Hatfield Town (part 5 of 16)

The first planters of New England were entirely unaccustomed to the business of clearing woodlands, and they selected places where they could immediately begin to cultivate the earth. They found the best lands generally divested of timber. The intervales or rich alluvial lands, upon the Connecticut and its tributary streams, were more free from trees than the adjoining uplands. The first settlers of Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield, found plenty of land ready for the plow, and began to raise Indian corn and other grain, and to mow grass, as soon as they had fixed themselves in these places. Nor did their homelots upon higher ground require much clearing. The upland woods on each side of the river, above and below these towns, were passable for men on horseback, and with little preparation, for carts. In Philip's war, and in later years, companies of horsemen, and larger bodies of foot soldiers seem to have penetrated the woods without difficulty in every direction.

Growth of Bushes. - After the Indians ceased to burn over a tract of land, bushes and brambles commonly began to grow abundantly upon it. When some of the people of Northampton petitioned for a plantation at Squakeag (Northfield) in 1671, they stated that the Indians had deserted the place, and that for want of inhabitants to burn the meadows and woods, the underwood had increased, "which will be very prejudicial to those that shall come to inhabit, and the longer, the worse." The inhabitants upon Connecticut River were greatly annoyed by the bushes that sprung up so plentifully in their homelots, highways and elsewhere. There was so little travel within and between the towns with wheels and two animals abreast, that the bushes choked up the ways and it was difficult to keep an open path. In Connecticut, a law obliged every man to work one day in the year in clearing bushes from the highways. Hadley adopted a similar by-law in 1693.

Burning over the lands by the English. - The woods were for a long time the pasture grounds for all kinds of domestic animals. The inhabitants fired them annually, as the Indians had done before. They did not set fires near their habitations and fenced fields, but in the more distant parts of the township. Massachusetts enacted a law forbidding any person to set the common woodlands on fire, except between March loth and April 30th.

According to tradition, there were some splendid burnings in the woods on the hills and mountains, around this valley, especially in the night. The people of Hadley not only burnt over their own lands, but extended their fires to the hills of Pelham and Belchertown, in order to increase their pasturage. Brookfield burnt over the lands in Ware, and they were called "Brookfield pastures." Northampton and Hatfield spread their fires westerly over the hills of Westhampton, Williamsburgh, &c. These burnings continued in many places down to 1750, and later. A law of Massachusetts in 1743, made to restrain such fires, says the burning of the woods greatly impoverishes the soil, prevents the growth of the wood, and destroys much fence. Tra- ditional accounts say that the woods were so free from underbrush and the trees so thinly scattered, that a deer could be seen 40 rods on the wooded hills. The burnings were as favorable to the white deer-hunters as they were of old to the Indian hunters.

Wood and Timber. - The annual burnings by the Indians, and afterwards by the whites, destroyed small trees and hindered the growth of large ones, and valuable timber was not so plenty as some have imagined. Some of the towns on the river had fears about a scarcity of timber in early days. Springfield voted in 1647, that no timber, boards, planks, shingle-timber, nor pipe staves should be carried out of the town, from the east side of the river. Hatfield voted, in 167 1, that no man should sell clapboards, shingles or rails, out of the town, and coopering stuff was not to be sold out of the town until wrought into casks. In May, 1706, this prohibition was so far relaxed as to permit John Field, jr. to transport shingles "to supply those whose houses were burnt down in Hadley."* Northampton, in 1699, "considering the great difficulty we are in to get fire-wood," ordered that no staddles should be cut, that were less than 9 inches in diameter. Hadley, in 1713, ordered that no oak staddles under 12 inches in diameter should be cut, on penalty of five shillings. These town votes all relate to common lands. They clearly evince that timber was not very abundant.

