Wampum vs. "Seawan"

Many early 17th Century primary sources use the term Sea-wan to mean trade beads that are strung (like beads on a necklace) or in bundles (multiple strings). This term is used while under Dutch New Netherland and during 17th Century British New York.

The New Netherland era for this blog includes the time of the first permanent trading post in 1614 Wiltwijk on the Hudson, through to the time the English received sovereign control in 1667 and unto 1674. There is an argument that can be made for this era to include up to when the Dutch took back the territory for 15 months and finally ceding control again to the English in 1674. This timing will be explore in a follow up post; however, one of the main reasons for this is that prior to 1674, the English did not enforce British Common Law. This had a significant effect on the population after 1674 because it meant that many people's liberties enjoyed under Dutch Civil and Canon law were stripped in this one year. The lack of enforcement of English Common law up to this point, allowed the colony to continued to use Dutch civil law to solve legal and court cases which had an effect on personal incomes, property ownership, economics, and even how to address a person.

Sea-wan was used in documents from early in the region's settlement by Europeans; and is adopted from the local indigenous language. Later, when the British governors introduced the term wampum (from the Algonquin word wampumpeag meaning white shell beads) into legal documents, it was not easily adopted by the general public. Did the introduction of the term wampum into this colony by the governor displace the term sea-wan which was used by local Indigenous people and colonist?

It is noted that the primary records do not hyphenate sea-wan. However, when I type the term without a hyphen the spellcheck auto corrects it, even after I have saved the page. So, it is hyphenated to preserve understanding otherwise this post would read very differently. Sea-wan which is commonly used from Brooklyn to Albany; also appears as "Zee-wan" in early documents and "Se-want" particularly in the South River  (Delaware River) documents.


In the Albany, Rensselaer and Schenectady court minutes for 1680-1685

Sample 1: Ordinary session held in New Albany, June 8, 1680, page 11 -12

Mr. Samual Winder, attorney for Capt. John Palmer, ... against Jan Ver Beek, defendant.

The plaintiff demands of the defendant the sum of 16 gl. [guilders] in beavers, showing by the journal and ledger of Mr John Winder, fol. 24, under date of October 5, 1665, that the defendant is indebted to that amount...

Idem, plaintiff, against Lambert van Valkenburg, defendant. The plaintiff demands of the defendant the sum of 28 gl. in sea-wan, showing by the books of Mr. Jan Winder, fol. 24,....

The hornoable court condemn the defendant to pay to the plaintiff or his order the sum of 28 gl. in sea-wan,...

Indem, plaintiff, against Jan Labatee, defendant.

The plaintiff demands of the defendant the sum of 21 gl. in sea-wan, showing by the books of Mr. John Winder, ....

(The terms Negro and Indian are copied from the primary sources and not my own.)


Sample 2: Extraordinary session held in Albany, July 24, 1682, page 274 - 277

Philip Schuyler complains to their honors [in court] in writing that on on the 20th of July last great harm was done to him... who in passing [by] left the gate open and called him names...  especially one called Naerenachteno, who threw a stone at his horse, wounding it above the eye, where upon his Negro, Jan, struck the said Indian.... [a fight followed].

The Indians answered:

1) That the mischief which occurred was not premeditated... They offer a belt, 7 [beads] high.

2) They are heartily sorry about the mischief... They offer a bundle of sea-wan.

3) They are very sorry that the Negro was wounded so badly... They offer two wampum belts, one 12 and the other 6 [ beads ] high.

4) They are ashamed of this mischief... They offer 1 belt of wampum.

5) It was very wrong of the Indian to abuse and scold Ph. Schuyler so... They offer 1 bundle of sea-wan.

Etc...

12 They have finished, but they give 2 belts for medicines or salves [ medicine bags ] to be put on the wound.

N.B It is found that the sea-wan offered by the Indians consists of 12 wampum belts, large and small; 4 bundles of sea-wan and 2 small strings woven belt wise, and 1 thing that is carried on the breast.


In Albany, NY we can see partial transition in terminology after the 1674 enforcement, though some time after.What is interesting about this transition is that the citizens and the courts continue to use sea-wan for individual strings of beads and for bundles of strung beads whereas; wampum is specifically used for trade beads made into a belt form. It is unknown if the local indigenous population decided to adopt the English governor's use of wampum. Despite this, the term sea-wan is used significantly more often than wampum in 1680-85. This implies that both the Indigenous People and colonist continued to use sea-wan in their day-to-day communications.

