Does anyone out there have any information on the original beads traded for Mnahattan Island? I believe there were chests of them, but how many remain (I have been told there are only around 1,000 authentic beads known to exist)?
If one had one (or some number of them), how could it/they be authenticated and appraised? Any idea what the appraisesd value per bead might be?
I have access to around 100 such beads and want to make sure they’re legitimate and the stated value is reasonable.
Thanks for any information you might be able to provide.
I had always heard that the “beads for Manhattan” story was a fabrication. When I went a-looking for cites, the best I could find was Peter Francis Jr., “The Beads That Did Not Buy Manhattan Island” New York History, 1986, Quarterly Journal of the New York State Historical Association.
In it he cites the only period reference to the purchase as saying “They report that our people are in good heart and live in peace there; the women have also borne some children there. They have purchased the Island Manhattes from the Indians for the value of 60 guilders; 'tis 11,000 morgans in size. They had all their grain sowed by the middle of May, and reaped by the middle of August."
While that reference does not rule out beads making up part of the purchase, it also does not mention them.
The Staten Island purchase records, however, specifically mention beads of Native American manufacture. Minuit writes he purchased the island for an unknown quantity of “…Diffies, Kittles, Axes, Hoes, Wampum, Drilling Awls, Jew’s Harps, and diverse other wares". Don’t ask me what “Kittles” are, but I know “wampum” is Native American shell beads 8-).
Has someone found some primary source material to substantiate the “beads for Manhattan” story? That would indeed be interesting. Francis states that the idea of beads being used in the transaction originates with Martha J. Lamb’s 1877 History of the City of New York
This article indicates that there is no actual evidence that any beads were traded for Manhattan Island (although perhaps some were, specifically wampum). Therefore it might be a trifle difficult getting them authenticated.
I don’t want to be a jerk, but this is silly. As far as I can tell, the trade goods use for purchase were described as “trinkets,” by the Dutch. I believe they included things like steel axe heads and woven cloth, both of which were otherwise unavailable in North America at the time (and therefore priceless). In fact, Peter Minuot(sp?) overpaid for a crappy little rocky island with no fresh water.*
“I have an opportunity to buy some beads” is obvious BS.
*[sup]And he paid it to a group that was just passing through. They didn’t actually live there. Nobody did. It was good for fishing, and not much else.[/sup]
As has been mentioned earlier, the Dutch didn’t buy Manhattan for “beads.” They bought it with tools and manufactured goods that the Indians couldn’t have made or obtained for themselves. An iron cauldron, an axe, or a few bolts of cloth may have been inexpensive and unexceptional in Amsterdam, but to Native Americans, they seemed like a blessing.
The popular notion that Indians traded Manhattan for “pretty beads” doesn’t give them any credit for shrewdness of their own. It treats them as naive, wide-eyed, child-like innocents, ready to give up anything for some worthless trinkets. In reality, they gave up a relatively small tract of not-particularly-desirable land for some useful, quality goods they couldn’t have gotten anywhere else.
BOTH sides thought they’d gotten a pretty good deal.
Thanks for the timely responses. The information provided certainly leads me to believe that any beads represented as part of those used in trade for Manhattan Island, which is something I grew up believing, are as real as Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy.
As Kirkman pointed out, it was very likely wampum was used as part of the transaction. Wampum is made up of beads, so it is not wrong to say beads were used.
Not that you could find the original wampum beads nowadays, of course.
History may render priceless things worthless and worthless things priceless “history is written by the victors” even if he were to sell the real mccoy it might be worthless and we know that but it is interestic to meditate on historical relics because the truth lies in the story.
I’ve read many land deed with the local Indians from the colonial period in New Jersey (late 1600s-early 1700s), and many of these detail the goods traded for land. These include pots, cloth, “matchcoats”*, glass, and other such trade goods. I dobn’t actually recall any mention of wampum or beads, but I couldn’t swear to it. Suffice it to say that a variety of matereial changed hands.
In my reading, I recall that it was supposed to be 60 guilders worth of trade goods that were traded for Manhattan. One book I read stated that tghis was equivalent to 2400 English Pennies, which was the root of the story that Manhattan was bought for $24, If true, this relies upon a whole series of assumptions and misunderstandings that makes that $24 figure absurd.
*I forgot to explain “Matchcoats” fro m the above. These were poncho-like garments. The name derives from the native american name for these, which is rendered “matchcor”. The tendency of people to re-intyerpret things so they make sense lead the British settlers to transform this to “matchcoats”, since they were, to their minds, a kind of “coat”.
Not only that but the Indians probably thought the whole deal was laughable, I mean culturally to them the idea of land deeds was probably causing them to chuckle, they also had no idea how popular the idea of colonization would become.
Imagine some guys from the other side of the world offer you hundreds of thousands of dollars for the right to the air over your house, are they kidding? LOL sure guys! These nutballs will probably get tried and go back home anyway.
Now centuries later you are called an idiot for selling the primest real estate where the great hover city is located for a pittance.
IIRC, the deal was a total scam because the tribe that “sold” Manhattan didn’t “own” it. They only wintered there or some such. It was part of another bands regular stomping grounds. Never mind the whole concept of ownership being unheard of by the natives.
Your last sentence is an overstatement (I think you meant “individually, permanently owned land parcels with precise, immutable boundaries was rare in the Americas, probably only developed in the Aztec and Inca states and related cultures”), but the rest of you post I agree with completely. Good point – both sides thought they had gotten the better part of the deal, as indeed that had .
Is it true, per a (much) earlier post, that there is no fresh water on the island? I thought there was a river in the Bronx at one time. And of course the Hudson is fresh water as well, come to think of it.
The Real Chief’s Wives of Staten Island. Eight episodes. VH1. Wednesdays. When the last rays of the sun disappear behind the palisades on the far Hudson shore. (Check your local listings for exact times.)
“history is written by the victors” even if he were to sell the real mccoy it might be worthless and we know that but it is interestic to meditate on historical relics because the truth lies in the story.