Fire-wood. - Much of the fuel consumed in Hadley, during the 17th, and a great part of the i8th century, was oak and walnut. From some regulations in 1733 and 1737, it appears that oak, walnut, maple and elm were then chiefly used. Pine, chestnut and other soft woods, were not extensively employed as fuel until a much more recent period. From the supplies of wood given to clergymen, some idea may be gained, of the great quantities of wood consumed in the spacious fire-places of former days. Hatfield at first gave Mr. Chauncey 50 cords of wood annually, and afterwards 60 cords. South Hadley voted from 50 to 70 loads of wood yearly, for Mr. Woodbridge. Hadley gave Mr. Hopkins 50 cords, many years. The third precinct in Hadley, now Amherst, gave Mr. Parsons, their first minister, 80 loads of wood some years, and 90 loads in 1749. Mr. Edwards of Northampton, after 1740, consumed from 75 to 80 loads of wood in a year. Wethersfield gave Mr. Woodbridge, (settled in 1680,) 80 loads of wood - probably over 50 cords. Some persons who had not a

Study to warm consumed as much wood as the ministers, or about 50 cords. When Hadley had only 100 families, about 1765, the consumption of wood was not much less than 3000 cords annually.

Building Timber, &c. - The first settlers of New England knew the value of oak, but did not at first understand the importance of pine. In many places, they not only used oak timber for the frames of buildings, but oak clapboards and oak shingles, and some used oak boards to wainscot rooms. Posts, pails and rails were of oak. Where pine was plenty, pine boards were sawed perhaps as early as oak boards, and pine shingles and clapboards gradually took the place of those of oak. How early the people of Hadley began to use chestnut for posts and rails, is not known. They may have split out chestnut rails for some of their early meadow and homelot fences, but there is no evidence of this.

The Norwottuck valley was to a considerable extent an evergreen region. Pines predominated in many places in Hadley, but were mingled with oaks and other trees.

Rift Timber. - This kind of timber could be rived, cleaved or split. One of the first votes of the early settlers of Hadley related to it. "Dec. 17, 1660, voted that if any men fell any rift timber, and do not rive it out into bolts, pales, rails, clapboards, or shingles, within six weeks, any inhabitant may fetch it away for his own use; and that if any man fell any pine timber, and cart it not away in three months, any man may make use of it." This vote makes a distinction between" rift timber" and "pine timber." The former was apparently oak. The articles into which it was rived require some explanation.

Bolts denoted pieces of wood cleft out, in order to be split again into shingles, laths, &c. Pales were stakes, posts, and any cloven pieces of timber placed upright for a fence. The picket fences of door-yards are a light kind of paling. Rails were used for post and rail fences. Our fathers had to learn how to split rails from logs after they came to this country. Zigzag or Virginia fences were unknown. Shingles of oak and pine in New England in early days, were from 14 inches to 3 feet in length. John Pynchon, when he built his brick house in 1660, put on shingles 18 inches long, and an inch thick at the thick end; but for several other buildings, he used shingles 3 feet long. He had cedar shingles for a building in 1677. He gave for shingles 18 inches long, 20 shillings per thousand, and for the 3 feet shingles, from 35 to 40 shillings.

History Of Hadley 101

cloven and not sawn, and were thence called clove-boards, and in process of time, cloboards, claboards, clapboards." It is quite certain that clapboards were cloven in the manner of shingles in New England, more than a century. In England, an act of Parliament under Elizabeth, 1592-3, names the timber of which beer and fish casks were made, "cloven-borde" and "clapborde." English writers represent that clapboards in that country were used by the cooper for casks, and not by the joiner on buildings.

The use of short, narrow, cloven boards, over-lapping each other, to cover the outside of buildings, seems to have been a contrivance of the early settlers of New England, before they had saw-mills, and sawn boards were scarce and dear. It may be that they had been previously so used in some parts of Europe. In this country, they were at first split from oak, and afterwards from pine, and made smooth by "hewing,"* or shaving. The wages of "rivers of clapboards" and the price of clapboards, were regulated by law in some places. Their length for a time was various - 3, 4, 5 or 6 feet. In the i8th century, the laws of Massachusetts ordered that pine clapboards exposed for sale, should be 4 feet 6 inches long, 5 inches broad and f of an inch thick on the back, and be straight and "well shaved." The last law ordering such clapboards was passed in the year 1783. Such short, split, shaved clapboards may still be seen on some old houses, built before the Revolution, in Northampton, Hadley and other places.

