Documenting the Hochstetler Massacre

My current writing project is The Return, Book 2 of the Northkill Amish Series, which I’m coauthoring with Bob Hostetler, and which releases April 1. This series is closely based on the inspiring true story of Bob’s and my Hochstetler ancestors, well-known among the Amish and Mennonites.

Mural depicting the attack on the Hochstetler farm
(Pennsylvania Dutch Campsite, Shartlesville, PA)

We’re fortunate that so much research has been done on the Hochstetler massacre, which took place on the Pennsylvania boarder on September 20, 1757, during the French and Indian War. We relied heavily on oral accounts passed down by Jakob’s descendents and published in the massive genealogical books of the Hochstetler family, Descendents of Jacob Hochstetler (DJH) and Descendents of Barbara Hochstetler Stutzman (DBH), and information from the Jakob Hochstetler Family Association Newsletter. We’re also greatly indebted to family researchers who located fascinating accounts in newspapers and other records of the day preserved in the Pennsylvania State Archives and in private collections. One of the most fascinating is Jacob’s interrogation by the British after he escaped from the Seneca village where he was held captive for seven months. Beth Hostetler Mark published this account in her compilation Our Flesh and Blood: A Documentary History of the Jacob Hochstetler Family During the French and Indian War Period, 1757–1765. 

Jacob had been behind French lines and in 3 French forts during his captivity, and therefore was brought from Fort Augusta, which he reached on his escape, to Carlisle, Pennsylvania, to be interrogated by Colonel Henry Bouquet, second in command to British General John Forbes. This account survives in the Pennsylvania Archives and in Bouquet’s published papers, Vol I covering Dec 11, 1755, to May 31, 1758.

The captives' route

Bouquet’s Papers include the letter of Colonel James Burd, the commander at Fort Augusta to Pennsylvania governor William Denny on May 30, 1758, in which he describes Jacob’s arrival at the fort. “About five minutes before I march’d from Augusta, I observed a white man floating down the west branch on a piece of bark. I sent and took him up, he proved to be a Dutchman that was taken prisoner last Fall nigh to Reading and had made his escape from an Indian town above Vanango. I brought him with me to this place and Col Bouquet took his deposition and sent it to the General to which I beg leave to refer your Honour” (Papers of Henry Bouquet, Vol I, p. 396).

Bouquet’s first reference to Jacob is in a letter to General Forbes dated Carlisle May 29, 1758: “I had a German peasant brought here who was taken prisoner last year, and taken to Venango, etc. I am enclosing his deposition. The man is very stupid, and speaks only rude German. I did not think it necessary to send him to you. He is almost dead of hunger, having lived on grass for several days” (Papers of Henry Bouquet, Vol I, p. 388). Bouquet disliked the nonresistant Amish Swiss Germans who refused to bear arms, and his letters often express disgust at having to protect people who will not protect themselves.

According to Mark, although Jacob’s name was recorded in the deposition as John Hochtattler, “the details included in the ‘Examination’ so closely resemble the family story—both as recorded in newspapers and transmitted by oral tradition (DJH)—that family researchers, including the editor, believe that “John Hochttatler” was actually Jacob Hochstetler.” I haven’t found any record of another Indian captive with a name similar to Hochstetler or one who was from Berks County, Bern Township, and I also concur that the subject of this interrogation must be our ancestor.

This resource has been invaluable to us as we’ve striven to turn the bare historical records into a gripping story. Jacob and his 2 younger sons were taken on a 17-day journey from their home near present-day Shartlesville, Pennsylvania, to the French stronghold of Fort Presque Isle on the shore of Lake Erie—a journey of roughly 300 miles. Clearly, in spite of Bouquet’s unflattering assessment, Jacob must have been a strong, intelligent, and resourceful man to have endured what he did, find a way to escape, keep track of time and miles, give the answers he did during the interrogation despite being “half dead”, return home without any help from the British, and then pursue efforts to locate until finally his sons were returned to him. He was certainly a man of unwavering faith.

Jacob's Examination, p. 1

Following is the “Examination,” which reflects the French transcriber’s spelling, e.g., words like jou” for “you.” The information within brackets was inserted for the sake of clarity. The dates given by the transcriber are incorrect according to facts that have since come to light.

