Workshop One Summary
Summary recommendations from the successful Workshop One participant comments funded by Collegiate Church Corporation have established the basis for moving forward with the Virtual New Amsterdam Project specifications. Comments from Jaap Jacobs and Charly Gehring reflect the general positive reaction to the workshop.
New Amsterdam History Center
Summary document as requested at the NAHC Development Workshop One:
Building a Virtual 3D New Amsterdam Exhibit
Jaap Jacobs
The idea of a 3D Virtual Model of New Amsterdam based on the Castello Plan as a starting point for the New Amsterdam History Center is in itself sound. The technical side is quite convincing and the artwork of Len Tantillo is magnificent. Although there are some problems with the reliability of the Castello Plan, I believe that it can be used to depict New Amsterdam as accurate as possible. While the feasibility study, the results of the grant proposal with the LMDC, and the outcome of the negotiations with the MTA, all critical factors in determining the future of the NAHC, are awaited, some decisions need to be made on the actual development of the 3D Virtual Model.
While the first workshop worked reasonably well as a brainstorming session, the phase in which the actual work is being done requires a structured organisation and outlined procedures. Next to a board of trustees, a board of recommendation, numerous freelance contractors, and several committees dealing with facilities management, collections policy, community engagement, brand strategy, promotional strategy, pricing strategy, technical website development, and commercial activities, a scholarly advisory committee is required.
In my view a scholarly advisory committee is the best means to ensure that any products of the NAHC can stand the test of criticism from the scholarly community. While that scholarly community is obviously not the main target audience, its disapproval, if voiced in the media, would damage the project as it would diminish its credibility. Thus, any popular approach insufficiently grounded in scholarly research should be avoided. Too great an emphasis on for instance New Netherland being the cradle of tolerance, diversity (the famous eighteen languages), the issue of St. Nicolaas/Santa Claus should be avoided. That is not to say that the use of these is anathema. But when indicating that New Netherland was more tolerant than for instance New England, the limits of tolerance and its context should be highlighted. When mentioning the diversity of New Netherland, it should be made clear that we do not actually know to which eighteen languages this remark by Willem Kieft refers. Nor should geographical origin be equated with culture and seventeenth-century individuals be draped in modern conceptions of nationalism and affiliation with specific nation-states. And as to St. Nicolaas, he was not an inhabitant of the former New Netherland area until well after the American Revolution.
Similarly, while in a exhibit located in the financial district the focus should be New Amsterdam, the fact that this city was ‘merely’ the capital of the much larger colony of New Netherland should be made clear. New Netherland in its turn was part of the colonial empire of the Dutch Republic, along with several other areas at different times: the Caribbean islands of Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao, as well as St. Martin, St. Eustatius and Saba; the colonies along the Guyana coast, foremost Suriname; the conquest New Holland, Dutch Brazil, and, of course, the Dutch forts on the coast of West Africa, among which Elmina, the important nexus of the Dutch slave trade. For a correct interpretation of New Netherland, it needs to be assessed within the context of its European origin, as a component of Dutch expansion worldwide and of the gradual development of the American colonies.
It would be the task of the scholarly advisory committee to set standards of quality of the NAHC material and to maintain those. I envision my own role to be that of a member of this committee. It will advise on all matters related to content as it sees fit and give advice on specialists to be used for specific tasks (unless a research coordinator, reporting to the committee, is employed, see below.) The scholarly advisory committee will have the power to approve or reject all material produced by the NAHC prior to its becoming public. To execute its task the committee needs five members, large enough to cover all relevant areas of expertise (history, architecture, archaeology), but small enough so as not to become cumbersome. As members I suggest Firth Fabend as chair, and Charles Gehring, Jeroen van den Hurk, Joel Grossman, and Jaap Jacobs. Other possibilities are David Voorhees and Joyce Goodfriend, who both have a thorough knowledge of New York in the seventeenth century. With good communication via e-mail and other means, regular meetings may not be required.
