, 170, 217, 222, 224, 233, 256, 268, 274 – Mohawks 151, 153 n. 20, 233 – Senecas 143 n. 4, 153 n. 20, 154 n. 20, 224, 224 n. 3, 232, 233 Jokkmokk, see also market place 63, 67 Jukkasjärvi, see also market place 56, 63, 71 Kalm, Pehr 102 n. 4, 214, 241, 266 Karesuando, see also market place 63 Karl IX, king of Sweden 40, 52, 54–55, 62, 76, 247 Karl XI, king of Sweden 80, 187 n. 22, 261 kätniss 105, 202–203 Kemi, see also Lappmarks 55, 69–70, 76, 250 Kieft, Willem 262 Kling, Måns 94, 192 Körningh, Johannes 83 Lais, see also sii"da 67 land 2–7, 18–22, 40–42, 45, 47–48, 48 n. 10, 49–51, 54, 57–61, 68–71, 86–89, 94–96, 99–101, 101 n. 2, 102, 105, 107, 107 n. 8, 108, 108 n. 9, 109, 109 n. 10, 110–117, 117 n. 18, 118–123, 123 n. 26, 124–132, 134–138, 140–142, 144–148, 151–153, 155–157, 159, 162, 165–166, 168–171, 173, 176, 182–183, 202–205, 209, 215, 219,

general index 221–223, 224 n. 3, 227–229, 234–237, 239, 242, 245, 247–254, 256, 259–260, 263–265, 270–272, 274–276 – donation 205 – ownership 4, 51, 53, 61, 101 n. 2, 107, 126, 138 – purchase 132, 152, 239 – “rightful owners” 100–101, 117, 132, 134–135, 137, 252 Lapland, see also gender, Sameædnam, Sápmi 3–4, 6–7, 27–28, 37, 40, 44, 54, 87, 98, 101, 190, 247, 249–250, 253, 259–261, 274, 276 Lappmarks, see also Ångermanna, Åsele, Kemi, Luleå, Piteå, Torne, Umeå 7, 27, 40, 44, 50, 58, 61–63, 67–71, 76, 78, 81, 83, 86–87, 247, 250, 253, 257, 261 “lappmark trades” 59 legal customs 260 – English 116 – Indian 137–138 – retribution 176, 179–180, 182, 235, 277 – Swedish 74, 138, 175, 258 Lenapehoking, see also gender 5, 87, 101–102, 112, 126, 179, 198 n. 36, 211, 211 n. 51, 246, 267 Lenapes 1, 5, 13–15, 30, 39, 100, 102, 105, 108, 108 n. 9, 109–113, 117, 119–122, 125–126, 128, 130–131, 136, 138, 141–144, 148–157, 159–162, 164–165, 167–170, 172, 175–176, 178–179, 181–185, 190, 192, 194, 196, 198–207, 209–210, 212–213, 215–219, 221–225, 227–237, 239–242, 244, 246, 251–253, 255–256, 258–261, 263–271, 273–277 Lindeström, Peter (Pehr, Petter) 28, 30–31, 31 n. 13, 35, 37, 104, 161, 183, 199, 205, 218 n. 58, 222, 268 local courts (ting) 56, 69, 234, 260 Lord, Richard 124, 158 Luleå, see also Lappmarks 69–70 Lundius, Nicolaus 45, 66, 72, 83 Lutheran church 23–24, 195 – Lutheran orthodoxy 26 – Luther’s Little Cathechism 185, 190 Lycksele, see also market place 35, 63, 67, 78