Saw-logs. - John Pynchon built saw-mills in Springfield, Suffield and Enfield. After his first saw-mill in Springfield was built in 1667, he hired men to cut logs ready for the saw at 8 pence each; and others were engaged to cart them to the mill with their own teams, at is. 8d. each. They were to be between 12 and 25 feet in length and from 17 to 24 inches in diameter, at the small end. Most of them were pine. White oak logs cost much more. In 1684, he gave for pine logs at the mill at the rate of is. 3d. for every hundred feet of boards v.hich they made. In 1690, Clark and Parsons of Northampton, gave for pine logs at the rate of is. 6d. for every hundred feet of boards sawed from them.

Price of Boards. - Those sawed by hand at Springfield had risen to 7 shillings per 100 feet, before Pynchon built his mill in 1667. After that his price was 4s. 6d. per 100 feet. The price of Clark and Parsons, of Northampton, for many years after 1682, was 4s. per lOO feet. Their charge for sawing boards for others was 2s. 6d. per lOO feet. Hadley prices did not probably vary much from those of Northampton. These prices of logs and boards were all in "provision pay."

Laths for plastering are rarely named in the writings of the 17th century. The houses of farmers had very little plastering. The wealthy plastered their rooms.

Pasturing domestic animals in the woods. - The first pastures in this and other British colonies were the woods, which had previously been the hunting grounds of the Indians. The inhabitants of the Norwottuck valley had a very wide range for their cattle, more than half a century. The great pasture of Hadley extended to the north indefinitely, until Sunderland was begun in 1714; and the eastern limit was Brookfield, or the "Brookfield pastures" in Ware, until Amherst was commenced, about 1728. The nearest inhabitants to the south, were in the vicinity of Chickopee River, in Springfield, previous to the settlement of South Hadley, about 1725. Horses, horned cattle, sheep and hogs were pastured upon these plains, hills and mountain sides. Goats apparently were not kept in Hadley, though some towns in the colony had many. Cows were under a keeper, and sheep after they were numerous enough for a shepherd. Young horses, hogs, and young cattle commonly roved without restraint, but the latter sometimes had a keeper.

A cow-keeper or herdsman was employed in Hadley every year, but is seldom mentioned in the record, and information respecting this manner of pasturage must be sought in other towns. In Hatfield, in 1680 and 1681, a man agreed to keep the town herd from early in May to Sept. 29, for 12 shillings per week, payable in grain. He was to drive out the herd every morning by the time the sun was an hour high, take them to good feed and bring them home seasonably at night. In many places, the wages of a cowherd were 12 shillings per week; in some towns a little higher.

A shepherd was not needed in Hadley and Hatfield for many years. Those who had a few sheep, kept them on their homelots and about the village, until the number was so much increased that the owners could afford to pay a shepherd. After shepherds were employed, the sheep in both towns were folded at night, and the manure was paid for by those on whose lands were the pens or folds. In Hatfield, the sheep were folded in hurdles or movable pens, which were carried from one place to another. The wages of a shepherd were ordinarily 12 shillings per week. Hatfield had 273 sheep in 1691 and 291 in 1699. The Hadley

History Of Hadley 103

In Hatfield, the cow-keeper and shepherd enjoyed the privileges of most of the Sabbaths. In 1672, every man that had three cattle on the commons, was to take his turn in keeping the herd on Sabbath-days. In 1693, the shepherd was to keep the sheep every loth Sabbath, and the proprietors were to guard them 9 Sabbaths in 10. In most of the towns, the owners of the herds and flocks took care of them, on many of the Sabbaths, that the keepers might attend public worship.

It is presumed that horses and oxen, whose services were frequently called for, fed at the barns, on the homelots and in the broad streets. Oxen were at times under the care of the cowherd.

As soon as the crops in the intervals were gathered, cows and some other animals were pastured in the meadows until snow fell. Hadley and Hatfield usually opened one meadow Sept. 29th or about the first of October, and the others within a fortnight. Indian corn was gathered early.