Albany, Rensselaer and Schenectady records for British New York:

                             Sea-wan                   Wampum                 Wampum Belt

1668 - 1673:           261                             0                                 0
1675 - 1680:           462                             0                                 0
1680 - 1685:           438                             3                               13



Interestingly when Govoner Dogan writes to the magistrates of Albany, he uses the term wampum independently of "wampum belt", yet does not include the term sea-wan, strings of sea-wan or bundles of sea-wan in his address. He has yet to adopted to the terminology associated with the economy or currency. Here we can see a disconnect between the understood terminology used by the citizens and indigenous population and an imposed terminology introduced by the English governor. In 1684, the governor realizes that more than just trade beads are being used as money and includes "jewelry". However, the disconnect in terminology and language between the Governor and the colonist still remains.

Albany, Rensselaer and Schenectady 1680-1685 , Page 475.

By the Governor [Dongan], 1684

Forasmuch as ye Present magistrates of ye Toune of Albanie, have made there Complaint, that it is a great Inconvenience and Damage both to ye trade of this Governt, and this town in Particular, that any wampum, wampum Pipes, Indian Jewells or money should be Transported out of this Government off N: York and Dependencies, it is therefore ordered, that no wampum, wampum Pipes, Indian Juwels or any sort off money, be Transported or carried out of this Government, and that no traders, merchants or any "oyr" Persones whatsoever shall in Exchange or Traffique, give sell or any other ways dispose of money, wampum or Indian Juwells to any Person who shall Carry them out of this Government. ...

However, records such as property purchases are still using sea-wan as a currency; sea-wan is cited as  still in use as currency in 1684. For the Early Records of Albany, Notarial Papers the term sea-wan is cited 99 times and zero times for wampum for the years 1660 to 1696.

Example from the Early Records of Albany, Notarial Papers 1 and 2, 1660 - 1696, page 576, is below.  

Contract of sale between Cornelis Michielsen and Jurriaen "Teunissen" [van] Tappen of the the farm called the "Klinckenbergh" 

On this 5th day of August 1684... Michietlsz acknowledges that he has sold to said Jurriaen Tunis all his interest in the land... pay to the seller or his order the sum of fifty whole, merchantable beaver skins in silver money, wheat, or sea-wan at beaver's price, in two payments... 

When we travel south to the South or Delaware River to the former New Amstel and New Sweden region, we see what appears to be confusion in terminology. Sea-wan is used in the same way as in Albany during the post 1674 enforcement of English Common law which requires all documents to be kept in English, but the citizens are interchanging belts of wampum and belts of sea-wan. It is noted that se-want is the preferred term for sea-wan in this region.

Delaware Papers The English Era

                         Sea-wan                       Wampum                    Wampum Belt

1664 to 1682:  18 (incl. belts/bands)    2  [1670]                      3   (1675 wampam & wamp.)


In the Delaware Papers during the English period, we see General Carr using the term wampum to include strung or bundles of sea-wan, but doesn't use the local definition of sea-wan. Note: In the same document we see non-government officials and recorders using the term se-want to represent sea-wan but not wampum in 1670.

Delaware Papers, English Period: Page 12

Relation from the Whorekill Concering Jan de Caper's Sloop, 1670

On the 20th of December 1670 a sachem of Nassawam, who lives near Sachomok, came here to this place... We asked for an Indian with a canoe to take us there which the sachem agreed to for 1  1/2 fathoms of black se-want.... we offered them ten fathoms of se-want and a blanket,...

In the same document but several records later in October 6th of 1670, on page 18, we can see Marten Roseman, Edman Kantwel, Pieter Cock, Pieter Rambo, Israel Helm and Matheus de Ringh, (clerk)  in their report picks up on the use of the term wampum... but don't seem to know how it factors into the language or how to use it as a reference. The letter was signed by "Matheus de Ring", Clerk.

Report of a meeting with Indians on the Delaware about a murder, 1670 

"... presented us with a small bundle of white se-want about 3 or 4 fathoms", They then gave us another bundle of white wampum adding these words.... Whereupon they also give the Mincquasen a gift, namely, a belt of se-want with a bundle of white se-want, ... We answered them, when we accepted this money or se-want, saying that when we accept this money or se-want we accept it..."

