Skip to main content
Go to accessibility notice


    Native American 1696 Land Deed for Most of Hyde Park, New York.
    -June 24, 1696. Hudson River Valley, New York. In Old Dutch. Four pages on three leaves. 15" x 12" unfolded. Matted and framed to 41" x 27"
    -Original folds, some foxing, tears, chipping and soiling, else very good.

    This land deed is a rare, early primary document relating to the Hyde Park, New York, area, which later became Franklin D. Roosevelt's beloved home, now a national historical site. This 1696 autograph document conveys 15,000 acres of land to a group of early and notable Dutch settlers. The agreement, penned in gunpowder ink, was made between Hendrick ten Eyck and five Native American chiefs whose totem signatures are included next to red wax seals.

    The most important of the chiefs was Nimham, a Wappinger, whose totem signature resembles a ghost waving a single hand. His grandson, Abraham Nimham, served on the American side during the Revolutionary War. The document also includes the signature of Stephanus van Cortlandt, the first native-born Mayor of New York City, who held every major office in the colony except Governor. He was very prominent in dealings with Native American tribes.

    The document reads (translated, in part): "Hendrick ten Eyck has come to an agreement with some Indians, rightful owners of the land and a waterway called Aquasing, called the Viskil by us; this land begins on the north side of the Viskil at the marker trees of Paling; these underwritten Indians sell to Hendrick ten Eyck all with the Viskil and all other waterways until Meyndert Harmense's property; this aforesaid land reaches to the east until the Valkil [Fallkil] of Meyndert Harmense and to the west until Hutson's [Hudson's] River." Meyndert Harmense was owner of land bordering the northern sector of "The Great Nine Partners Patent," which was the property of Hendrick ten Eyck and eight others.

    This unique historical document transferring ownership of what became Hyde Park and Springwood, New York, from Native Americans to Dutch colonial settlers is custom-framed. The larger frame (41" x 27") includes a hinged smaller (22" x 19") frame housing the document that can be released from a Velcro strip on the right side. This allows the verso of the document to be viewed while the display remains hanging on the wall.

    More Information:

    The extended description below was supplied by the consignor. We are making it available to our web bidders who are interested in more in-depth research and broader historical perspective. Please note that presentation (i.e. framing), lot divisions, and interpretations of condition and content may occasionally differ from our descriptions. Assertions of fact and subjective observations contained in this description represent the opinion of the consignor. These remarks have not been checked for accuracy by Heritage Auctions, and we assume no responsibility for their accuracy; they are offered purely to allow the bidder insight into the way the consignor has viewed the item(s) in question. No right of return or claim of lack of authenticity or provenance based upon this extended description will be granted.