Examination of John Hochstattler

Intelligence given by John Hochstattler a Swiss by nation which settled in Bergs County, Berner Township, near Kauffman’s Creek was taken by the enemy Indians the 12th of October 1757 [actually September 20] and escap’d from them arriving at Shamokin 5th [actually the 24th] May 1758 [Shamokin was formerly an Indian village at the junction of the north and west branches of the Susquehanna River, at the present site of Sunbury, Northumberland County, PA. Fort Augusta was erected there by the colony in 1756].

Q. By What, and how Many Indians was you taken?
A. By the Delaware and Shawanese 15 in the whole.
Q. Which way did you pas’d before jou came into the Enemys Country?
A. We March’d 3 Days before we arrived at the Est branch of Susquahanna 20 miles from Shamokin where it was fordable, from there whe keept intirely West all along the west Branch, till after 17 Days Journey we arrived on the Ohio. [The Allegheny River. Indians and many Whites considered the it to be the upper course of the Ohio and its headwaters.]
Q. In what place on the Ohio do jou arrivd?
A. Where the French Cr empties in to Ohio there upon the Corner is a small Fort [Fort Mechault built by the French in 1756] Established lately, of Logs, Framed together, there are 25 Men Garrisoned in it, without Artillery, there we passed the Ohio for to come by it, the place is call Wenango [Venango, a former Indian village and important trading post at the mouth of French Creek, the present site of Franklin, Venango Co., PA.]
Q. How do jou proceeded further?

Jacob's Examination, last page

A. Up the French Creek 3 Days traveling on Battoes at the end of it we came to a fort [Fort LeBoeuf built by the French in 1753 at present day Waterford, Erie Co. Pa.] built in the same Maner as the other, and Garrisoned, with 25 Men, from there the French Creek a Road to Presque Isle [Fort Presque Isle built by the French in 1753 at present-day Erie, Pennsylvania] wich is a Days Journey from it Distant.
Q. What became of jou after that?
A. After 3 Days travel Est south Est, I was brought to Buxotons Cr [Buxotons is another spelling of Buckaloons, one of the names given to Brokenstraw Creek and to the village at its mouth near present Irvine, Pa.] where it emptys in the Ohio whe came to an Indian Castle which lys upon the Corner of it, there I was keept Prisoner all the that time.
Q. Do jou ever hear anything of Fort Du Quesne / .
A. Ten Days before I Escaped five Dutch Prisoners was brought up by the Indians from there wich told me there was 300 Man Garrisond in Fort du Quesne, the Provision Scarce, so that the Indians was oblichd to bring away thier Womans and famelys which they generally left there, for to be nourish’d in thier absence / .
Q. Are there any Works about, besyts the Fort jous heard of / .
A. The same People told me that there was a Dutchman Prisoner for 3 years in the Fort, a Baker by Trade, which shewd them a Hill, at the opposite of the Fort over the Monungahela, telling them If the English was there that the could certainly take the Fort with 200 Man because the French had nothing upon it / .
Q. Do jou never heard what Cañons the French had there / .
A. Yes I heard several but all Dismounted / .
Q. Do jou never Learnd if the Indians Receivd Order for Marching against us?
A. 5 Days before I did escape an old Indian was telling to me shewing against all parts of the world, that Indians was coming there and then he shewed about Est south Est, telling that the would attack the English there, wich I did imagine that It was Intended for Shamokin / .
Q. Do you Ever Learn from how the French got Intelligence of / .
A. 6 Weeks before my Departing there came 2 Delaware Indians telling that the came from Shamoking that the Comandat took thier arms from them not trusting, and that the English was Drawing together about Conostoge [Conestoga about seven miles south of Lancaster near present Millersville] or Lancaster, paying up a great Deal of Cattle, that the Designd to attack the great Fort, du Quesne and the was waiting till the grass was groan / .
Q. How do you Escapd from there, how long and in what Mañer do jou was coming, and where did jou arrive / .
A. I got the liberty for hunting, one morning Wery soon took my gun finding Bark Canoe on the River wherein I crossd it, traveling Est for 6 Days from there I arrvd at the source of the west Branch, there I march for 4 Days further till I was sure of it, there I took several Bloks tying them together till I got a flott, there I flotted myself Down the River for 5 Days where I did arrive at Shamokin, Living all time upon grass I passd in the Whole for 15 Days.
(The Papers of Henry Bouquet,1972, Vol I, pp. 391-393)

For more information about this historical event and the series, go to the Northkill website.