Young cattle and horses ranged the woods in every direction. In Hadley, they ascended Mount Holyoke to the steep rocks, and crossed the mountain in those gaps called cracks. In lyoQj the town gave John Taylor 20 acres of land, to maintain a fence across the crack of the mountain, meaning a gap, now about half a mile north-east of the mountain house. Cattle from the south side sometimes came through this opening into Hockanum and Fort Meadow. The common fields and private lots required strong barriers to protect them against restless, rambling animals.

Young cattle and horses often remained in the woods until winter, and some became wild and unruly, especially horses, and wandered to other towns. Many days were spent in the winter and in other seasons in looking up horses and cattle in the woods. This mode of pasturing, though not without inconveniences, was the best that the new settlers in this and other colonies could adopt.

*The hanging of mischievous dogs sometimes gave a name to the place where the execution was performed. I have noticed the name, "Hang-dog swamp," both in Massachusetts and Connecticut. The dog was taken to the woods, a leaning staddle was bent down and a cord was fastened to the top and to the dog's neck; the elastic staddle then sprung back, with the dog dangling in the air. In former days, cats and dogs were sometimes hanged at the heavy end of a well-swipe.

Chapter Xii

Good land of little value to Indians - Purchases by Penn and Pynchon - Purchases of the Indians in Norwottuck Valley - Remarks on the Indian Deeds - How Hatfield was purchased - How much Hadley paid for land - The name Norwottuck.

The Indians upon Connecticut River were very desirous that the Enghsh should settle among them. They willingly and gladly sold their lands; no urging was necessary. They understood what was meant by a sale of land. When the Norwottuck Indians sold the lands at Northampton in 1653, and at Hadley in 1658, they knew perfectly well what use the English made of the lands they had purchased in other places long before, and what they claimed under an Indian deed. The Indians never pretended that they were ignorant of what was intended by a sale of land, and no quarrels arose on that ground.

The price obtained by the Indians for land, however small, was all they demanded, and in the opinion of intelligent men, all the land was worth. "Whoever is conversant with the hardships, toils and privations attending a new settlement in the wilderness, and will take the trouble to compute what is expended and laid out on and about a settlement to make land produce any thing; how much its value depends on neighboring settlements, on roads, fences and the various improvements of civilized life; will inevitaby come to the conclusion that wild land in a wilderness, remote from neighbors, cannot be of much value."* Gov. Hutchinson observed that land in New England, at the time of its settlement, was of no value. f

Very erroneous opinions are entertained in regard to the value, to the Indians, of the land which they sold to the English. They manifestly were not conscious of giving up much that was useful or important to themselves. The Indian men were fond of fighting, hunting and fishing, and disdained other pursuits. All agricultural labor and all kinds of drudgery were thrown upon the women, who, with hoes of shells, wood or iron, cultivated small pieces of land. It may be doubted whether all the Indian corn-fields in this valley, from Holyoke and Tom on the south, to Toby and Sugar Loaf on the north, contained more than seventy acres. Agriculture was a minor object with the Indians.

History Of Hadley 105

In Connecticut, the Indians in most of their deeds, retained the right to hunt, fowl and fish within the lands disposed of. So the Norwottuck Indians, in their deeds of land in Hadley and Hatfield, reserved to themselves the liberty of hunting and fowling on the lands they sold, and of fishing in the streams; and in two of the deeds, they had liberty to set their wigwams and take fire-wood on the commons.* They had the same use of most of the land and water after the English came, that they had before. The women lost their corn-patches in the meadows. The men continued to hunt, fowl and fish, and the women to raise corn.f

It was not rich land that principally induced the Indians to establish themselves in this valley or elsewhere. The most numerous tribes of New England Indians were not upon the best lands. The Pequots, the most powerful tribe in Connecticut, resided in one of the most sterile sections of the colony. The sandy, barren island of Nantucket, had as many Indians 200 years ago (if correctly estimated in 1659) ^^ ^^^ fertile lands upon the Connecticut in the whole course of the river. The Indians had no permanent settlements above Northfield, and they voluntarily deserted that place.