    One of the earliest and rarest primary source historic documents relating to the Hyde Park, New York Roosevelt family in America, and FDR's beloved Hyde Park home and land, now a national historical site: the Seventeenth Century Indian (Native American) Deed conveying 15,000 acres of land to a group of early and notable Dutch settlers in the Hudson River Valley of New York that would later become FDR's Hyde Park estate! The 1696 Indian Land Deed Manuscript DS is in Old Dutch, 4pps on 3 leaves, New York, June 24, 1696, translated. The Agreement is penned in gunpowder ink between Hendrick ten Eyck and five Indian Chiefs, whose pictorial totem signatures adorn this document next to red wax seals. The most important of the Indian signatories is Nimham (fl. 1667-1744), whose totem resembles a ghost waving a hand. Also called "Squahikkon" or "Quahiccon," he was a member of an influential Wappinger Indian family and was likely an ancestor of Daniel Nimham, a famed Wappinger Chief who with his son, was killed fighting on the American side during the Revolutionary War. Also signed by Stephanus Van Cortlandt (1643-1700), one of New York's largest landholders who held every major office in New York except Governor; David Jamison (1660-1739) who became Chief Justice of New Jersey, and Meyndert Harmense, the surviving owner of the Sanders-Harmense Patent which bordered on the tract herein described, which ultimately became the city of Poughkeepsie, New York. Harmense's father, Dr. Harmense Myndert van den Bogaerdt, had served as surgeon at Fort Orange in Albany, New York. The document, translated, reads: "Hendrick ten Eijeck has come to an agreement with some Indians, rightful owners of the land and a waterway called Aquasing, called the Viskil by us; this land begins on the north side of the Viskil at the marker trees of Paling; these underwritten Indians sell to Hendrick ten Eijck all with the Viskil and all other waterways until Meyndert Harmense's property; this aforesaid land reaches to the east until the Valkil [Fallkil] of Meyndert Harmense and to the west until Hutson's [Hudson's] River." Signed with their totems by the Native American Proprietors: Nimham; Willem; Mattasiwanck; Quagan; and Rapawees. Further, "This was signed and confirmed in the presence of Meyndert Harmense and his wife, and submitted by the Indians to Hendrick ten Eijck as witness." Meyndert Marmense and Lenne Meynders pen their signatures beneath. Thereafter is listed the payment rendered to the Native Americans, being 5 kettles; Rugs 4; another 8 shirts; Blankets 4; another 8 pairs of stockings; Duffels 4; Gunpowder 12 lbs; Lead 25 staves; Guns 4; Sewant [wampum] 300 guilders, black and white; Axes 12; Knives 20; Tobacco 2 rolls; Adzes 12; 1 barrel of cider; 1 half barrel of good beer; 2 hats; 1 anker of rum; 2 fine coats; 2 shirts, fine; and 2 pair of stocking [defect]. Stephanus van Cortlandt pens and ornately signs his endorsement in English, "One of the Justices of the Supreme Court of this Province, Meyndert Harmense and Helena Harmense, and being sworn upon the holy [Scriptures] said, that they were witnesses to the within deed, and saw the Indians therein named..." David Jamison also pens an endorsement recording the Deed. The document concludes with the statement, June 25, 1696, "Thus the rightful owners went with Jan Oostroom and Tijs Geraetse and conveyed the land and the Viskill, along with all the other waterways up to Meyndert Harmense's property; the land is called Aquasing..." Signed with the marks of Jan Oostroom; and Tijs Geraetsz. With final signatory, Meyndert Harmensz, who witnesses, "This was signed in the presence of the rightful owners and me." Docketed on verso in English, "The original agree[ment] or first Indian purch[ase] made by Ten Eyck 24[th June] 1696 in Dutch." Four partial fold separations with paper loss affecting only a few words; normal toning; occasional light foxing. Handsomely matted and framed beside printed engraving of an early Native American warrior and descriptive text that gives the viewer of this magnificent piece of history an overview of the deed and its Dutch colonial and Native American signatories, conveying the land that would become FDR's Springwood and the town of Hyde Park, New York, from Native American to Dutch colonial hands for the first time in history. Overall the presentation piece measures 40 ½ x 26 ¾." The deed is accompanied by a complete translation; and map of Crown Patent Grants awarded in Colonial Dutchess County, 1685-1706 (Based on the map in McDermott, 1986: 2) referencing, among others, the Sanders & Harmense Patent. In the mid-eighteenth century, 1742, Jacobus Stoutenburgh, a wealthy area landowner, purchased much of the land described in this deed from the [Great] Nine Partners, and the area was known at that time by the family name. This tract, along with property north of Crum Elbow Creek eventually gave rise to Hyde Park, formally named in 1812, and established as a town in 1821. Early residents included the Stoutenburghs and Drs. John and Samuel Bard, physicians to President George Washington. Claes Martenszan van Rosenvelt, the original descendant of FDR who traveled to America from Holland (the Netherlands), arrived in New Amsterdam (Manhattan, now New York City) in 1649, only 47 years before the date of this deed transferring the Hyde Park and environs lands from the Native Americans to the Dutch colonial purchasers. In 1867, James and his first wife Rebecca Howland Roosevelt moved to Hyde Park, New York. Fifteen years later, after the death of his first wife and his remarriage to Sara Delano Roosevelt, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was born at Springwood in Hyde Park. At one point, FDR served as town historian, editing and publishing two books of early local records. Springwood, the family homestead on the Hudson River, was a peaceful retreat for FDR throughout his life and Presidency. FDR donated his home and 33 acres of the land conveyed in this 1696 land deed to the American people in 1943, on the condition that his family be allowed to use it after his death. It was transferred to the Department of the Interior on November 21, 1945, after the family relinquished their lifetime rights. The Home of Franklin D. Roosevelt National Historic Site, which contains 290 acres, is administered by the National Park Service, United States Department of the Interior. After moving to Hyde Park in 1867, FDR's father James Roosevelt bought the house at Springwood. It was a large farmhouse built around 1800, but James, and later Sara and FDR, transformed it into something grander. The previous owner had already built a three-story tower and a full-length covered porch. James added two rooms, enlarged the servants' wing, and built a large carriage house for his prized horses and carriages. Franklin also planted many varieties of trees on the grounds, eventually turning large sections of the estate into an experimental forestry station. Franklin had a lifelong interest in trees, beginning with specimen plantings he made with his father in the 1880s. After 1911, FDR began large scale plantings of his own, later entering into an agreement with the Forestry Department of Syracuse University to use the wood lots at Springwood as an experimental forestry station. Almost half a million trees were planted at Springwood between 1911-1945. FDR took pride in the fact that he could contribute timber to the war effort after 1941. President Roosevelt's interest in trees, and in conservation in general, played an important part in the creation of the Civilian Conservation Corps, still regarded as one of the most successful New Deal programs. The cluttered Living Room and Library reflects the eclectic decorating style of FDR and his mother Sara. A melange of family heirlooms, European and Oriental antiques and American department store furnishings created an impressive yet comfortable room. FDR spent countless hours at his corner desk working with his stamps, rigging a model ship or pursuing a newly acquired rare book. His collections were impressive: a personal library of 14,000 volumes; more than 2,000 naval paintings, prints and lithographs; more than 200 model ships; 1.2 million stamps; more than 300 mounted bird specimens and thousands of coins, banknotes, campaign buttons and medallions. Located just below Crum Elbow Creek, the FDR estate sits on the land originally conveyed by the Native Americans to the Dutch colonial settlers in this 1696 deed, which is now a national historic site. Provenance for this unique, rare, and historic deed is from the Frank T. Siebert Library of the North American Indian and American Frontier; Sotheby's, New York, Friday, May 21, 1999. The ghost Indian Totem