Has your family preserved genealogical records and historical accounts? If so, please share a brief story about one of your ancestors.

~~~

J. M. Hochstetler is the daughter of Mennonite farmers and a lifelong student of history. She is also an author, editor, and publisher. Northkill, Book 1 of the Northkill Amish Series coauthored with Bob Hostetler, won Foreword Magazine’s 2014 INDYFAB Book of the Year Bronze Award for historical fiction. Book 2, The Return, releases in Spring 2017. Her American Patriot Series is the only comprehensive historical fiction series on the American Revolution. One Holy Night, a contemporary retelling of the Christmas story, was the Christian Small Publishers 2009 Book of the Year.

Upper and Lower Canada. Which One's Up?

At the close of the Seven Years War, France agreed to turn over it's lands in northern North America to the British. This was the event known in the United States as the French and Indian War (1763).

At the time, most of the residents north of the Saint Lawrence River were of French ancestry, (typically Catholic) while farther south  were the British colonies (typically Protestant). Much of what had been France's colony was populated by the First People. For the most part, the French settlers were trappers and traders and coexisted. British settlers were generally not so amiable. I'm not looking to cause trouble but the British were not good neighbors. Yes, they felt they had good reason. Did France take advantage of it? Of course.

I've posted before, here and on my other group blog, Inkwell Inspirations, about the relationships between Native tribes and how 'siding' with one colonial power or another only made more problems in the long run.  (See New York's Native People) Along comes the Revolutionary War, and now, without France in the picture, it is Britain against her colonies and both sides are looking for help from the tribes they've done little to ingratiate.

War rages. Thousands of Tories leave the new United States and head for British Canada.  Families split and come back together. An influx of new residents adds to the already strained relationship in the British Colony of Quebec.  Britain's solution is to take the populated areas along the St. Lawrence River and divide it into two large colonies: Lower Canada and Upper Canada.

Keeping the Catholic "French" happy was important when it was hard to tell who was your enemy or friend in the colonies.

Now here's the confusing part if you look at a map.  Lower Canada is farther north. It was the eastern portion of the original Quebec colony and for the most part was populated by Catholics of French ancestry. The capital was Quebec City.



Upper Canada was west and farther south. It became a colony of British subjects and loyalists (Tories) who'd fled the new U. S.

The upper and lower designations come from the fact travel was much easier by water and much of the area was settled via the St. Lawrence River. If you settled in the east, you were in  "Lower Canada". If you went far UP river (to the west, um, actually south) you were in Upper Canada.  Simple, right?

I was confused until I asked a Canadian Reenactor a few years ago.

Although Montreal is now the capital of the province of Quebec, it was once the capital of Upper Canada and administered by the British.

Things had barely settled with the new colonies when war broke out between the United States and Britain in 1812 over naval press gangs, the arming of First Peoples by the British, and continued trade-without-permit along the St. Lawrence and Great Lakes. Upper Canada became central in the American War of 1812.

Forts that had changed hands between British forces and French forces throughout the last fifty years, now were won and lost by British and American forces.

I love the history of this area and I hope this has cleared up confusion or stirred up interest in these areas!

Dyeing and Blocking- The history behind Printed Fabrics by Debra E. Marvin

In the 18th Century, among the many fascinating items Europeans began to ‘need’ from the far east were printed fabrics. “Fast Printed” meant the colors were not supposed to run, not the speed of creation. By 1700 English, French, and Dutch craftsmen had figured out how to fix their dyes and create prints with the use of elaborate carved woodblocks, but they were slow to catch imports for their desirability.  

Here's a link to an incredible dress from 1780s made of Indian Chintz. Such colors and bold patterns!

Of course, the labor was backbreaking – cold, dark workrooms with boiling vats of dye. Bleak, monotonous work for very long days. Sadly, few samples of the earliest of prints survive. Cotton took dye best and natural fabrics deteriorate unless kept under the best of situations.

The Madder Plant. Roots were the source of red dye

Most dying centered around two major colors – red and blue and were created by the use of MADDER for red and INDIGO for blue.

THE PROCESS:
It’s incredible to see the intricate details carved on old woodblocks.  Dots worked into the patterns (or not) helped the worker line up the block from spot to spot. A block was colored (think of stamping –rolled on, or pressed onto the dye) and pressed against fabric, then imprinted with a tap from a mallet. The process continued, block by block down the yards and yards of fabric. Consider that in a yard and a half , the process on 45” material would have been done 91 times alone with a 4”  sq. block.  (note-45” wide material is the norm now, not then!)

If you are like me, you love TOILE. Here’s an excellent representation of detail but done in one color.