Some European writers have been strangely ignorant of the fact, that most of the early settlers of New England occupied their lands by actual bargain with the Indians. These writers have represented that William Penn was the first to purchase a conveyance from the Indians, and have bestowed much praise upon him for doing what had been done a hundred times in New England, before Penn came to America.:};

Penn is said to have completed his bargain or treaty with the Indian chiefs under an elm tree near Philadelphia, and the transaction has been rendered famous by the historian and the painter. Yet it would be difficult, perhaps, to tell why the purchase of Indian lands in Pennsylvania by Wm. Penn, is more worthy of renown, than the purchase of Indian lands in Northampton or Hadley by John Pynchon, 20 years before. Both bought as cheaply as they could.

*Pres. Dwight says, in his Travels in New England, "the Indians were always considered as having a right to dwell and to hunt within the lands which they had sold." Such a right seems to have been practically enjoyed, though not expressly reserved in all the deeds.

-|-When the women took land of the English for half the crop, they may have obtained from well plowed land more corn than the same amount of labor produced when the land and all the crop were theirs.

Indian Deeds Of Lands At Norwottuck

INDIAN DEEDS OF LANDS AT NORWOTTUCK. Deed of Northampton. This purchase was made by John Pynchon, Sept. 24, 1653, ^^ Springfield, (perhaps under an elm tree) of six Indians, two of whom appear as owners of land on the east side of the river, viz., Chickwallop ahas Wawhillowa, and Awonusk, wife of Wulluther. The tract of land purchased was at Nanotuck or Nonotuck, and extended from the brook below Munhan, called Sankwonk (now below Asahel Lyman's) up by the Quinetticott to the brook or gutter below Capawonk called Masquomp, (now called Half-way brook,) and out into the woods westerly nine miles. The consideration was 100 fathoms of wampum, 10 coats and some small gifts; and the English were to plough up for the Indians, on the east side of the river, sixteen acres of land, in the summer of 1654.

Northampton bought this of a chief, named Lampaunchus, or Umpanchala, July 20, 1657, for 50 shillings. This meadow was then called Pewonganuck or Capawonk. In October, 1658, Northampton proposed to sell it to the "Hartford men,"on four conditions, (on page 11,) which were not complied with. Oh the nth of March, 1659, Joseph Fitch, John Webb and Joseph Parsons, in behalf of Northampton, agreed with William Westwood, Samuel Smith and Andrew Warner, acting for the purchasers of the new plantation on the east side of the river, to sell Capawonk Meadow, for 30 pounds sterling, in wheat and peas, delivered at Hartford at the current price, before June i, 1659. The 30 pounds were paid at or near the time. The deed from Northampton agents to the agents of Hadley, was given Jan. 22, 1663. The bounds of Capawonk in the deed, were, the riverett running into the Great River easterly, the Great River south and east; and the bank of upland, north and west.

The agreement of March 11, 1659, is the first instrument recorded in the first Book of Deeds at Springfield. Elizur Holyoke recorded it Dec. 2, 1660.

This deed embraces the land from the mouth of Fort River, and Mount Holyoke, on the south, to the mouth of Mohawk brook, and the southern part of Mount Toby on the north, extending easterly nine miles into the woods.

"Here followeth a copy of a deed or writing -whereby the Indians of Nolwotogg, upon the river Quienecticott, made sale of certain lands unto Maj. John Pynchon, of Springfield, together with the copy of the said Maj. John Pynchon his assignment of the said deed to the use and behoof of the inhabitants of Hadley, and his acknowledgment thereoft