signature on this 1696 deed was actually used as the inside cover artwork for Sotheby's two day auction. For complete background and analysis of this one of a kind historic item related to the Roosevelt family of Hyde Park, New York, here is the text of J. Michael Smith's "The Seventeenth Century Sachems or Chiefs of the Wapping Country: Corporate Identity and Interaction in the Hudson River Valley," in full: The Wappingers and other native groups of southern New York have for more than a century been labeled as generic bands of a greater Delaware Nation, or as the principal constituents of a Pan-River Indian confederacy spanning the Hudson and Connecticut valleys. These long held misconceptions are largely the result of inferences made by late nineteenth and early twentieth century researchers rather than thorough investigations of the archival record. This discussion reviews corporate and individual references pertaining to Indian people "from the Wapping country" using ethnohistorical modeling that identifies them as aggregates of the Munsee cultural region, and as active participants in the ever-widening world of early contact history./ Introduction/ Wappinger Indians and other native peoples of the Hudson valley first received historical attention during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in such now classic studies as those written by Edward M. Ruttenber (1872), and Reginald P. Bolton (1920). Although these early scholars were exceedingly careful researchers, their notions of cultural and linguistic boundaries have failed to stand up to the test of time. Ruttenber, Bolton, and their contemporaries, were working during a period when anthropological science was in its infancy and without the benefit of modern linguistic and ethnohistoric methodologies, subdisciplines that had yet to come into their own. The so-called "chieftaincies of the Wappingers" envisioned by Ruttenber (1872: 77-85) merged what modern linguists now recognize as two distinct Algonquian languages; the Munsee dialect of the Delaware language spoken on the lower Hudson River, with that of the Quiripi language spoken by numerous ethnic-groups along the river valleys of western Connecticut. Moreover, Ruttenber's expanded cultural groupings were not solely confined to the Wappingers. He also envisioned a much larger Mohican nation that included Abenaki speakers from northern New England such as the Soquatucks of the Green Mountains, Pennacooks of New Hampshire and others (Ruttenber, 1872: 85). Bolton, for his part, identified the Wappingers and other Munsee groups as constituents of the "Mahikan of The Mainland, East of Hudson River" (1920: 22-45). Yet, despite revisions of this earlier research begun in the 1970's that define our current understanding of Algonquian cultural geography in the northeast woodlands (Trigger, 1978; Goddard, 1978a; Grumet, 1995), persistence in the belief of a Wappinger confederacy spanning the Hudson and Connecticut rivers still prevails among some today. Linguistic evidence alone has not entirely succeeded in dispelling this long held myth. This study attempts to use ethnohistoric methods that help identify Wappinger Indians as a distinctive group of the Munsee-speaking world with their own unique history. Using a culturally orientated view from their perspective (Becker, 1993: 16-17) allows us to examine data that is group specific to provide a more detailed assessment of corporate identity, interaction with neighboring groups and the histories of individuals associated with the "Wapping Country."/ Corporate References/ Corporate or ethnic-group references pertaining to Wappinger Indians in the seventeenth century occur in some eighty-four documents found in colonial archives and are cataloged here in Appendix 1 for cross-reference. The primary source material used in this study consists of dated events transpiring from 1610 to 1690 that depict the lives of native people living in the region traversed by the Wappinger Creek, Fishkill Creek, and other tributary waterways of the mid-Hudson River valley in present-day Dutchess and Putnam counties, New York. The exact origin and meaning of the term Wappinger is not indicated in these seventeenth century sources. Secondary county histories suggest that it may be derived from the Dutch word Wapen (weapon) favoring such interpretations as "weapon-bearers" or "half-armed Indians" (Hasbrouck, 1909: 24). Modern linguists, however, citing nineteenth century missionary and Indian informants who indicated that it meant opossum, suggest the term is a possible cognate of "wa.pi.nkw" the Munsee name for that animal. Translations of the term as easterners, a favorite of past researchers in the region, was refuted by the above mentioned informants who distinguished Wappinger Indians from the Wappanoos or Wapenocks (Table 1); a seventeenth century Dutch name – likely borrowed from the Munsee word "wa.pano.w" (easterner) – that early explorers used to identify the so-called "eastern nations" living around Sloop's or Narragansett's Bay in Rhode Island (Goddard, 1978: 95-96). There also appears to be no documentary connection with the pan-Algonquian term "Wapanachki" (dawn/land, east/land) besides its use by Delaware speakers and other northeastern groups as a generic title denoting prestige among all indigenous peoples of the north Atlantic coast (Speck, 1943: 325)./ The Wappingers were first mentioned in European records in an obscure 1610 reference to "certaine Indians" living "at the lower end of the Long Reach" who boarded Henry Hudson's ship the Half Moon and exchanged Indian corn for trade goods (Juet, NNN: 25). The Long Reach or Lange Rak, the Dutch name for that section of the Hudson River bordering the present Towns of Poughkeepsie and Hyde Park, incidentally, is where most Wappinger land sales occur. Native people of this area through repeated associations with these transactions were later identified near the end of the century in geographic terms under the synonym "Indians of the Long Reach" (Ruttenber, 1872: 177-178). However, ethnic-group references to the Wappingers under standardized spellings of that name (Wappenas, Wappings, Wappinghs, Wappingoes, etc.) do not appear until 1639 but increase with some frequency from that time onward. The vast majority of references included in this study document war related events with Dutch settlers in a series of intermittent conflicts that devastated both native and European communities throughout the mid and lower Hudson valley. Slightly over half of these references record events associated with the Second Esopus War and Wappinger participation as diplomats and combatants in that conflict before English seizure of the colony of New Netherland in 1664. References following this date document Wappinger interaction with the British administration of colonial New York, their involvement in wars with their Iroquoian neighbors, and their participation in land transfers beginning in 1680 that would ultimately lead to the dispossession of their homeland by the mid-eighteenth century./ A brief mention needs be made regarding the inclusion of the term Highland Indians in this study, another name considered synonymous with the Wappingers. Although nine out of seventeen references listed state or imply that they were one and the same, the remainder, mostly Dutch accounts, suggests they could have been separate groups. The term, derived from the Dutch "Hogelanders" (DHSNY, 4: 101-102), might initially have referred to the rarely mentioned Nochpeem; the only Indians identified on seventeenth century maps as living in the Hudson Highlands. In some of these sources, though, Dutch officials are vague regarding their exact identification and leave the impression that they also occasionally used the name as a generic reference to all native peoples living near the highlands and included groups such as the Haverstraw and the Kichtawanks. Succeeding English administrators would include the Wiechquaeskecks and other Westchester County Indians along with the Wappingers as members of a confederated highland group at war with the Mohawks. Eighteenth century native leaders, on the other hand, involved in litigation over the highland areas of present Putnam County testified that the people selling land there in 1691 were the "then Indian Chiefs of the said tribe of Wappingers" (NYCM-LP, 18:128). Based on the existing data above, this work proceeds on the assumption that Wappinger Indians and Highland Indians were probably the same people, and the recognition that by the latter part of the seventeenth century either term specifically identified native peoples living within the boundaries of colonial Dutchess County, a pattern that continued well into the next century (Smith, 2004: 40)./ The eighty-four corporate references identified in this study uniquely contain 153 incidents in which Wappinger Indians are mentioned in association with other named groups in given documents. Many of these documentary associations could be considered arbitrary in that they simply lists groups present during particular events. Other references are more informative and provide a glimpse of the political interaction characteristic of forest diplomacy conducted by native peoples throughout the northeast. Individually these incidents present an incomplete view. Collectively when this data is tabulated and mapped (Table 2, Figure 1) it provides a means to measure rates of interaction which show that Wappinger geo-political concerns lay within the greater Hudson River valley region./ One hundred seventeen of all documentary incidences, 77 percent of the total sample listed in Table 2, depict Wappinger associations with autonomous groups now largely recognized by researchers as Munsee-speakers of the Delaware language. Forty-four of these incidents describe relations with the Esopus Indians, a disproportionately high number explained by the realization that half of the corporate references cataloged in this study deal with the conflicts fought between them and the Dutch. Incidents of interaction with Munsee groups like the Wiechquaeskecks and Hackensack Indians are represented by more realistic figures numbering in the teens. Other Munsee groups show more varying degrees of contact with Wappinger Indians and are enumerated by entries recorded in single digits. These documentary associations for the most part portray shifting political relationships between bands during times of war.  None of the incidents identified here reveal kinship ties between Wappinger Indians and any other named groups. There is, however, limited evidence of familial connections between some Munsee bands such as the Esopus and Haverstraw, and the Tappan and Massapequa, whose chiefs were noted at various times as brothers (Goddard, 1978: 94). Evidence suggesting Wappinger participation in this type of social networking is found only in the deed record and will be discussed later when we examine the proprietary cohort affiliated with their territory. Nonetheless, the high rates of interaction identified here provide good evidence for including them as members of the Munsee cultural region. These incident rates are also mirrored by the fact that nearly half of all the place names found within Wappinger territory (Table 3) contain the distinctive Munsee locative ending –sink, listed under several spelling variants (sinck, singh, cincq etc.). More circumstantial evidence of interaction is suggested by the concurrence of the place names (and corporate terms) "Minnissingh" (Minnisink), "Haverstroe" (Haverstraw) and "Kightamonk" (Kichtawank) noted in deeds to the Long Reach, that might reveal contacts with Munsee groups living on the lower Hudson River and in northern New Jersey that were otherwise unrecorded by Europeans at the time (NYCD, 13: 571; ERA, 2: 182-183)./ The remaining 23 percent of the sample identified in Table 2, depicts documentary associations with non-Munsee groups living in the upper Hudson valley and nearby regions. Fourteen of the incidents included in this percentage document interaction between Wappinger Indians and Iroquoian-speaking groups. Most of these describe undefined relations with the Mohawks, one of the Five Nations Iroquois, who initially appear in records along side the Wappingers "as mediators and advocates of the Esopus tribe," and later as enemies during the Second Mohawk-Mahican War (NYCD, 13: 179-181). Several references record possible associations with the Susquehannocks, an Iroquoian group noted as long-term belligerents of the Mohawks. A slightly higher rate of incidents that are more informative (nineteen entries) document growing relations between Wappinger Indians and their northern Algonquian neighbors the Mohicans, beginning in 1645 when the sachem Aepjen signed the treaty ending Governor Kieft's War on their behalf. These relations continued during the Esopus Wars where "the chief of the Wappinghs" was noted traveling "with presents to the Mahicanders ..... to talk over the matter[s] with the Sachems there," before culminating later in 1675 when Mohican chiefs informed Albany officials that they and "the highland Indians, and western corner Indians [like the Dutch and the English] are now also one" (NYCD, 13: 282; Leder, 1956: 37-38). Other incidents depict interaction with specific Mohican-speaking bands such as the Catskill and Westenhoek Indians. Relationships with the Westenhoek (Wawyachtenok or western corner) Indians along the New York-Massachusetts border, for example, appear to have been particularly close, and include proprietary associations suggesting kinship ties that would untimely lead to Wappinger affiliations with the Stockbridge community of Mohican Indians in the eighteenth century (Smith, 2004: 46). Incidents of interaction with more traditional New England groups comprise only 2 percent of the total sample identified in this survey. All of these occurred in 1688 and involve an individual named "Quaetsietts, a Wappenger [formerly] of Hudson's River," reported among Pennacook and Pocumtuck expatriates raiding settlements along the Connecticut River on behalf of the French governor in Canada (NYCD, 3: 561-564). These few references recorded shortly before King William's War, by no means constitute evidence of a pan-Indian confederacy spanning the Hudson and Connecticut river valleys. The low rates of interaction identified here, on the other hand, indicate that Wappinger relations with New England Algonquian peoples were somewhat limited and infrequent at best during the seventeenth century./ Early Leaders/ "North of the Highlands was the chieftaincy historically known as the Wappingers ..... On Van der Donck's [1656] map three of their villages or castles are located on the south side of the Mawenawasi[n]gh, or Great Wappinger's kill, which now bears their name.  North of that stream they appear to have been known as the Indians of the Long Reach, and on the south as the Highland Indians. Among their chiefs Goethals and Tseessaghgaw are named, while of their sachems the names of Megriesken and Nimham alone survive"(Ruttenber, 1872: 83-84)./ References to named individuals that are identified ethnically as Wappinger Indians are rare in seventeenth century documents. Sources recording the activities in the region of Indian leaders such as the Tankiteke chief Pacham and the Mohican sachem Apjen during Governor Kieft's War indicate early affiliations with other Algonquian peoples mentioned later in the century. Named references to Wappinger leaders, however, do not occur until mid-century where they first appear in records documenting the Esopus Wars and are represented by twelve entries made between the years 1660 and 1664 (appearing in chronological order: Goethels, Coetheos, Kessachauw, Isschachga, Wisachganioe, Neskewetsim, Neshewetsim, Neskabetssin, Wamassaan, Messachkewath, Eihtaworis, and t'Sees-Sagh-Gauw). Comparing phonetic and other structural similarities found in these names suggest the provisional association of eleven of these entries with five individuals. Three of these leaders may also have been noted in events following the Esopus Wars. Some of the named associations implied by these spellings (orthographies) exhibit a wider-range of variation when compared to better-documented materials on Indian leaders living closer to expanding European settlements like New York City (New Amsterdam), Kingston (Wiltwyck/Esopus) and Albany (Fort Orange). These spelling variations and the late references depicting land transfers in the region, some fifty years after the first sales registered in the Hudson valley, indicate that Wappinger Indians had infrequent contacts with their colonial neighbors and remained relatively insulated from the impacts of settler encroachment occurring in other parts of the valley well into the seventeenth century. Given the inconsistent spellings found in some of these named associations, often recorded by different colonial officials at different times and different locations, an endeavor has been made to interpret the following data cautiously. Notation of primary sources for these conjectural reconstruction's are included within individual profiles for cross-referencing in Appendix 3./ The first references recording face-to-face encounters between Wappinger leaders and Europeans document the careers of the Indian diplomats Coetheos and Kessachauw during the closing months of the First Esopus War. Coetheos made his archival debut on March 15, 1660 as "Goethels, chief warrior of Wappingh," during a meeting with the Dutch Director-General at Fort Amsterdam, and was heard three days later in open session before the New Netherlands Council proposing peace on behalf of all the Esopus chief men, "especially Kaelcop and Pemmyrawech." There is little other information pertaining to this individual. Ruttenber's historical account identifies him as "Goethals, King of the Wappingers" (1872: 299) suggesting that he was the principal leader of that group, but no primary source has been found to support this assertion. The lack of references documenting this chief's other activities suggest that he had a more limited role as war leader, an individual whose authority was recognized only during times of conflict and was later superseded by a civil leadership composed of a hereditary sachem and council of elders. Other references show that Coetheos, despite his elevation to kingship by Ruttenber, was probably not this man and that his diplomatic companion Kessachauw may have held this position./ Kessachauw made his first documentary appearance under that name on May 18, 1660 as "one of the chiefs of the Wappings" renewing peace before the New Netherlands Council and lodging a formal complaint against the seizure of Indian people "from the Wapping country." He may next have been identified on May 15, 1664 as "tSees-Sagh-Gauw, chief of the Wappinghs," participating in the treaty conference with other "Sachems or chiefs" at Fort Amsterdam ending the Second Esopus War. A reference to one of two chiefs of the Wappings recorded at Fort Wiltwyck as Isschachga on the earlier July 15, 1660 treaty document ending the First Esopus War, might also be a named variant depicting this individual. This assertion, if correct, would make him the only Wappinger leader noted as a participant to both treaty events with the Esopus Indians. These combined references suggest that Kessachauw may be the most likely candidate for the principle Wappinger sachem noted frequently by Dutch commanders, but unfortunately unnamed during numerous diplomatic events associated with the Esopus Wars. He might have last appeared in records after these conflicts in 1680 and 1683 under the named variants Kashekan or Kasshecho, a Highland Indian proprietor from the Long Reach, and a witness to a deed conveyance north of Wappinger territory made by "Mahikan Indians, owners of the land lying on the Roeloff Jansen's kill."/ The next Wappinger leader to emerge from archival records, Wessickenaiuw, made his first appearance as Wisachganioe, the second chief of the Wappings attending the July 15, 1660 treaty conference between the Dutch and Esopus Indians. He may also have been mentioned during the Nicolls Treaty of 1665 following the English conquest of New Netherland as the "young Sachem ..... Wingeerinoe," being granted temporary planting rights in Esopus territory near "a Small Creeke called Cloughkawakanoe," and later known as the Indian Wassemo, one of the "young people" attending a renewal of that treaty in 1675. Identified the following year as Wissakano or Wessecanoe, "The sagamore of Wickerscreeke" (Wiechquaeskeck), he became a prominent spokesman among native people living in colonial Westchester County, declaring allegiance on their behalf to the governor of New York, and facilitating refuge for several "North Indian" tribes (Wawyachtenok and Stamford Indians) during the border violence associated with King Philip's (or Metacom's) War in neighboring New England. He was probably noted again among the Esopus in 1677 as Wessenach, a "joint-owner" to lands along the Rondout Creek, before reappearing in Westchester County as the sachem Wessickenaeun or Wessekann, a witness to land sales there from 1681 to 1682 where he was listed as a brother to one of the grantors named Conarhande. He made his last appearances among Westchester county Indians in 1689 and 1690 under the orthographies Wessecanow and Wessecamer, a Wiechquaeskeck or Kichtawank sachem living south of the highlands and sending men to fight the French during King William's War./ Wessickenaiuw might also have been identified once more before the English conquest as "Messachkewath, chief of the Wappings," noted on March 24, 1664 among Kichtawank and Wiechquaeskeck chiefs renewing peace with the Dutch during the Second Esopus War. If this earlier 1664 orthography refers to the same individual then he may have been the unnamed chief noted a month later on April 26 as having negotiated peace without the consent of "the common Wappings ..... called barebacks" (warriors) and failing to redistribute treaty gifts among his people. A common Wapping Indian named Eihtaworis, mentioned in the same document and accused of murdering a Dutch hostage, was probably one of this leaders many disgruntled constitutions around this time. These references suggest that Wessickenaiuw may have fallen from power after losing consensual authority among his supporters, an essential component of native political systems, which may partly explain his fluid ethnic identity expressed by his residence among the Esopus, his associations with Westchester County Indians and the changing fortunes of his status that led to his resettlement in these regions./ Another suspected leader appearing in documents during the Esopus Wars was recorded on December 28 to 29, 1663 and January 4, 1664, under the orthographies of Neskewetsim, Neshewetsim and Neskabetssin, "a brother, as they say, to the chief of the Wappings" reported among Hackensack and Staten Island Indians seeking an armistice with the Dutch at New Amsterdam. He was also probably identified earlier as one of two hostages detained at Fort Wiltwyck, "the old Indian," who was noted as "a Wapping and brother of the chief" and mentioned after his release in the company of that leader on December 3, 1663 by the nickname "Splitnose, the Indian last taken by us." Dutch records are replete with unnamed references to this individual who was alternately held captive at Wiltwyck and Fort Amsterdam for five months, beginning in July of 1663, where he supplied intelligence implicating Wappinger and Minnisink warriors as allies of the Esopus Indians. He became a major cause of concern among "the chiefs of the Sinsincks, Kichtawangs and Wiechquaeskecks [who] solicit[ed] very earnestly the exchange of the captive ..... Sachem and brother to the chief of the Wappings" before his eventual release in mid-November. He was last noted in person departing New Amsterdam with letters for the Dutch commanders and soldiers at Fort Wiltwyck on December 29, 1663. However, Neskewetsim never arrived at this destination, and it is to the individual who took his place that we direct our final inquiry./ The last suspected leader mentioned during the Esopus Wars, Mawhoscan, may have made his initial appearance on January 4, 1664 under a possible phonemic variant of that name "Wamassaan, a Wappinger, as he says," arriving at Fort Wiltwyck in place of the post messenger Neskewetsim and a suspected combatant implicated in raids on Dutch settlements the previous year. He next appeared in 1675 as "Mawhoscan Sa[ ]h[ ]m of the Wapping Indyans" declaring his intent to the governor of New York to negotiate a peace to the Susquehannock War, before making a final entry in colonial records as Megriesken or Megriskar, the "sachem of the Wappingir Indians," an absentee proprietor relinquishing his rights to the Rombout patent lands in 1683. He also appears to have been mentioned several months before the Rombout purchase under an abbreviated variant of his name, Massany, a "Highland Indian" endorsing a grant to "the land [of] Minnissingh" before Albany magistrates for the establishment of farms and a mill in the present City of Poughkeepsie. Accepting the previous assumption that Wappingers and Highland Indians were one and the same and the fact that Mawhoscan was identified as the sachem of the former in 1675 and 1683, it seems highly likely that the individual noted as Unannamapake the "Sakemaker of the Highland," one of two sachems approving a grant in the Long Reach during the intervening year of 1680, might represent a named alias referring to this influential leader. Aside from these references little else is known about this man. His earlier activities during the Second Esopus War reveal Wappinger involvement in that conflict and the dual role played by their leaders, who openly declared neutrality but covertly sympathized with their fellow tribesmen across the river. His 1675 "Embassy to the Susquehanna Nation" reveals possible Wappinger affiliations with this once powerful Iroquoian tribe. Similar associations were maintained by other Munsee groups between 1657 and 1669, including the Wiechquaeskecks, Hackensack