In the Delaware records, from 1664 to 1682, the term wampum is not generally used, appearing only 5 times. For historic museums, villages and reenactors this may be an interesting topic as is shows that when there is a disconnect between the soveriegn government and the population they are ruling over; the imposing of new terms from a different language can take an exceedingly long time.

For Albany, we can see that from the time the English seized control in 1664 to 1680 there was zero acquisition of the term wampum, and the 438 times the term sea-wan is used compare to the 15 times wampum is used demonstrates the barrier intrinsic to language and tradition can impose, lest it cause confusion during an economic trade. The people of Albany took it further, and relegated the term wampum to only beads in the form of a belt. The people of the Delaware River region were just as slow to change. However, we can see the court in New Castle making adjustments to use wampum as a currency (or valuation) between colonist in the same way we sea-wan is used as the base currency in the rest of the colony.

In 1675, we see a case adopt the use of wampum as if sea-wan, in that he uses the wampum as a "value" or currency. Page 64.

Gabriela Manville Plt. Contra Capt. John Carr Deft., New Castle , 1675

The plt. declares that this deft. became indented unto him in the "Yeare" 1671 for "Linning" Should unto him at New Yorke the Summe of f.521: wampum "Vallue" to be paid in Small "Furres" upon demand...

While the single case above shows that the British generals are using wampum  it does not seem to trickle down to the citizens; sailors, trades people, small merchants or even large merchants according to wills, deeds, and other primary sources. In the end, we can see that for the 1614 to 1696 there is likely difficulty adopting to new terminology; when the existing terms were being used on a day to day basis, between both the colonist with the Indigenous population and the colonist to colonist. It is possible that the use of sea-wan continued until the currency became displaced with bills.

Indigenous Leggings for Men, Women and Children

From early in the 17th century, Europeans began adopting and appropriating indigenous clothing in the middle colonies. There is also evidence of indigenous clothing in New England, Delaware, and elsewhere. One of the most common items of the 17th century are indigenous bags, that are large enough to hold a number of strung trade beads called "sea-wan". (Some people use "wampum" but New York inventories use "sea-wan", "trade beads" or "Indian beads".) Coats, shoes, trade beads, and other items are also found for adult and children in both probate and shop inventories. During the second half of the century indigenous leggings become widely popular. There are possibly a few reasons for this including; protection while walking through brush or working but also for warmth. While it is difficult to determine whether certain garments were adopted or appropriated, we can look at where they are found in primary sources. There is a rather large number of indigenous clothing in inventories, too many for one post, here we will explore primary sources for the 133 pairs of leggings found in probate and store inventories due to their high frequency in the 17th Century. 

"They [the "Wilde"] make their stockings and shoes of deer skins or elk's hide, and some have shoes made of corn-husks, of which they also make sacks." - Narratives of New Netherland 

Leggings came in a variety of colors and designs before and after Europeans arrived. The earliest depictions of indigenous persons tend to be people from warmer climates and without leggings. However, later depictions of Northern Indigenous persons shows them with and without leggings. The Narratives of New Netherland was a 17th century publication written by Adrian van der Donk who's occupation stationed him in the Hudson and Mohawk region, so it may be used as a primary source guide. Prior to European settlement, leggings were made of durable leathers and this continued in the 17th century. As of now, further research is needed to determine when fabric leggings were developed. By the 18th century indigenous artist and clothing makers adopted or appropriated the use of woven fabrics into their work. Leggings tended to come in two primary heights/lengths; one that just came to the knee being gartered at the knee and ankle, and the second is shaped more like chaps and having a strap at the side that ties to a waist belt. Both appear in imagery of Native Americans in the northeastern and middle colonials. 

Below are chap style leggings in the mid-18th century: Karonghyontye (Captain David Hill) is a Mohawk from the region near Albany, NY and who is pictured in the rear of painting. Colonial Guy Johnson who is in front was in charge of relations with the indigenous populations, National Gallery of Art, Link. Interestingly, the colonial in front is wearing leggings over his breeches but also moccasins. Yet, Karonghyontye is wearing the leggings on bare legs, but has healed European-British shoes on. This style of legging had a side-strap that tied to a belt at the waist. Karonghyontye's leggings also have a red vertical stripe on the exterior of the garment. The leggings worn by Colonial Johnson are likely made of fabric rather than leather. 