Imagine the work that went into this fabric!

Amazing printed fabric from 1775-1800

http://www.marquise.de/database/dbout.php?name=hindelopen1.jpg&lang=.

Block printing was not perfect and that’s the charm of it. A discerning seamstress might well pass on fabric that was not lined up properly, or had the occasional smear, but someone would use it.  It’s not surprising that prints were not found on the clothes of servants and the working class in the 18^th Century!

CREATING THE WOOD  PATTERN BLOCKS was a time-consuming enterprise, starting with a thick block of wood made from sycamore / planetree or pear wood (primarily  in England). They had to be of quality to resist warping when wet, and were backed with two or three other layers of wood, often pine. Grains ran in opposite directions in each layer to further prevent warping.

The block was sanded completely flat and smooth before accepting the sketched on design which was transferred on.  The design started on paper, as it had to be copied over to other blocks if the design had multiple colors. For each color the area of the design was left and the balance carved away. I understand the process from making printing blocks out of a linoleum type material, but the skill involved to make a multi-colored block amazes me.

At times, small details had to be made in metal and added to the block, as small cuts tend to wear away or chip off. The use of copper added a very intense amount of work in such cases.

The process to print continues with the choice of a good cloth, fast dyes, and steady hands. And patience!

For a multi-color print, the entire bolt of fabric had to be hand printed in one color and allowed to dry. A second, third or fourth color could be added with different blocks for the same pattern and additional stamping and drying time. In some cases, if a color was only used in a small part, it was hand painted on.

For many years in England, import of printed fabric was illegal. People loved it but it took away from the domestic fabric industry—until British craftsmen could compete with Indian craftsmen!  Textiles from India led the market for a long time. India muslin and calico remained in high demand even after British mills were rolling out cotton fabric.

Here are few more ways to create printed cloth:

Mordant Dyeing (chemical fixatives stamped to the cloth which was then put into a pot of dye)

Resist Dyeing (placing a resist material, like a wax, on the fabric where dye was not to attach)

Hand Painting!

Flower designs were popular, and still are. Fabric printing by mid 18^th century was done to mimic embroidery.  Later, bolder patterns of twisting stems and lines came along but so did small designs which were much easier and cheaper to produce! Now the working class could wear  simple prints.

The term Calico represents printed cotton and may have originated in America as the general term for cotton prints coming from the port of Calicut, India. Chintz, another popular cotton print (generally with a more polished cotton thread and therefore a shinier fabric) is believed to have come from the Hindi word Chint which meant variegated.

I won’t take for granted the classic look of printed cotton when I consider its not so humble beginnings.

For anyone creating period clothing, it is important to look at what materials were used at the time.

American Politics: A History of Invective, Chicanery, and Mudslinging

Every presidential campaign season I ruminate on the history of American politics, and since we’re coming down to the wire in the current race, I thought this would be a timely—and lively—topic for discussion. We hear a lot of complaints about personal attack ads and dirty tricks, including from the politicians who are guilty of using them. But you don’t have to do much digging to discover that political chicanery is a time-honored American tradition that has been exercised with glee since America was still a collection of British colonies on the course toward revolution. So let’s take a quick tour of some of the more egregious examples from our nation’s history.

Political parties didn’t exist in this country until we were well on the way to revolution. At that point, the division between those who supported the British and those who opposed them spawned the Loyalists, or Tories, and the Patriots, or Whigs. There was no such thing as neutrality between the two points of view. Anyone who didn’t support one side was automatically consigned to the opposition. Where Patriots held sway, mobs often forced Loyalists out of their homes, denying them legal counsel and trial. Loyalists might be jailed, have their property confiscated, their citizenship revoked, and even be exiled. Where Loyalists held power, Patriots suffered similar treatment. At times someone of the wrong political persuasion was even tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail.

Mobs played a big part in colonial politics, particularly in Boston, where Dr. Joseph Warren helped to refine mob rule into an art form. But mobs were a force to be reckoned with throughout the colonies. In June 1775, one placed the home of New Hampshire’s last royal governor, John Wentworth, under siege, demanding he turn over his guest, John Fenton, who had urged acceptance of the latest British proposals to avert the crisis. When Fenton understandably refused to comply, the crowd wheeled a cannon in front of the mansion and beat on the walls with clubs until the hapless offender finally gave himself up. Fearing for his and his family’s safety, that night the governor fled with his wife and young child to the fort in Portsmouth harbor, ending decades of British rule in that colony. Nothing like the direct approach to changing your government!