Indians, and the Minnisinks of the upper Delaware River who were allied with the Susquehannocks against the Senecas in 1664 (Grumet, 1979: 51-52, 112-114). Unfortunately, Mawhoscan's apparent absence during the 1683 Rombout conveyance – he was not listed among the signatories to this deed – indicates that he probably disappeared from documentary history shortly before this event./ Proprietary Cohort/ "when they sold, the [principal] Chief always with the leave of the others undertook to sell & when he had agreed [with the purchasers] he called together the heads of the families who had any Right in the Land sold [the grantors] & divided among them Goods he got for the Land telling them for what they recd those Goods; then the Heads of the families again divide their portion among the Young people of the Family & inform them of the Sale & thus every individual, who have any right must be fully acquainted with the matter. Besides whenever a Sale is made, the Chief who sells calls the Chiefs of the Neighbouring Tribes who are his friends but have no right, in order to be Witnesses of the Sale & to make them remember it he gives them a Share of the Goods. So that no Land can be sold without all the Indians round being made acquainted with the Matter" (Nutimus, Unami-Delaware sachem, cited in Weslager, 1972: 162-163)./ References to other named individuals identified as Wappingers or Highland Indians in the seventeenth century are found primarily in the deed record depicting the transfer of their hereditary land rights. Indian deeds made to European purchasers represent a unique form of documentation found in colonial archives, that have been used by researchers to reveal the principals underlying native ideas about their land holdings and sales rituals (Becker, 1992; Dunn, 1994, 2000; Grumet, 1979, 1991; Wojciechowski, 1992). This research, and the names-lists generated as a result, allows the reconstruction of possible social groupings and their internal and external relationships. Any discussion of native land transfers must make clear distinctions between the signatories of deeds recognized as grantors and those who signed as witnesses. The former were selling their rights based on familial or band associations derived through inheritance (kinship), while the latter were fulfilling reciprocal political functions by subscribing or attesting to sales made by nearby groups, but who likely had no claims to the lands being sold. Leading sachems or chiefs of various groups, themselves grantors, also occasionally endorsed these documents as witnesses on behalf of constituencies within their home territories. The roles of other participants mentioned in deed events but not listed as signers probably varied considerably, but may have included some individuals that had acquired limited non-negotiable rights through marriage, alliances or friendships (Becker, 1992: 40; Grumet, 1991: 195). Applying these principles to Wappinger land transfers at the end of the seventeenth century provides a basis for comparisons with neighboring names-lists compiled by researchers and the ability to work out boundaries and relationships between socially distinct ethnic-groups. This examination concentrates on the period between 1680 and 1702 in which Wappinger Indians conveyed most of their territory to land speculators in the mid-Hudson valley (Figure 2, Appendix 2), and where group integrity is believed to still be largely intact given the late land sales recorded there. These years provide a representative picture of the natal cohort in the region and the proprietary associations of individual members both within and without the group./ Wappinger deeds classifying the native proprietors as grantors or witnesses are cataloged in Appendix 2, and portray land transfers in the region ranging from initial grants to more traditional sales for goods and currency. Seven of these transactions occurring north of the Wappinger Creek between 1680 and 1696 were made for relatively small parcels embracing the area of "land lyeing in the Long Reach." Transfers of much larger tracts made below this waterway were conveyed in three deeds from 1683 to 1702 for the areas encompassing the Fishkill Plains and portions of the Hudson Highlands, which help define the southern limits of their homeland. Land sales along the Fallkill (or Valkill) and Crum Elbow creeks during this same time period, in the present Town of Hyde Park, provide evidence delineating the upper most reaches of Wappinger territory on the Hudson River./ Edward Ruttenber's earlier cited quotation referencing Wappinger leaders (1872: 83-84) appears to make internal group distinctions between Indian people living on opposite sides of the "Mawenawasi[n]gh, or Great Wappinger's kill," as it was noted in the 1683 Rombout purchase of the Fishkill Plains. He may have been influenced in this assertion by the realization that sales in the Long Reach, where the Wappinger Creek is identified by the name "Wynachkee," exclusively involved land speculators from Albany, while those south of this tributary body were made with competing New York City land interests. This apparent proprietary dichotomy is further suggested by the limited named associations occurring between native grantors in the Long Reach and those affiliated with the sale of the Fishkill Plains. Other material revealing distinct proprietary groupings here are found in the deeds for these areas, where stated boundaries overlap in the parallel tract of land separating the Wappinger and Casper creeks that could be indicative of an internal buffer zone in which rights were shared (inset, Figure 2). A similar dichotomy is also apparent in transfers made between the highland areas of Wappinger territory and the southern most area of the Rombout conveyance, where there is a correspondingly limited number of named associations and overlapping boundaries found near the Fishkill Creek and foothills of the mountains. Both of these buffer zones transected land patents established by early settlers which were disputed in the eighteenth century by contending holders of these titles who based their respective claims on the boundary descriptions contained in the original Indian sales of these lands (Reynolds, 1924: 19-21; MacCracken, 1956: 52). These deductions, suggesting the existence of smaller political units that may have made up a larger Wappinger ethnic-group, might represent evidence of the tripartite phratry or clan divisions, tortoise, turkey and wolf, that are thought to be the primary mechanisms in which individual Munsee bands organized and maintained social connections (Grumet, 1990: 21). An analysis of where and how often grantors appear in relation to these three continuous areas provides details about members of the proprietary cohort within the region./ Table 4 depicts the proprietary activities of fifty-seven granting signatories listed in Wappinger deeds from 1680 to 1702, and their associations with the aforementioned areas of the Long Reach, Fishkill Plains, and Hudson Highlands encompassing their territory. Native peoples endorsing these documents as witnesses and non-signing participants – some known to be affiliated with different ethnic-groups and cultures – are excluded from this survey. The numbers of grantors identified in these deeds average between 16 to 28 individuals per area and could provide further support for the existence of distinct cohorts in this region (see names-lists at end of Appendix 2). These signatories most likely represent the heads of nuclear families conveying parcels of group lands which they occupied or used and collectively had the rights to sell. Accepting this premise, and assuming that each had a spouse and from two to three children, provides useful demographic data suggesting area populations ranging from 48 to 112 people, and a regional estimate of 171 to 228; the kind of figures generally considered to be reflective of egalitarian or band-level societies (Becker, 1993: 19-20). Forty-six of the 57 grantors identified in these transactions, more than two thirds, appear only once in the deed record here and are probably representative of the natal cohort overall. The high number of single internal associations noted are not uncommon in names-lists generated by deed analysis, where most individuals are rarely mentioned again following initial sales./ However, 11 of the 57 grantors listed in Wappinger land transfers might have wider inter-regional ties based on their implied named associations. The reoccurring appearances of these proprietors suggests they may be higher ranking leaders (sachems) of extended family lineages and clans, who were engaged in multiple intercommunity (or local exogamous) marriages that helped reinforce