A number of the persons that immigrate to New Netherland and later New York are from regions in Europe that have a history of wearing lower and upper stockings, or layering breeches over long hose without a foot. Women too in some regions also wore petticoats over long hose without a foot. It is possible that the adoption of indigenous leggings by the European population was made easier due to the predisposition to similar garments. Below is an inventory from Albany where many mohawk people lived. It is possible that they came in the chap style as shown in the painting above, but the style is not noted in the inventories. Note the 32 pairs of red indigenous stockings. These may of been dyed leather or imported fabric. Also, "stockings" is historically correct, even though there was not a foot in them. But today we call them leggings. 

Also, the Dutch use two terms for Native people one is "barbaar" or barbarian the other is "wilde". In court and other primary sources such as in inventories we tend to see "wilde", which literally means "wild, natural" in 17th century Dutch. The Dutch also use the term "babaar", but as in the 1640s Governor Kieft's writings suggest it is not the most common term and used most often when angry or scared. We don't really have a dirrect translation for wilde other than maybe "nature's people" or "natural people" and it doesn't translate to "Indian" in the same sense. For reenactors, this terminology should be use respective of the region. Because as is evident in the 1693 inventory below, the term "wilde" is still being used in Albany 20 years after English sovereignty was granted in 1674. Whereas, "Indian" or "Savage" is used in NYC and Long Island during English sovereignty. 


In 1693, the following items were for sale in a Lysbett van Eps's store in Albany, New York taken during the English era; 

29 pair wilde “coussen”                                   29 pair wilde stockings

24 pair “jougen” ditto “coussen”,                     24 pair youth ditto [wilde] stockings

9 'pair' 'Fijne' 'roode' vrouw do.                       9 pair fine red woman do [stockings]

32 pair wilde “coussen” “roode” & “t.”             32 pair wilde stockings red and 't.' 

The 85 (possibly 94) pairs of indigenous leggings in van Eps's inventory taken in Albany, NY are likely made by the indigenous women and traded for other goods in van Eps's shop. Early court records show Indigenous people purchasing "cakes" (cookies?) with van Eps present and other goods. Albany had four indigenous villages or "castles" close by. With healthy trade moving back and forth between New York and Canada. The European settlers had a strong relationship with the local Mohawk population despite many of the Europeans often feeling unsure on how to "read" their relationship; the Mohawks came to their rescue and they vis versa in the 1690s when Canada invaded New York.

In 1675, and 1697 two different small merchants in New York City had "three pr. of Indian trading stockings at 00:06:00" and "30 pair Indians "Stockins” 03:00:00, 5 pair “wirsted” “Stockins” 01:05:00" respectively for sale in their shops. A shop out in Flushing Long Island in a 1680 inventory shows the couple had "fourteen “paire” of Indian Stockings" for sale in their shop, and then in with the tools another “one 'paire' of Indian Stock & 'breeches'". This last listing also mentions in the inventory, an "Indian “Mann” by name Phillip". We get a glimpse at how these stockings were being used, as the 1680 inventory states that 14 pairs were for sale in the shop, whereas, one lone pair were with tools. Many of the 1680 inventory's indigenous items were possibly made by Mr. Philip, who was a person of Indigenous heritage.  

Below is an example of leggings that were tied with a garter at the knee rather than a strap from the legging to a belt. Link.

Here are extent 18th century gartered at the knee leggings from the St. Lawrence area which are made of leather. And check out the amazing blog who posted about these and other authentic art made by people of indigenous heritage, Historic Iroquois and Wabanaki Beadwork, Beautiful !

Additionally, many teenagers in New York entered apprenticeships at about 12-16 years old. This may be why there are a number of youth stockings as it would protect their lower legs while learning carpentry and other trades. Had the 1693 Albany leggings for young persons been for small children it would of read for babies or "kinder" children rather than youths. 


Example of Ottawa persons from just the other side of the boarder in Canada, Link.

Colonial Labeling of Native Americans

One of the terms that seems to be rather difficult to translate into English is "wilde". This is because in part the Dutch use the term wilde for things, plants, animals and Native Americans. For the English the term "wild" is used for things and animals; while the word savage if reserved for indigenous people. The Dutch use the term wilde for only Native Americans but not Indigenous Persons from other nations (See the translation problem?). The English use savage as a general term for Indigenous Persons. But for all the Game of Thrones fans out there, you'll notice a trend where the term wilde is use in a similar way as "wild-ling" or person of nature or outside of urban European-cultural norms but with their own social-organizational patterns and laws. This recognition of separate cultural, legal system and sovereignty seems to be what separates the terms "wilde" and "savage". I don't know why the 17th Century Dutch choose this term, but lets look at the primary sources.