Be it known to all men by these presents that Chickwollop alias Wahillowa, Umpanchella alias Womscom, and Quonquont alias Wompshaw, the sachems of Nolwotogg, and the sole and proper owners of all the land on the east side of Quonicticot river, from the hills called Petowamachu, and from the mouth of the brook or river called Towunucksett, and so all along by the great river upward or northward to the brook called Nepassooenegg, and from the hither part or south end of the great hills called Kunckquachu, (being guessed at near about nine miles in length) by the river Quenecticott - We the aforenamed Chickwallop alias Waahillow, Umpanchala alias Womscom, and Quonquont alias Wompshaw, of Nolwotogg, on the one party, do give, grant, bargain and sell unto John Pynchon, of Springfield, on the other party, to him, his assigns and successors forever, all the grounds, woods, ponds, waters, meadows, trees, stones, &c. lying on the east side of Quenicticot River, within the compass aforesaid, from the mouth of the little Riverett called Towenucksett, and the hills Petowomuchu northward up the great river of Quenecticot, to the Brook Nepowssooenegg, and from the south end of the hills Quaquachu, being near about nine miles in length, from the south part to the north part, and all within the compass from Quenecticot River eastward nine miles out into the woods, all the aforesaid tract of ground called Towunucksett, Sunmukquommuck, Suchaw, Noycoy, Gassek, Pomptuckset, Mattabaget, Wunnaquickset, Kunckkiunk-qualluck, Neposeoneag, and to the south end of the great hill called Kunckquachu, and for nine or ten miles eastward from the great river out into the woods eastward - We the said Chickwallop, Umpanchella, and Quonquont, do for and in consideration of two hundred fathom of wampom, and twenty fathom and one large coat of eight fathom, which Chickwallop sets oflF, of trusts, besides several small gifts, and for other good causes and considerations do sell, give, grant, and have given, granted, bargained and sold to John Pynchon, of Springfield, and to his assigns and successors all and singular the aforenamed land, or by whatever other name it is or may be called, quietly to possess, have and enjoy the aforesaid tract of ground free from all molestations or incumbrances of Indians, and that forever, only the Indians aforenamed, and in particular Quonquont, doth reserve and keep one corn field about twelve, sixteen, or twenty acres of ground, a little above Mattabaget, by the brook called Wunnaquickset, lying on the south side of the said brook, and compassed in by a swamp from that brook to the great river, and also they reserve liberty to hunt deer, fowl, &c. and to take fish, beaver, or otter, &c. but otherwise all the aforesaid premises the said John Pynchon, his assigns and successors and their heirs shall forever enjoy absolutely and ciearly, free from all incumbrances of any Indians or their corn fields forever, except as before excepted. And in witness hereof, we the said Indians do subscribe our marks this present twenty-fifth day of December, 1658. It is only the corn field on this or south side of the brook called Wunnuckeckset, and the little bit of ground by it within the swamp and betwixt the swamp and the great river which the Indians do reserve, and are to enjoy. But the little corn field on the other side or further side or north side of Wunnaquickset, and all the other corn fields within the compass of ground aforenamed, the Indians are to leave and yield up, as witness their hands.

Witnesses to this purchase and that the Indians do fully sell all the lands aforementioned to Mr. Pynchon, and that the marks were subscribed by the Indians themselves.

The mark R. T. of Rowland Thomas, who was privy to the whole discourse and conclusion of the purchase, and Joseph Parsons was present and acquainted with the whole agreement; the other witnesses came in to testify to the subscribing, and that the Indians owned all as it was read to them.

The Indians desired they might set their wigwams at some times within the tract of ground they sold without offence, and that the English would be kind and neighborly to them in not prohibiting them fire-wood out of the woods, &c. which was promised them."

Assigned by John Pynchon to "the present Inhabitants of Hadley," Oct. 28, 1663 - in which he says he acted in the purchase as an agent entrusted by them.

The corn-field of 12, 16 or 20 acres, reserved in the foregoing deed, was sold to Hadley in a few years. It seems to have been a part of the upper School Meadow.

The land included in this deed, is bounded by Hatfield Mill River on the south, and the upper side of the Great or North Meadow on the north, extending westerly nine miles.

