
Of course, one cannot fault Mr. Kaplan: there is no comprehensive, scholarly treatment in English (or Dutch, for that matter) of the direct involvement of Flemings in Henry Hudson's third voyage. Moreover, no constituency up until this time has had reason to assert the claims of the Flemish Protestant emigres: the Anglo-Saxon world had no reason to diminish the supposed stature of Henry Hudson; the Dutch scholarly community had no reason to underscore the key role of Zuid Nederlanders in their Golden Century; and the Flemish Catholics had no reason to extol the success of emigre Flemish Protestants. I mean to transcend these barriers with this piece. It is my hope that a proper scholar pick up the baton from these pages. Until that time, I submit these findings to you, Gentle Reader, for review and consideration of the Flemish involvement in Henry Hudson's "discovery" of the Hudson River Valley and its subsequent settlement.
It Started in Antwerp

Van Meteren was a confidant of the Prince of Orange and a first cousin of Willem Ortels, the Antwerp-born, “Dutch” cartographer better known as Ortelius, who created the world’s first atlas (sample page pictured above). [2] Another first cousin was Daniel Rogers, Queen Elizabeth’s personal envoy in the Netherlands as well as the translator (into English from Dutch) of the English navigator’s bible, “The Mariners Mirror” (Dutch version pictured below). Both Ortelius’ Atlas and Rogers’ “Mirror” were critical tools for transatlantic voyages to the New World by Netherlandic and English seafarers until well into the 1700s. [3]


Henry Hudson, then, when he returned from his voyage, owed Emanuel Van Meteren an explanation for his activities and voyage. Van Meteren, who wrote the authoritative history of the momentous (for Europe at that time) struggle of the Dutch-speaking Protestants against the Spanish Catholics [5] (title page below), believed that trade and war went hand in hand. Thus, he believed that Hudson’s discoveries – to the extent that they offered new channels for trade – aided the battle against the Spanish (a theme we will return to later in a subsequent post).

With Henry Hudson nearby and Hudson’s journals literally in front of him, Van Meteren wrote the first account of Henry Hudson discovery of Manhattan and the Hudson River Valley, in 1610 (published in 1611).[6] Van Meteren wrote a detailed description which recounted the actual journey – including the specific navigational markers. The actual book and excerpts are pictured below, here.

More to the point, Van Meteren described the economic importance of this discovery. Henry Hudson and his crew “found this a good place for cod-fishing, as also for traffic in good skins and furs, which were to be got there at a very low price.”[7] This statement resonated with the Flemish émigré merchants in Amsterdam (as Van Meteren knew it would). After all, they made their money on trade and especially the high value-added cod-fishing and fur trade.[8]

Up until this time, Amsterdam-based merchants (many of them Flemish émigrés), had sourced their furs in Muscovy.[9] Furs were in demand not only for winter coats but also for hats, lining, and a myriad of other uses. As early as 1566 two Flemish merchants from Antwerp had journeyed to Muscovy.[10] Olivier Brunel of Leuven had been the first to open that trade between northern Europe and what we today call Russia.[11] The fact that he had also reached Chinese merchants overland through Muscovy had excited Petrus Plancius (and other Protestant Flemish merchants in Amsterdam) as early as the 1580s. It was that tidbit – eyewitness reports by Brunel, which Hudson also acknowledged [12] – that made the effort less of a gamble and more of a calculated business risk. Consequently, they sent Henry Hudson off in April, 1609 searching for a Northeast (a sea route to China through the Arctic waters north of the Russian landmass) or Northwest (north over the top of Canada) Passage.

When upon Hudson’s return the Flemish merchants at Amsterdam realized that Hudson had uncovered a new source for furs, so much the better. Merchants purchasing furs in Muscovy incurred a 5% duty on both the goods they imported to trade and on the furs they exported.[13] In an era of little insurance and great risk, every % paid to someone else raised not only the cost of conducting business but the risks as well. So the chance to simultaneously exploit rich fishing grounds and trade for inexpensive yet high quality furs was a 17th century entrepeneur’s dream. Luckily, Hudson’s landfall was in the “no-man’s land” between the fast-growing English colonies of Virginia (Jamestown) and New England (Plymouth) along the coasts and the expanding French trading posts of New France to the northwest and west.
The émigré Antwerpenaars wasted no time following up on this opportunity. Within weeks of the news hitting the quays of Amsterdam, in 1610, the Antwerpenaar Arnout Vogels, dispatched a ship to duplicate Henry Hudson’s route.[14] Other Flemings followed, sometimes literally in their wake. Oftentimes there were so many Flemish ships trading with the Indians in the same waters of the Hudson River at the same time that gunbattles between the ships broke out. At least once that we know of (from the notarial record) Petrus Plancius had to be called in to arbitrate an agreement between these Antwerp natives.[15]