295

maize, see also corn 102, 104, 104 n. 5, 106, 123, 154, 156, 204, 256 Manhattan 141, 143, 150, 160, 172, 221, 222, 222 n. 1, 228, 231, 233, 256, 268, 269, 271 market place 52, 62–63, 66–69, 71–72, 73 n. 43, 76, 80, 98, 257, 260 Maryland 92, 140, 149, 153, 165, 172, 172 n. 2, 176, 181–182, 207, 222, 224, 232, 233 n. 13, 234–235, 242, 255, 263, 274 Mattahorn 119, 126–130, 152, 156, 159, 183, 263–264 measles, see disease 214, 216, 217 n. 57, 218 medew, see health, Indian 212 middlemen, also go-betweens 64, 68, 147, 158–159, 169, 221, 244, 260, 267 – Lenape 159, 231 – Swedish 210, 231, 246, 267 military customs, Indian 174 – torture 173–175, 175 n. 5 – warfare 22, 174, 176, 188, 205 Minquas, see also Susquehannocks 151, 161 Minquas Path 90, 141–143, 159 Minuit, Peter 90, 92, 117–119, 121, 127, 143, 152 Mitatsimint (Metatsimint) 119, 130 Mohawks, see Iroquois 151, 153 n. 20, 233 Munsees 150, 160 Naaman 183–185 Nasafjäll 60, 60 n. 27, 61, 62 n. 29, 76 The Netherlands, also Holland 20–21, 90, 122 New England 115–116, 124–125, 143, 162, 175 n. 5, 203 n. 41, 254, 264 New Haven 147–149, 158, 255 New Jersey 92, 108, 206 n. 46, 238, 241–243 New Netherland 90, 98, 100, 143, 149, 172, 203, 255, 263 New Sweden 1–2, 4, 6, 14, 26, 28, 30, 34, 38, 87, 92–94, 96, 100, 117, 119–120, 124, 132, 208, 215, 217–219, 221, 224, 226–228, 242, 244, 247, 249, 251–252, 254, 258–263, 265–266, 267–269, 272, 274

296

general index

New Sweden Company 89, 93 n. 6, 98, 117–118, 131, 248, 254 Niurenius, Olaus Petri 35, 78 Norway, see also Denmark, Denmark-Norway 4, 18, 41, 51, 56, 56 n. 22, 57, 60, 62–66, 68, 78 n. 46, 80, 84, 250 Notike 127–131 Nutimus 137, 137 n. 43 Ondoliasnekii 165 oral 182, 199–201, 249 – history 273 – traditions 273 n. 26 Oxenstierna, Axel 23, 76, 89–90, 92, 118 n. 20, 146, 248 Papegoja, Johan 94, 101, 173 Passayunk, Passayungh 131–132, 157 pastors 25, 27, 32, 36, 55, 72, 75–78, 80–83, 85, 192, 194 n. 31, 196, 199, 214, 219, 239 n. 20, 244–245, 257, 261–262, 268 peace 273, 275 – peaceful relationships, relations 2, 98, 221, 225, 239, 253, 263, 266, 270–271, 273–274, 277 Peminacka 122, 127–131, 134, 183 Penn, William 104, 108, 125, 137–138, 221, 234, 239, 243–244, 246, 270–271, 273, 275 Pennsylvania 92, 108, 113, 139, 170, 206, 223, 241–242, 244, 266, 273, 275–276 pigs 202–204, 219–220 Piteå, see also Lappmarks 67, 69, 257 powow, see health, Indian 212–213 Printz, Johan 38, 94, 97, 101, 117–118, 124, 126–127, 149, 151, 166, 168, 172, 176, 178, 248, 262, 264 Rambo, Peter Gunnarsson 171, 210, 235, 239 Rheen, Samuel 30 n. 13, 68, 78 Risingh, Johan 93–94, 101, 111, 123, 132, 134, 136–138, 145, 151–153, 166, 168, 173, 182, 189, 208, 215, 225, 231, 252 Rudman, Andreas 214, 223 n. 2, 268 Saami, see also sii"da 48, 50 – forest 45, 47–48, 57, 60, 65–68, 78, 80, 254

