One of the news items in a recent summary of “This Week’s Top New York History News” here at The New York History Blog had a link to an article from the Albany Times Union (reprinted from the New York Times), entitled “New York Won’t Celebrate 350th Birthday.” The article noted that neither the city nor the state was commemorating the takeover of New Netherland by the British in August, 1664.
The writer suggested that “a dispassion for the past” among the public was a basic explanation.
The article quoted a historian who said: “I’m trying to imagine what it would look like: a re-enactment of British ships threatening to bombard the Wall Street area? But nothing actually happened, not a shot fired, except for Peter Stuyvesant’s temper tantrum. Not sparky stuff. Lowering a Dutch flag somewhere and raising a British one instead? Doesn’t set the pulse a-pounding.”
Of course, that perspective seems rather limited. It does not take into account the historical significance of the event. The British takeover was the beginning of the colony of New York and a major step in Britain’s control of what later became the United States.
This might have been an opportunity not only to commemorate the event but also to call public attention to New York’s historical development and greatness.
Just to the south, New Jersey is building a series of commemorative events around “New Jersey 350,” emphasizing the themes of innovation, diversity, and liberty. “Since its creation in 1664, New Jersey has played a pivotal role in the shaping of American life and culture,” says the website. “Don’t miss out on this once-in-a-generation opportunity to commemorate the Garden State’s notable contributions to the nation and the world.”
New York needs to do more to commemorate turning points in its history, and to use them to build public awareness of that history. Leadership is essential. That points up the need for a Commission on New York State History, proposed by Assemblyman Steve Englebright in the 2014 legislature. His bill is being revised and will be reintroduced next year.
This also points to the opportunities for New York State History Month, which Section 57.02 of the Arts and Cultural Affairs Law designates as November. Section 2 of the law says “The purpose of this month shall be to celebrate the history of New York state and recognize the contributions of state and local historians.” The law has been on the statue books for several years with little attention or official activity.
There seems to be some rising interest in History Month this year. In Albany, the University Club is planning a series of History Month events. The State Museum is developing links to websites of organizations that may be initiating History Month events.
November would be a great time to take up the story of the beginning of New York, including its brief reconquest by the Dutch a few years after the British takeover, and its subsequent return to the British.
Illustration: Articles about the Transfer of New Netherland on the 27th of August, Old Style, Anno 1664.
Apart from the “temper tantrum”, which is an nineteenth-century embellishment, it was not a British takeover, but an English takeover.
The town of Eastchester, New York is also celebrating its 350th anniversary. Our town was founded by 10 Puritan farm families who settled somewhere near Co-Op city in the Bronx. When they arrived they thought it was Dutch territory and it is very probable that they thought they were extending the territory of the self governing colony of Connecticut. They knew the Dutch were tolerant and there must have been apprehension that the Duke of York would suspend their religious and political liberties.
It was a very unsettled period in history and it is a shame that more attention is not paid to this fascinating event. The general public does not know that the Dutch reclaimed the land for the Netherlands nine years later.
Dick Forliano Eastchester Town Historian
Why is New York’s birthday 1664?
Because the “region” got a new owner who changed its name?
Much to discuss about.
This year 1614 is the regions 400 year birth of New-Netherland founded by the Dutch. The region adopted formally and legally recognized by the Dutch Government the States General on october 11 1614 with Fort Nassau on Castle Island as its first settlement and “officially” adopted as a Dutch province, colony, in 1624 leading up to the birth of Fort Orange and Fort New Amsterdam a year later.
Of course before that it was “virtual” part of English Virginia who claimed the area without ever seen or knowing about the Hudson River and Long Island Sound region. Which was discovered first by the Dutch. Does not matter if Hudson was an Englishman as he was sailing in 1609 for the Dutch with information of the Dutch. The Dutch already knew the region even maybe traded there and even called it New Virginia. They explored and mapped it as the first (see map on Vellum 1614) and established structural trade with natives laying the foundation out of which New Netherland came to be in 1614 and ……….
There is enough solid argumentation that New Yorks birth year (as well as well that of New Jersey) could be regarded 1614. Maybe to be seen just “born” as a bastard child of the Dutch and English with Virginia (Native owned) as the mother of New Netherland. It does not change that birth year if it 10 years later was officially adopted by the Dutch and 50 years later was kidnapped by the English.
If we want to talk about the brief retake of New York by the Dutch in 1672 we should for sure talk about what happened before and started in 1614 and yes Hudson may be part of that to of course.
Of course not to forget that the American Natives lived there before and “owned” it. So we actually only talk about a European commemoration or celebration (!) of the birth of its “colonization”. Discussion is maybe just about which one? The Dutch or the English one?