The colonial past of North America, along with the Americas in general, has been of great interest to historical archaeologists and the general public alike for the past several decades. When examining colonialism in North America by the prominent nation states of the 16th through 18th centuries, the Dutch can often times be overlooked. This is mainly because their presence in North America did not last for long, and it was not motivated by the desire for sheer imperialistic power, but rather by the attainment of wealth through an expanded trade network. As a result, their colonization tactics and consequent environments within their colonies differed in some ways from that of other powerful nation states. The Dutch settled New Netherlands in the geographical areas of present-day New York, New Jersey, and Delaware in the late 16th century. On the other hand, the French colonial projects in present day Canada are a prime example of a lasting colonization effort in North America by a well-known, powerful nation state. Due to this, the French colonization efforts along the St. Lawrence River, including the colonies of Quebec, Montreal, and the Charlesbourg-Royal site, reflect the differences in colonial tactics between the Dutch and the French. Additionally, the relatively close proximity of the two colonial projects highlight not only the differences but also the similarities in regards to trade, Native American relations, and everyday life in the colonies.
Prior to North American colonization in the early 1600s, the Dutch were a well-established maritime power in the Atlantic. After Henry Hudson’s voyages to North America between 1609 and 1611, the Netherlands formed The Dutch West India Company in order to set up trade posts and capture Spanish treasure in the region explored by Hudson. By 1624, the Dutch had begun to settle fortified urban mercantile centers, such as Manhattan Island, as well as patroonships or large agricultural estates. Taking notes from previous shortcomings in the New World by other nation states, the Netherlands immediately excelled economically. Dutch trade with the local Natives of this region contributed immensely to their economic success through food and fur trade. With this, the Dutch experienced a unique relationship with the Natives as compared to other colonial projects. One particular aspect of this trade relationship that should be illustrated is that the Dutch did not attempt to convert the local Natives to Christianity or any other religion. This could be due to the idea that settlers within the Dutch colonies viewed the Natives strictly as trade partners, and “maintained a social distance from Mohawk and other Native groups” in that they also did not include Native American made objects within their daily lives (Loren 46).
Another possible explanation for this social distance from the Native Americans is that Dutch settlements such as New Amsterdam were so diverse: they included the Dutch, Walloons, Huguenots, Scandinavians, Germans, English, Scots, Jews, and Native Americans. While one would expect this diversity to create intermarriages, households were complex and many people retained their own culture, especially the Dutch. This is exemplified within the archaeological evidence of the Stadt Huys Block site and the Broad Financial Center site in New Amsterdam or present day New York City. The pottery and ceramic debris that were excavated from privies reflect that the Dutch settlers retained their material culture and diet that they would have practiced in the Netherlands. These artifacts include earthenwares and redwares such as serving dishes, pipkins, skillets, and bowls. The opposite can be said for Dutch material culture influencing Native American’s daily lives. Seneca tribe sites from the Dutch era, such as the Dann site, the Factory Hollow site, the Power House site, and the Boughton Hill site display that Dutch material culture was intertwined with Native American material culture in everyday Native life. Excavated artifacts have revealed that both Dutch made and Native produced goods “were seemingly intermingled into Seneca life as they were found in both burial and refuse contexts.” (Loren 46-47).
In New France, the colonial strategies used in regards to Native American relations and trade were slightly different than in New Netherland. In his explorations of Canada in the 1530s, Jacques Cartier observed Native customs and practices in the early area of Montreal. The French liked and approved of the Native’s brothels and gambling houses, as well as their use of tobacco, wampum, and copper. However, they did not approve of the Natives foodways and diet, which consisted of corn, cooked fish, and not of salt. In 1541, Cartier settled Charlesbourg-Royal and established the first French settlement in North America. Prior to this, however, Cartier and his men were met with hostility from the Natives while attempting to settle their previous camp because he kidnapped many Iroquois people. The Natives were then so hostile to the settlers at the Charlesbourg-Royal site that it was abandoned in 1542. These interactions would prove to be a shaky start to some aspects of French and Native American relations, and were already more negative than the original Dutch interactions with the Hudson Valley native peoples. By 1663, French seigneuries had spread all along the St. Lawrence River, establishing feudal estates and encouraging further settlement and colonization, in turn breeding more and more interaction with the Native people.
The main difference between Dutch and French tactics in interacting with the Native population was that unlike the Dutch, the French were very much interested in exploitation by religiously converting the Native Americans to Catholicism. Loren contends, “One of the reasons for French settlement in the New World was to convert the Native populations so that they could assist them in survival and settlement” (Loren 40). However, the Jesuit priests that ventured to Canada on behalf of France were not always successful in their conversions. The French then also had to rely on the native people, such as the Algonquians, for trade and alliance. Similar to the Dutch, the French traded furs heavily with the Native population. This was especially true in Quebec, which was a mercantile frontier garrison town and would later become the capital of New France. The French also provided the Native people with firearms in return for food, furs and survival supplies. This increased Native wars with other tribes, but also helped the French build a military alliance with the Native population that would later become evident in the French and Indian war. The Dutch were not as reliant on the Natives for assistance in survival, firstly because they were not a relevant colonial power for long, and secondly because they did not have to deal with harsh Canadian winters, While the French and Dutch both enjoyed a profitable economic relation with the Natives, the French weariness of the Native threat is much more obvious as is shown in the archaeological evidence. For instance, huge stone walls protected Quebec, indicating that the French desired protection from not only other rival colonial powers, but also the Natives. Other smaller finds support the claim that the French were extremely intent on trading and protection. These artifacts include a fragment of Italian ceramic matching a piece at the Hermitage in Russia at the Charlesbourg-Royal site, as well as a sword hilts, pistols, bellarmine jugs, and many types of pottery found at sites throughout Quebec.
The French and the Dutch colonial projects in North America are effective to compare in that they are both similar and different, as well as because they occurred in the same general area of the continent. They are similar in that both projects economically depended on trade with the Native people of the northeast. This trade evidently affected ways of life for each culture, even if this effect was purely economic or also materially related. The French and the Dutch begin to differ when examining social assimilation of the Native Americans. The French were keen on religiously converting the Natives fully in order to exploit them and possibly assimilate them into their society, but ended up relying on them more than expected for survival and trade needs. Indeed, the Dutch did not attempt to assimilate the Native population, as their population within their settlements was already diverse. Consequently, although the Dutch members of these diverse early settlements may have felt superior, there was not one set belief system to assimilate the Natives to. In this, the Dutch viewed the Natives as strictly trade partners that contributed to their wealth and profitable trade system, and did not waste time and energy attempting to change them. Although the French and Dutch held slightly different policies in Native relations and were no doubt exploitative to different degrees, these two were perhaps the least exploitive of the Native Americans out of all of the colonial projects in the Americas.