– Laplanders 27 – Lapps 45, 58–59, 67, 75–76, 81 – mountain 45 n. 6, 46, 48 n. 10, 56–57, 60–61, 65–66, 68, 254, 258, 260 Sakakitqz, see Chakakitque Falls 123, 153 Sameædnam, see also Lapland 41 Sandel, Andreas 30, 31 n. 13, 173, 193 Sápmi, see also Lapland 3, 7 Schefferus, Johannes 27, 54, 78 schools 77, 84 Senecas, see Iroquois 143, 153 n. 20, 154 n. 20, 224, 224 n. 3, 232–233 sewant, see wampum 119, 147, 161, 167, 180, 228 sii"da (Saami village) 48, 50 silver 3, 45, 50, 60–62, 65, 68, 69 n. 37, 76, 164, 190, 250, 254 Sjokksjokk, see also sii"da 65 smallpox, see disease 214, 215 n. 54, 216–218, 223–224, 232 Stuyvesant, Peter 93, 126, 151, 181, 227, 262 Susquehanna River 102, 139, 169, 242, 246 Susquehannocks 30, 33, 90, 109, 110 n. 11, 111–112, 119–120, 123–125, 136–140, 140 n. 1, 141–144, 147–148, 148 n. 12, 149–153, 153 n. 20, 154–155, 159–161, 164–165, 167–170, 172–173, 176, 182, 194–196, 199, 201, 205, 207, 217–219, 221–222, 224, 224 n. 3, 228, 231–236, 239, 246, 252–253, 255–256, 259, 266, 269, 271, 273–275 Svensson, Jacob 158, 165, 227, 231–232 Swanendael, see also Dutch settlements 121–122, 136, 143, 172, 174, 181, 265 Swedberg, Jesper 31 n. 13, 32, 173–192, 244 “Swedish nation” 2, 226, 228, 234, 240, 245, 249, 267 Swedish settlements 153, 218, 226 taxation, also taxes, taxlands 24, 47–48, 51–52, 54–57, 59, 62, 69, 247–249 ting, see local courts 69 Tinicum 132, 157, 172, 183, 210, 230, 237, 263, 274

general index Tinicum Island, see also Swedish settlements 151, 273 Tom, William 235–236 Tornæus, Johannes 30 Torne, see also Lappmarks 54, 70–71 trade goods 121–122, 125, 127, 129, 134, 136, 139, 140 n. 1, 142–143, 149–150, 155, 157 n. 25, 158–160, 166, 168, 170, 172–173, 188, 229, 251, 253–254, 256, 262–263 Tuorponjaur, see also sii"da 65 Umeå, see also Lappmarks 69, 78, 257 Upland, see also Swedish settlements 157, 233, 236–238, 242

297

vilde (wild man) 34, 174 Virginia 115–116, 123, 140, 143, 147–149, 153, 165, 172, 176, 217, 235, 255, 263–264 wampum, also sewant, zeewant 119, 147, 160–161, 169 Wapsten, see also sii"da 73, 84 White Minquas, see also Susquehannocks 30, 195 Wicacoa, see also Swedish settlements 30, 195, 237 Winthrop, John 125 Wissemenetto 126 zeewant, see wampum 160

THE ATLANTIC WORLD ISSN 1570–0542

1. Postma, J. & V. Enthoven (eds.). Riches from Atlantic Commerce. Dutch Transatlantic Trade and Shipping, 1585-1817. 2003. ISBN 90 04 12562 0 2. Curto, J.C. Enslaving Spirits. The Portuguese-Brazilian Alcohol Trade at Luanda and its Hinterland, c. 1550-1830. 2004. ISBN 90 04 13175 2 3. Jacobs, J. New Netherland. A Dutch Colony in Seventeenth-Century America. 2004. ISBN 90 04 12906 5 4. Goodfriend, J.D. (ed.). Revisiting New Netherland. Perspectives on Early Dutch America. 2005. ISBN 90 04 14507 9 5. Macinnes, A.I. & A.H. Williamson (eds.). Shaping the Stuart World, 16031714. The Atlantic Connection. 2006. ISBN 90 04 14711 X 6. Haggerty, S. The British-Atlantic Trading Community, 1760-1810. Men, Women, and the Distribution of Goods. 2006. ISBN 90 04 15018 8 7. Kleijwegt, M. (ed.). The Faces of Freedom. The Manumission and Emancipation of Slaves in Old World and New World Slavery. 2006. ISBN 90 04 15082 X 8. Emmer, P.C., O. Pétré-Grenouilleau & J. Roitman (eds.). A Deus ex Machina Revisited. Atlantic Colonial Trade and European Economic Development. 2006. ISBN 90 04 15102 8 9. Fur, G. Colonialism in the Margins. Cultural Encounters in New Sweden and Lapland. 2006. ISBN-10: 90 04 15316 0, ISBN-13: 978 90 04 15316 5