My own expertise is not limited to the themes assigned to me for Workshop One (commerce, trade, WIC, Stuyvesant). My book New Netherland: A Dutch Colony in Seventeenth Century America (Leiden, Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2005) covers New Netherland’s early history, population, government and justice, economy, religion, status, material culture, and daily life. I wouldn’t call myself an expert on architecture, food, or gardens, but I have a detailed insight into New Netherland as my research specialty, based on a thorough knowledge of the history of the Dutch Republic and its colonies.
The task of the scholarly advisory committee will not be to produce content material, although individual members can in specific cases act as freelance consultants. When commissioning research or specific texts, the NAHC should ensure that it acquires the copyright as well. For freelance historic research or editing, I suggest Martha Shattuck. Apart from writing a dissertation on Beverwijck, which is now being turned into a book, and several articles, Martha was content editor on New Netherland and colonial New York entries for the recently published Encyclopedia of New York State, and has been an editor and researcher on the New Netherland Project since 1988. She has a thorough knowledge of the Dutch history of New York, both city and state, a working knowledge of the Dutch Republic, and has a very extensive network among both historians, ethnographers, and archaeologists. If the work load starts growing she would be an excellent research coordinator.
The scholarly advisory board will need to develop a guideline for research, to be applied by anyone submitting material to the NAHC. Obviously, all material needs to contain references indicating the origin of the information. Generally speaking, for any question on New Amsterdam or New Netherland, the first option will be the most recent scholarly literature. Much of the literature prior to 1980 is unreliable, and also some after that date should be consulted only with caution. The second option is translated New Netherland documents. Researchers need to be aware of the pitfalls, as some older translations cannot be fully relied upon. The third option is untranslated documents, either located in the US or in the Netherlands. Special research skills are then required. If the answer to a specific question cannot be found in literature or in documents directly to New Netherland, then the fourth option, a comparative approach, is required. There are three general areas that can be drawn upon: the Dutch Republic, its other colonies, and the English colonies in North America. In all three cases caution is warranted. Any assumption that for a specific research question New Netherland is similar to another area needs to be corroborated and made convincing.
Charly Gehring Comments
It was good to have the chance to participate in the group assembled at the Marble Church. Len Tantillo and I had plenty of time to discuss matters on the train both coming and going. On the way back to Penn Station we had something to eat with Jaap Jacobs who was returning to Cornell by bus. We discussed various aspects of the "brainstorming" session, agreeing that it was a worthwhile exercise. We agreed that the subject matter is extremely complex. In fact, we feel that an advisory panel or committee be established to vet any content submissions. We need to avoid both the virtual and physical site from becoming a Fibber McGee's closet of questionable historical detritus.
First and foremost New Amsterdam and New Netherland need to be placed in their historical and geographical contexts. The former is important first of all because most people fail to understand the extent of New Netherland in the New World (from the Connecticut River to Delaware Bay) and its significance for commerical activities in the 17th century; and secondly because most Americans do not understand the extent of the West India Company's operations in the Atlantic region. The former indicating that New Netherland is more than Manhattan and the latter that New Netherland is but a small part of WIC operations in the early years. Geographically it needs to be clearly demonstrated that New Netherland lay astride the most important watersheds south of the Saint Lawrence river system, making it possible for the Dutch to establish a fur-trading operation second to none in the New World. Both themes work well in the opening phases of introduction to both virtual and physical sites.
I have just read Jaap Jacob's summary and am in total agreement with his analysis of matters. Over dinner on the 7th we argued about the name New Amsterdam and whether it should more accurately be New Netherland. However, after some discussion I came to the conclusion that Jaap's argument that New Amsterdam was more familiar to New Yorkers and should be retained was correct. I believe that Len still feels that New Netherland should replace New Amsterdam.
I am also in agreement with the development of themes suggested by Len to devolve from the general to the specific. The various aspects of household themes, for example, need to be prioritzed and carefully vetted in order to prevent trival matters from obscuring what is important and noteworthy. I look forward to the next phase.