By 1613, Adriaen Block, possibly a native of Dendermonde, and in the service of Antwerpenaars, had sufficiently mapped the area after three voyages to the area.[16] In 1614 the Block map of Nieuw Nederland (the first written record of the name “Nieuw Nederland”) had been submitted to the States General of the United Netherlands as part of a petition for the establishment of the New Netherland Company (Nieuw Nederland Compagnie).[17] The States General granted a monopoly of trading rights to the company for three years. This company was the origin of the so-called “Dutch” colony of North America.
Other Flemings, such as Hendrik Hunthum [18] (also of Antwerp) – a man with fur trading experience in Muscovy and Paris – who later assumed command of Fort Nassau (the small fortified trading post set up near present day Albany) played prominent roles. At the end of the New Netherland Company’s three years’ license (e.g., in 1618), their official rights to a monopoly had ended[19] but the voyages (by the company and others) had not stopped. It was at this point in time (1618) that the “Dutch” – as the Pilgrims referred to the Flemish emigres in Leiden and Amsterdam – approached the group of Separatist Englishmen located in the Pieterskerk about colonizing the trading area. [20]
The approach to the Pilgrims was likely carried by Matthew Slade, an Englishman who also happened to be the son-in-law of Petrus Plancius, the VOC cartographer and the fellow who had coached Henry Hudson and supplied him with the latest cartographic information. Unknown to either Petrus Plancius or to the Pilgrims, Slade was also a spy for the English Ambassador.[21] Thus not only were all movements and activities of the Separatists at Leiden diligently reported to King James’ court, but the London merchants close to King James, such as Sir Edwin Sandys and Sir Thomas Smith, investors in the Virginia Company running Jamestown, were also well-informed.

As students of Pilgrim history may well recall, the Pilgrims were soon (but secretly) approached with a counter offer from English merchants of the London Company. By 1619 more than 100 English Separatists at Leiden had begun the process of disposing of their worldly possessions, preparing for a life in the New World, and hiring two ships, the Speedwell and the Mayflower. Within a year of those preparations, in 1620, the Pilgrims had set off for what we now call the Hudson River. Their intent – and the intent of their backers at the London Company – was to claim the territory that Henry Hudson’s third voyage – conceived of by Flemings, financed by Flemings, managed by Flemings, charted by Flemings, and ultimately publicized by Flemings – had “discovered” for the Flemish-dominated United Netherlands.
The London merchants saw natural riches to be exploited. The Separatist colonists saw a chance to separate themselves from what they viewed as indifferent or hostile administrations. Both groups saw a chance to profit from the peltries of North American mammals. Of course, both groups – and Henry Hudson as well – profited from the contributions – economic, political, cartographic, navigational, etc. – of the Flemish Protestant émigrés at Amsterdam. It remains to be seen whether the Flemish profited at all.

[1] Despite his immense contribution to the discovery and settlement of North America – let alone his contributions to Anglo-Dutch relations, his important role in the Dutch Reformed Church in England, and his uncountable contributions to the struggle for the independence of the Netherlands against Spain, there is no scholarly treatment of Emanuel Van Meteren in English. I have drafted a very brief bio sketch of Van Meteren here: http://flemishamerican.blogspot.com/2009/07/flemish-fathers-of-america-emanuel-van.html . There is also a brief biographical sketch of Van Meteren in English in the introduction of John Parker, Van Meteren’s Virginia, 1607-1612, (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1961), pp.8-9. However, for those who can read Dutch, the two books worth perusing are W.D. Verduyn, Emanuel Van Meteren, (‘s-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff, 1926) and Dr. L. Brummel, Twee Balingen’s Lands Tijdens Onze Opstand Tegen Spanje, (‘s-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff, 1972), especially p.81ff.
Copyright 2010 by David Baeckelandt. All Rights Reserved. No reproduction in any format permitted without my express, written consent.