From the time of the first permanent European settlement in 1618 in Albany, New York to the seizure of Manhattan by the English in 1664 and then final transfer of sovereign control to the British in 1674, legal records were kept in Dutch. After 1674, all legal documents were mandated to be kept in English; many documents such as inventories, wills, letters and others continue to be kept in Dutch, and sometimes German and French. While I am not a language scholar, we can use primary sources to determine the meaning of labels and how they were applied to different people and groups. Translation dictionaries can often give us clues in how and when labels are utilized. Terms such as wilde, indian/indean, Japon and Turk are all terms that appear in 17th century books, letters, legal records and inventories. 

Bear with me, we are going to cover a topic that can be political. I ask that we look at it so that we can understand what 17th century people specific to New Netherland and New York were trying to state, explain or record in early documents.  

The savage pea plants of America ! : 
The term "wilde" may seem like an easy translation but it is not accurate due to the Dutch not using the word wilde in the same way English use savage, though there is consistency with the French and German. For instance, the Dutch would say "wild beast" which in English one could say "wild beast" or "savage beats". But the Dutch also use "wilde" for "wilde apple blossoms" and "wilde pea plants of America". Whereas, in English we don't say, "savage apple blossoms" or the "savage pea plants of America". (What a crazy movie that would be.) The term "wilde" for the Dutch is not interpreted as savage; "wilde" is meant to be interpreted as simply existing outside of the urban and formal farming culture, or "natural, in nature, of nature". 


Terminology: In the 1708 Groot Fransch en Nederduits woordenboek it states the following: 
"Sauvage", adj. Feroce, qui n'est point apprivoisé. Wildt, wreedt, ongetemt. 
Bete Sauvage. Een wildt beest. [ wild Beast ]
Pommier sauvage. Een wildt appelboom. [ wild apple bloom ]
Humeur Sauvage. Een mufien aart, een wildt inborst. [ a wild mood ]

This particular label is needed for interpreting court records such as the following. Note that the terms "natural" or "wilde" female and "black" female are used rather than "savage/sauvage", "Indian", "barbarous" or a variation on the N-word. (Side Note: This is not to say the N-word does not turn up regularly, it does appear often in different forms; but it is important for it to have its own post with attached primary sources.)   


New Netherland Council Minutes 1638 - 1649, page 37: 
Ulrich lupoldt fiscael....vs. Nicolaes Coorn Sargant....Bylen die he ende de soldaten waren Gedaen om hout te hacken, aende "wilden" voor zijn particulier te verruilen ende bevers tegens Sijn gedaenen eet in mijn coy heeft gehadt. ... Van gelijken tot verscheiden maelen "wildinnen"  [wilde females] ende Swartinennen [Black females] geheele nachten by hem gedachte hebben geslapen, in mijn Bet, tor presentie van alle de Soldaten." Page 37 Link.

"Ulrich Iupoldt fiscal vs. Nicolas Coorn Sargant... who by reason of his office was in duty bound to set a good moral example to his soldiers, has notwithstanding has been guilty of bartering with the wilde for private gain, the axes which were given him and the soldiers to cut wood and contrary to his oath has hidden the beavers in his bunk. ... Likewise, the defendant has at divers times had wilde females and black [swart=black] females sleep entire nights with him in his bed, in the presence of all the soldiers." 

The below is a cropping of the 20th century original transcript (not original document from 1638) of the New Netherland Council Minutes 1638 - 1649, page 37 section 27. These documents are available for free on the New Netherland Institute's website. 

Whereas, An Universal Etymological English Dictionary of 1731 states the following as the whole definition of "savage". The words savage and wild are separated. English Dictionary Link. 

Savage, wild barbarous people who keep no fix'd habitation, have no religion, law or policy. 


Here we get continuity, both colonial English and the Dutch use Barbarous (Dutch: Barbaar) for persons that appear to be a threat (though not to refer to themselves). When the Dutch wished to use a word closer to the English meaning of "savage" they used "barbarous", a barbarous people and may be associated with a person who purchases or drinks alcohol. This term has appeared occasionally in documents. 