social connections along group lines (Grumet, 1991: 195). The activities of these suspected leaders mentioned in two or more transactions are presented in Table 4A. Some individuals are only known to have had particular associations with a given area, like those listed under the names of Moakenap (Mecopap) and Wassawawogh (Wassarawigh) identified in purchases involving the highlands cohort in 1691 and 1702. An initial appearance by the eighteenth century Wappinger sachems Nimhammaw (Ninham / Nemham / Nimham) and Acgans (Quagan /Agans) in a 1696 sale at the upper margins of the Long Reach (FDR Heritage Museum), and subsequent conveyances made in that area after 1702, exhibit a similar pattern. The activities of these two men are examined elsewhere (Smith, 2004). Other individuals exhibiting multiple affiliations here, both within and between given areas, include the already mentioned Wappinger leader Mawhoscan, and another sachem noted in a deed along side him named Kaghqueront (Paquetarent / Kachkehant / Kechkenond), each of whom followed up initial transfers in the Long Reach with proprietary associations to the Fishkill Plains and Hudson Highland cohorts respectively. Individuals identified in deeds under the names of Peapightapaeuw (Paighew / Petawachpiet) and Tachquaram (Guighstjerem / Tochquamin) might have had connections with all of these area cohorts. The remaining three proprietors mentioned in this survey, Awans, Perpuwas and Waespacheek (alias Spek or Speck), each affiliated with the first Wappinger conveyance made in the region, have more in-depth histories and deserve further attention. Documentation of source materials for the following reconstruction's and those above are included in Appendix 3./ Awans made his archival debut on June 15, 1680, as the individual "named Awannis who has an interest therein" when he was identified in a grant conveying land in the Long Reach to New York Indian interpreter and fur trader Arnout Viele. This grant, witnessed by the sachems Mawhoscan and Kaghqueront before Albany magistrates, was made for three flats of land along the Casper Creek and included grazing rights for cattle extending from the Matapan Falls on the "kill named Wynachkee," to a smaller kill lying "to the north called Pakakcincq," the present Fallkill Creek in the City of Poughkeepsie. The flats (or vlaktens) mentioned in this transfer are typical of those documented in deeds throughout the Hudson valley, and generally indicate the presence of cleared planting fields and habitation sites that belonged to particular families or lineages (Dunn, 1994: 226-227, 231). Awans was noted in this transaction as "having [extended] authority" to the grantors listed ethnically as "Highland Indians," but he did not endorse the document, suggesting that his rights may have been limited. He made his next appearance in deeds on July 15, 1691 as Awanganwrgk, one of seven granting signatories later recognized as Wappinger chiefs selling land in the highlands, before being mentioned in events associated with King William's War around 1696, where he was reported among "the River Indian" prisoners who had escaped from the French and were delivering captives of their own to the Mayor of Albany. Awans was also identified the following year under the named variants Awannaghqat and Awannighqaet, on a register of "Makeeckander" individuals found in the account books of Albanian merchant Evert Wendell cataloging expenditures with the Indians. He made his final documentary appearance in these same accounts on July 1, 1707, when Evert recorded debits dealing with a Mohican Indian named Heerij who "hout bij [lives by or with] Awanwaghquat's people." This reference indicates that Awans, although listed among Mohicans visiting Wendell's trading post, was not native to the Albany region, and that he and his peoples homeland actually lay in the Hudson Highlands where he appeared as a proprietary grantor 16 years earlier./ Named references pertaining to the individuals Perpuwas and Waespacheek are found exclusively in land records and provide further material describing the close relationships between Wappingers and their Mohican neighbors. Both men were listed as Highland Indian grantors to the 1680 Long Reach conveyance, where they appear under the orthographies of Pillipuwas, and Waspacheek alias Spek. Perpuwas was mentioned after this initial transfer on May 16, 1683 under a phonetic abbreviation of his name Tapuas, a highland Indian granting a mortgage "against the land of Haverstroe, named Kightamonk" near the Matapan Falls, "being a flatt or meadow to the West of a Creek called Wynag[h]kee." This transaction, made in lieu of payment for debts incurred with Albany fur traders, was witnessed by his hunting companions "Wattawyt, a sachem" and "Emmenninck, a sachem of Schotak [Schodack]," the main council seat of the Mohicans in the upper Hudson valley. Perpuwas also appears to have been mentioned in association with the highlands cohort where he was noted on August 13, 1702 under the phonemic variant Terapouwes in a controversial sale made to New York City merchant Adolph Philipse. His identification as a non-signing participant to this event indicates limited rights and suggests that his hereditary lands probably lay to the north of this area near the Wappinger Creek. Perpuwas made his last appearance in deeds in 1730 conveying the territory along the upper branches of this waterway, where he was listed as the principal grantor among the "native Indian proprietors of land in Dutche[ss] County," confirming the boundaries of the Great Nine Partners Patent, originally established in 1697. Waespacheek appeared in deeds a year before the Highland Indian conveyance in the Long Reach, on October 1, 1679, as one of five grantors ("all Westenhoek Indians") conveying "flats lying on both sides of the Kinderhoek kill" in Mohican territory, where he was identified as a cousin (neeff) to the "Indian owners ..... Wieshaghcaet and his two brothers." He appeared after these transactions on May 5, 1683 when he was again noted in the Long Reach under his documented alias Speck, this time, as a witnesses confirming that the sachem Mawhoscan was "the lawful owner and inheritor of the said land" along the Fallkill Creek. Unfortunately, these initial references make the determination of Waespacheek's ethnicity somewhat problematic, in that he was mentioned as a grantor among both peoples. For instance, we do not know from which direction these stated familial associations were engendered. Nor do we know in what context the Dutch term neeff was used in the Westenhoek deed, which can alternately mean either cousin or nephew, or whether it equates with a European or native usage of kinship terminology. However, his familial ties to Mohican Indians were almost certainly multigenerational and he may likely have been the progeny of a prior political marriage that transcended cultural boundaries. Waespacheek was never identified again in Mohican sales following the Westenhoek conveyance, and all of his other proprietary activities occur south of their territory within the Munsee cultural region. Evidence suggesting that he might indeed have been a Wappinger or highland (i.e. Munsee-speaking) native may be found in deeds made by Westchester County Indians, where he was listed as a participant to sales under the named variants Washpackin and Waspuchaim from 1701 to 1708. Waespacheek made his final appearance in documents on February 23, 1722, when the lands that "did Belong to one Indian Called Spek" were reported as being north of a disputed claim between the "Fish Kill and the Wappanks Kill." These lands lay in the Long Reach along a small "Creeke which runs out of the Creek called Jan Casperses" near the present day hamlet of Spackenkill in the Town of Poughkeepsie, known during the colonial period as "Speck zyn kil" or Speck's stream (Reynolds, 1924: 31)./ Extra-regional proprietary associations between Wappingers and Mohican Indians, depicted by the activities of Perpuwas and Waespacheek above, and those documented with other native peoples, are surveyed in Table 4B. A comparison of named individuals identified in this study with names-lists compiled from land transfers made by Mohican groups (Dunn, 1994, 2000), shows that by and large the two peoples do not appear on deeds together as grantors. These kinds of associations suggestive of more interpersonal relations occur with greater frequency within cultures but are uncommon between distinct cultural groups (Becker, 1993: 17). This evidence, excluding possible familial ties with Westenhoek Indians, demonstrates that the Wappingers and the Mohicans were for the most part socially distinct, and probably remained so throughout the century. Appearances of the prominent Mohican sachems Wattawit and Emmenninck of Schodack as witnesses to a Wappinger conveyance are representative of the political affiliations noted between neighboring groups who were friends and allies, and which were primarily conducted by the leaders of principal lineages. This deed event in the Long Reach was reciprocated several months later by the Wappinger or Highland sachems Kessachauw and Kaghqueront, who appeared as attesting witnesses to a conveyance made by the Mohican "Indians of ..... Roeloff Jansens Kill."  