"Here foUoweth a copy of a deed of sale whereby Umpanchala, an Indian Sachem formerly of Nolwotogg, did sell and alienate his right and interest in certain parcels of land on the west side of Quenecticot River, unto Maj. John Pynchon, of Springfield, for and in behalf of the inhabitants of Hadley, as also his, the said Maj. John Pynchon's assignment of the same to the said inhabitants, and acknowledgment of it likewise:

Be it known unto all men by these presents that Umpanchala, alias Womscom, a sachem of Nolwotogg, on the one party, being a Chief and proper owner of the land on the west side of Quinecticot River, from Cappowoungomuck to the upper side of Mincomonk, (viz. to Quonquont 's ground) do give, grant, bargain and sell to John Pynchon of Springfield, on the other party, to him, his assigns and successors forever, all the grounds, woods, ponds, waters, trees, stones, meadows, uplands, &c. lying and being at Nolwotogg, on the west side of Quenecticut River, from the meadow on the south called Capawonk, formerly sold by Umpanchala to the inhabitants of Northampton, upon the great River of Quenecticut, northward to the upper side of Mincomunck, that is to say, the Brook or Riverett called Cappowong alias Mattaoolanick, which parts Cappowonganick and Wequetayyag, and the meadow and upland called Wequetayyag, and so northward to Yowanckhomuck and Natocouse, and the brook called Wunckcompss which comes out of the pond, and over the said Brook Nattacows or Wonckcompss still northward, viz. all the ground and meadow called Mincommuck to a marked Walnut tree, at the great River side, and so ofF from the River to a great White Oak marked, and thence to run out into the woods westward from the great River nine miles, and so down southward till it come to Coppowoung Riverett, which is to Northampton bounds, the aforesaid tract of ground called Wequetayyag, Yowunckhommuck, Wonckcomss, Nattacows, Mincomuck, and from Quenecticott River to run westward nine miles into the woods both at the southward bounds up along the riverett Cappawoung, as well as the northward bounds of it; the said Umpanchala alias Womscom on the one party, for and in consideration of the sum of three hundred fathom of wompum in hand paid, besides several other small gifts, and for other good causes and considerations, do sell, give, grant, and have sold, given and granted, to John Pynchon, of Springfield, aforesaid, on the other party, and to his assigns and successors forever, and to their heirs, all and singular the aforesaid land, or by whatever other names it is or may be called, quietly to possess, have and enjoy the aforesaid tract of ground, free from all molestation or incumbrance of any Indians, and that forever; only the said Umpanchala doth reserve the Chickons alias Cottingyakies, which is to say, their planting ground, together with liberty to hunt deer or other wild creatures, to take fish, and to set wigwams on the commons, and take wood and trees for use; but otherwise all the premises and the whole tract of land before mentioned, with all the appurtenances and privileges thereof, the said John Pynchon, his assigns and successors and their heirs shall forever enjoy, absolutely and clearly, free from all molestation by any Indians; and further Umpanchala doth engage and covenant, and it is the intent of these presents that all the Indian cornfields or old planted ground above Wequetayyag shall come to the English after his death, and then the Indians to have and enjoy only the old planted ground in Wequetayyag and down to the Brook Cappowongseate alias Mattoolanick. In witness hereof the said Umpanchala hath set to his hand and mark this tenth day of July, 1660.

The mark - of Etowomq, brother to Umpanchala, owning and approving of the sale of the land, and is a witness to it. Subscribed in presence of John Russell, Jr. Andrew Bacon, Richard Church, Richard Montaeue, The mark - of Woassomehuc, alias Skejack, an Indian witness."

Oct. 28, 1663. John Pynchon assigned the above to the inhabitants of Hadley, because "it was purchased in the behalf of several persons who had obtained a grant from the General Court of Massachusetts for a plantation, then intending to plant and settle themselves on the land," said Pynchon acting "only as being intrusted by the said persons now inhabitants of Hadley."

