Thesis (M. A.)--Florida State University, 2005. / Advisor: Edward G. Gray, Florida State University, College of Arts and Sciences, Dept. of History. Title and description from dissertation home page (viewed Feb. 7,2006). Document formatted into pages; contains vi, 108 pages. Includes bibliographical references.

This study examines the role of things in the making of New Netherland in the seventeenth century and the formation of New York in the early eighteenth century. With an attention to the translations of form and transculturations of meaning for objects, which have often led peripatetic lives, I focus on previously marginalized crafts and everyday objects like books, tea tables, chairs, hearth tiles, and other domestic goods found in peoples’ homes, to describe the way things connected people and places in early modern Dutch trade networks. Through a careful analysis of objects of material culture and depictions of material culture I focus on how the colony was physically constructed and ideologically imagined internally by the colonists and externally by other interested parties throughout Atlantic world. My research on the making, circulation, and consumption of things in and from New Netherland develops intersecting narratives of the past, some of them regional and localized, others cross-cultural, transnational, and global. By connecting artifacts, objects, and things to larger narratives it is possible to write a new history of materiality and the making of New Netherland, primarily in the seventeenth century but also in later histories. In what follows, through the examination of increasingly mobile and hybrid material cultures in the Dutch Republic and New Netherland, I demonstrate that just like materialism and morality, worldliness and homeliness were not binary constructs, but mutually constructive and inextricably intertwined in the oud and nieuw Netherlands. / Thesis (Ph.D, Art History) -- Queen's University, 2013-10-12 18:03:55.576

Living by a commercial ethic and resisting English encroachment from New England, the Dutch made at least 40 land purchases by written deed from their Indian neighbors from 1630 to 1664. In the past, scholars have seen only a European instrument of dispossession in the so-called "Indian deeds" that document land transfers from Indians to Europeans. In fact, they are colonial phenomena with uniquely Indian qualities. This is particularly true of the Dutch-Indian deeds signed or marked between 1630 and 1664. The Dutch-Indian deeds of the seventeenth century exhibit a middle ground of land tenures, in which the Dutch were compelled to yield to aspects of Indian land tenure and law in order to successfully purchase the land and retain it without facing retaliation. Indians, for their part, partook in the sale rituals of the literate world -- deed-signing -- but resisted European notions of land deals as fixed, permanent agreements. The Dutch-Indian deeds thus emerge as fluid agreements that were a compromise between Dutch and Indian land tenures and legal conventions.

Thesis--University of Louvain. / Reprint of the 1910 ed. Bibliography: p. 331-351.

Thesis--University of Louvain. / Reprint of the 1910 ed. Bibliography: p. 331-351.

The purpose of this thesis is to demonstrate the ways in which the core-periphery relationships of English and Dutch colonial ventures in North America were impacted by local events in New Amsterdam-New York, a Dutch colony that was lost to the English following the Second Anglo-Dutch War in 1664. Increased peripheralization of New Amsterdam-New York negated centralizing efforts of the Dutch and effectively ended the potential for Dutch geopolitical power in North America. While the Atlantic World has traditionally been understood as a framework for understanding international phenomenon and global processes, this thesis suggests that it was impacted by multiple geopolitical scales simultaneously. Placing New Amsterdam-New York’s colonial history in a framework of evolving core-periphery relationships and highlighting the central role of local social, political, and spatial processes provides a foundation for understanding the outbreak of ethnic hostilities in the late 1680s. I argue that the increasing importance of the local is demonstrated by the attention given to social, political, and spatial ordinances that sought not to control “the English” or “the Dutch”, but to control the actions and actors of individual streets, wards, and districts.