From America's earliest days as a democracy, name-calling and character assassination has been a highly popular tactic, such as when Davy Crockett accused Martin Van Buren of secretly wearing women’s corsets. In 1828, when John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson vied for president, Jackson’s campaign nicknamed Adams The Pimp, based on a rumor that as the American ambassador to Russia he had forced a young woman into an affair with a Russian nobleman. Adams’ supporters responded by circulating a pamphlet claiming that Jackson's mother had been a prostitute brought to this country by British soldiers, and that Jackson was the offspring of her marriage to a mulatto!


The name-calling in the 1800 presidential election between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, however, takes the prize for no-holds-barred mudslinging. Some of the charges and counter-charges are cited in this hilarious YouTube video: Election of 1800 Attack Ads. And you thought our modern political chicanery was bad!

In 1840, American politician Thomas Elder wrote to a friend that “Passion and prejudice properly aroused and directed do about as well as principle and reason in any party contest.” Every campaign season we see the proof of that claim!

So what do you think? Has the political scene improved any today? What are your main (nonpartisan only!) gripes about American political campaigns? What, if anything, can be done to change things?

Colonial Fort Michilimackinac by Carrie Fancett Pagels

Fort Michilimackinac

Fort Michilimackinac in Mackinaw City, Michigan, was where I conducted on site research this past summer. Situated on the shores of Lake Michigan, where Lake Huron meets it in the straits of Mackinac, this National Historic Landmark features reenactments from British 1770’s occupation and the American Revolution.  Surrounded by a stockade wall, this treasure has continued to expand with more exhibits each time I have visited. (I am originally from upper Michigan.) 

Location: Mackinaw City sits at the middle of the top of the “mitten” of lower Michigan. Northeast is Mackinac Island, round island and east is Bois Blanc Island. 

Bark teepee outside Fort Michilimackinac

Outside the fort, native peoples would have had their encampments, particularly during the summer seasons when trading was done. The men trapped and hunted and the women skinned the animals.  Note the otter skins hanging to the right of the teepee and left of the birch trees.  By the way, beautiful silver birch trees grow up north and birch wood was often used to make canoes.  

French Métis  re-enactor and Carrie Fancett Pagels 

On my visit to Fort Michilimackinac, I was able to speak with Susan, a former librarian and wonderful fellow history fanatic, who portrayed a French Métis woman of French-Chippewa heritage.  She had beaded most of her clothing herself and had also created her own Ojibway jewelry.  

Below is a picture of the amazing beadwork on her moccasins.

She showed me (I’m a fellow beader) how the porcupine quills were used in necklaces, forming kind of a hollow tube, through which string can be run. I had not realized porcupine quills were hollow.  To be used, the ends have to be cut. 

The fort was reconstructed to preserve the area’s history and depicts life in the early years of Mackinac City under European influence.  

The French courier du bois and voyageurs  met in this area for fur trading with the native Americans, several tribes being predominant in the area, e.g., Ojibway and Hurons. Traders would travel all the way from Montreal to the straits of Mackinac each summer.

Commander DePeyster's house.

Inside the fort are many buildings to be investigated, such as the British commander's house, portrayed at the left. The fort was under the occupation of the French for a long time and there is a building set up to serve as the priest’s quarters.  This was one of my favorite buildings because it held copies of baptismal records, and from those records I got kernels to start some new stories growing. 

All of this area was under the control of the French until after the French-Indian War. The British then took control of Fort Detroit and Fort Michilimackinac.   The British operated very differently than the French as far as interacting with the Indian tribes. Their callous disregard for following native customs resulted in problems, including Pontiac’s Rebellion, which I will be posting about this winter. British soldiers had reason to be wary of their new post!

In letters written home, the British soldiers complained greatly of the cold and deprivation.  But they played games, told stories, wrote letters, and participated in religious services like soldiers do today. However, unlike the French, who often blended into the communities, intermarrying with the Ojibway women, the English were more or less occupiers rather than integrators. 

One of the treats those early settlers had, that we still enjoy today, was of viewing the gorgeous sunsets.  The skies around the straits are bluer than anywhere I have been. So do yourself a favor--if you are in Michigan, head up to this National Treasure and enjoy all that Fort Michilimackinac has to offer! And expect some more posts from me in the coming year about Colonial Michilimackinac and nearby Mackinac Island, where American troops captured the British fort during the American Revolution.