On October 1656 Willem Hoffmeyr from Brazil and living in Fort Orange, was being accused of selling beer to "wilde-indian" in the opening statement, with a more detailed account of "on the 22d, 23d, and 24th of July last past, with five half barrels of good and small beer mixed together, sailed up the  river and sold and peddled the beer among the "wilde-barbar". The acusasaions continue with a reduction in the severity of "wilde-indian" and "wilde-babar" to "wilde" and the plural "wilden". - Fort Orange Council Minutes page 253 for the translated and also the original document from 1656 below. See the yellow underlines. Note that wilde is being used as the noun and Indian or barbarian as a descriptor. There are other nouns that are used in the same way such as Laken (a fulled twill woolen) vs. Serge Laken (a twilled woolen that is not fulled). The New Netherland Dutch tend to quantify many things in documents, so modifying the word wilde to meet the prosecutor's needs is not surprising. 

The term Indian does not readily apply either, and is use rarely in Dutch and even German documents. This may be due to the Dutch being regularly exposed to products from and writings about the nation of India. Roughly 2/3rds of men and 1/3 of women in the Netherlands were literate. This too may of helped, as did the regular education of both boys and girls in lower schools. 

In the 1655 Dutch book, Korte historian, ends jouraels aenteyckeninge, van verscheyden voyages in de vier deepen des wereldts-roune... the term "Indianen" is used to refer to the people of India, and rarely to the people of North America. The author having traveled to both regions and used separate terms to describe the people respectively.  Likewise, we see this in inventories; Wilde (Native people), Indian/Indean (India), Japon (Japan) and Turks (Turkish). All these terms are use in inventories in America often in the same inventory to delineate different items and their respective place of origin and value. 



Wilde, a People Recognized as a Nation: 
One interesting practice was international treaties. The Dutch enter into treaties for trade and peace with various indigenous tribes. Not only did the Dutch recognize that the Native Americans were legally able to enter into and sign contracts, they were treated as a separate nation and could not be punished under Dutch laws. A Native American could bare witness in a court cases against a European on trial, but could not be prosecuted themselves. However, any incident performed by an Indigenous Person would be reported to the person's tribal leaders. One governor Keift even tried to tax Indigenous person, but this did not comply with general Dutch legal structures of separate nations under treaties. This recognition of separate people as citizens under their respective nations and subject to separate sets of laws also distinguishes the term "wilde" from savage. This acceptance tends to carry over to the English occupation from 1664 to their sovereign control in 1667, and until the second granting of sovereignty in 1674. As a whole, Both the Dutch and English seem to treat Native Americans as a people with culture and subject to respective legal systems during the 17th Century. More study is needed to determine when the turning point is but the purchasing of property from Native Americans continues though the whole of the 17th century, with Indigenous persons signing contracts and deeds at least until the year 1700. 


Continued Use: 
Inventories also shed light on another phenomena, the term wilde continues to be used along side "Indian" ten, twenty and thirty years after the British were granted sovereign control. Wilde disappears from court documents in 1674, but continues in inventories and letters into the 1690s. 

Most interesting, people of Indigenous heritage are often referred to by name in Dutch and later New York era documents. Tribe names also make appearances, and the original Native American names for certain garments, material goods and other items create by indigenous persons are adopted by BOTH the Europen and British population. For instance, the term for a bag made by "wilde" is called "notassie" which is not a Dutch word but is regularly used by Europen people when referring to bags made by local Native Americans. Inventories in the Dutch from 1650 and in English from 1680s both use the term "notassie" (Dutch version) / "notase" (English version).  I don't know which of the Indigenous languages this word comes from but the Mohawk and Lenape terms for bag are "kaiarowá" / "nikaiar" and "putalas" / "xesinutay" / "menutesa" respectively. It may be that the "me-nutesa" which is a handbag or purse is our "notase", as the two "notase" are described as fitting into a travel bag. It seems that the name of the handband or purse was a Lanepe word, adopted by the Dutch and then later by the English. 

As we move forward through inventories whether under the Dutch or the English it is important to understand the different terms so to be able to appreciate the material goods in primary sources. The terms "wilde, barbarian, Indian, and savage" should be understood as accurately as possible and with understanding of the landscape it was used. 

Was this helpful in understanding term "wilde" in 17th Century Dutch New Netherland and English New York ?