A similar comparison with names-lists compiled from land sales made by neighboring Paugussett peoples in western Connecticut (Wojciechowski, 1992), has yielded no such proprietary associations with Wappinger Indians, further supporting the assertion that contacts between them and New England Algonquian cultures were infrequent during the seventeenth century./ Most extra-regional proprietary associations revealed in this survey occur with Munsee groups, and are indicated by the appearance in Wappinger deeds of named individuals ethnically affiliated with land transactions made in nearby regions. Some of these native proprietors were also mentioned as leaders during deed events in their home territories. Munsee individuals identified as subscribing witnesses to the highland and Rombout purchases, for instance, include a Hackensack or Tappan chief named Anackan (Anackhean), and the Indian interrupter Claes de Wilt (Claes / Claus), each additionally noted as conveyers of lands in northeastern New Jersey. Other Munsee individuals, listed as grantors to the Rombout purchase, include a principal sachem of the Tappans called Keghtackaan (Ketaghkanns), and Westchester County Indians Meggrek Sejay (Sayjaeun) and Oghkan (Ogkan), both mentioned in earlier sales among the Wiechquaeskecks and Kichtawanks. Associations with Esopus Indians are noted by the appearances of the expatriate sachem Caelcop (Keercop / Calycoon), who was initially reported as having a plantation among the Highland Indians, and later identified as a granting signatory to a conveyance along the boundary area separating Wappinger and Mohican territories in northern Dutchess County. Although kinship is not indicated in the deed record here, these proprietary associations, nonetheless, may be characteristic of the types of social networking that existed between culturally related ethnic-groups, and provides additional evidence for including Wappinger Indians as members of the greater Munsee-speaking region./ Conclusion/ This examination of seventeenth century materials clearly shows that native people from the "Wapping Country" were actively engaged in the widening world of early contact history. Numerous corporate references pertaining to Wappinger Indians document their interaction with Algonquian and Iroquoian neighbors and their diplomatic and proprietary encounters with Dutch and English settlers. Most of the documents depicting interaction in this study describe their relations with various Munsee bands of the lower Hudson valley, and provides compelling evidence for including them as components of that major cultural group. This research additionally reveals the close political ties between Wappinger Indians and their Mohican neighbors in the upper Hudson valley that cut across Algonquian cultural boundaries. Documentary associations with Algonquian cultures in New England, however, depict relatively low levels of interaction, and largely invalidate support for the existence of a Wappinger led confederacy spanning the Hudson and Connecticut rivers. It is unlikely that such a grand alliance of disparate groups would have gone unrecorded by European officials, who viewed such coalitions, whether real or alleged, as grave threats to their colonial interests./ A similar pattern of interaction is also found in Wappinger land sales depicting proprietary associations with other native peoples. The vast majority of these associations revealed in deeds occur between them and Munsee-speaking groups. Wappinger deed events involving Mohican bands are less common and are descriptive of the political affiliations between friends and allies. Proprietary associations with nearby New England cultures are noticeably absent in this investigation. The preceding discussion underscores the importance of regional historic studies of ethnic-groups like the Wappingers that have generally been overlooked by researchers. Comprehensive studies of these socially distinct groups in the Hudson River valley, the constituent parts of larger cultural entities, are needed to more fully comprehend how they related to one another and with neighboring cultures./ Note to Appendices/ The given spellings of personal names found in New York colonial records are highly fluid and variable. This is true of European names in general, but is particularly evident in the recording of Indian names whose phonetic sounds were unfamiliar to colonists' ears, but were nonetheless written down in Dutch or English style script. Transcriptions of Indian personal names are a central component of the appendices that follow. Careful attention has been made to include all spelling variations found to date that are believed to be associated with particular individuals in order to present a data base from which future comparisons and evaluations can be made. Multiple orthographic conventions found within the same document are also included here. These alternate spellings occur most frequently in land deeds. The first orthography listed represents the variant next to which an individual placed their mark or "signature" noted at the end of the document. Other spelling variants that follow are listed as they appear sequentially in the document body itself. Additional orthographies found in other primary and secondary sources referring to the same event are included in parenthesis./ Unpublished source materials used in this study/ (Kempe Papers): Kempe, John Tabor, Papers. Unpublished manuscripts on file, New-York Historical Society, New York, New York/ (Livingston Papers): Livingston, Robert R. Papers, Microfilm series, Firestone Library, Princeton University, New Jersey/ (NYBP): New York Book of Patents and Deeds. Unpublished manuscripts on file at New York State Archives, Albany, New York/ (NYCM-LP): New York Colonial Manuscripts, Indorsed Land Papers. Unpublished manuscripts on file at New York State Archives/ (NYECM): New York Executive Council Minutes 1668-1783. Unpublished manuscripts on file at New York State Archives/ (PGP) Philips-Governor Family Papers. Unpublished manuscripts on file at Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Columbia University, New York, New York./ (WAB): BV Wendell, Evert. Account book, 1695-1726, New-York Historical Society, New York, New York. Unpublished translation by Dutch scholar Cees-Jan Waterman./ (FDR Heritage Museum) 24 June 1696 original Indian/Dutch deed for lands in present Hyde Park, New York, on display at The Franklin D. Roosevelt American Heritage Center Museum in Worcester, Massachusetts. English transcription at: A one of a kind, fantastic, and historic item that conveyed the lands that would later become Hyde Park and Springwood from its Native American owners to the Dutch colonial settlers who populated this area of New York, land that would later be bought by the Roosevelt family, and the land in which FDR was born, and is buried along with his wife Eleanor Roosevelt at the national historic site at Hyde Park, New York.

    Auction Info

    Auction Dates
    June, 2008
    7th Saturday
    Bids + Registered Phone Bidders: 1
    Lot Tracking Activity: N/A
    Page Views: 4,670

    Buyer's Premium per Lot:
    19.5% of the successful bid (minimum $9) per lot.

    Sold for: Sign-in or Join (free & quick)
    Track Item

    Heritage membership

    Join Now - It's Free

    1. Past Auction Values (prices, photos, full descriptions, etc.)
    2. Bid online
    3. Free Collector newsletter
    4. Want List with instant e-mail notifications
    5. Reduced auction commissions when you resell your
    Consign now
    • Cash Advances
    • More Bidders
    • Trusted Experts
    • Over 200,000 Satisfied Consignors Since 1976
    Consign to the 2021 April 11 Guitars and Musical Instruments Signature Auction - Dallas.

    Learn about consigning with us

    Heritage Auctions and Mr. Chad Reingold were...professional and courteous in all transactions and provided outstanding service in answering my many emails. I recommend them at the highest level.
    Killy M.,
    Melbourne Beach, FL
    View More Testimonials receives more traffic than any other auction house website. (Source:

    Video tutorial

    Getting the most out of search