On the 17th of Jan. 1662, Umpanchala, with the consent of Etoomp, deeded to four men, for the town of Hadley, the planting ground in and above Wequetayag, reserved in the first deed, excepting five acres, which Hadley was to break up and fence for the Indians. The five acres, which were in Indian Hollow in Hatfield, were sold a few years after. The Indian planting ground, in the deed of 1660, is called "Chickons alias Cottingyakies." In the deed of 1662, it is named "Chickons Cottones Akers." Umpanchala was in debt to John Pynchon, who allowed him £ix, los. for this land, and received his pay of Hadley.

History Of Hadley 109

This deed takes in the territory fi-om the mouth of Fort River, and Mount Holyoke on the north, to Stony brook, in South Hadley, on the south, extending easterly lo miles, or to three ponds.

"Here followeth a copy of a deed of the purchase of certain tract or tracts of land by the Worshipful Maj. Pynchon of the Indians, and his assignment of the same to the inhabitants of Hadley, and their successors, with his acknowledgment of the same.

Be it known to all men by these presents, that Wequagon (formerly called Wulluthearne) and his wife Awonusk, and Squomp their son, being the sole and proper owners of the land at Nolwotogg, on the east side of Quenicticott River, from the brook Towonunkset and hill Petawamachu down southward towards Springfield bounds. We the said Wequagon, Awonunks and Squomp (for ourselves and heirs) on the one party, do give, grant, bargain and sell unto John Pynchon of Springfield, on the other party, to him, his heirs, assigns and successors forever, all the grounds, woods, trees, ponds, waters, stones, meadows, and uplands, &c. lying and being at Nolwotogg, on the east side of Quinecticott River from the hill called Petawamuchu, and the brook or little riverett called Towunuckset, which formerly Umpanchala and Wowwhillowa sold to the English, when they sold them Sunnuckquommuck and bounded it by the mouth of the brook Towunuckset and the hill Petowomachu. Now from the said hill and brook down Quinecticott River southward to a brook or riverett called Chusick, where the cart way goes over it, but at the mouth it is called Cowase, and all within the compass from the great river Quenicticott eastward into the woods about ten miles, viz. to the three ponds called Paquonckquamog, Scontocks, Paskisukquopoh. The aforesaid tract of land called Petowamuchu, Suchow, the great neck or meadow which the English call Hoccanum, together with the uplands adjoining, and the brook or riverett called Cowachuck alias Quaquoonuntuck, at the mouth of it, and so south to the riverett Chusuck alias Cowase, at the mouth of it - and eastward to the three ponds before named. - We the said Weequagon, Awonusk and Squomp, do clearly and absolutely grant and sell to John Pynchon, of Springfield, aforesaid, and to his successors forever - And by these presents, for and in consideration of 150 fathom of wampom with ten coats, and more two yards of cloth over in the largeness of their breeches, and several other small gifts, considerable all of them, and all in hand paid (the receipt whereof we do by these presents acknowledge) and for other good causes and considerations us thereunto moving, do grant and sell, and have sold, given, and granted to John Pynchon of Springfield, aforesaid, and to his assigns and successors, and their heirs forever, all and singular the aforenamed land from the north bounds Towunuckset to the south bounds Chusick alias Cowase, and from the west bounds the great river to the three ponds eastward called Paquonckequamog, Scontocks and Paskesicquopoh, or by whatever other names it is or may be called, quietly to possess, have and enjoy the aforesaid tract of ground, free from all molestation and incumbrance of any Indians, and that forever - only the said Weequogon and Awonuske his wife do reserve and exempt from this sale a parcel of land in the neck or Suchaw, called by the English Hoccanum, which parcel of land they say is upwards of fifty or sixty acres, being already mortgaged to Joseph Parsons of Northampton, and bounded out to him by stakes and marks in the presence of two Englishmen of Northampton, the which parcel of land being made over to Joseph Parsons they exempt from this sale but not otherwise, all the premises and the whole tract of land before mentioned, with all the profits, privileges and advantages and commodities thereof, the said John Pynchon, his assigns and successors and their heirs shall forever enjoy, absolutely, clearly and free from all molestation by Indians against. We the said Wequogan, Awonunske and Squomp will defend and will unto the said Pynchon warrant the premises against all lawful claims whatsoever by any other except as before exempted - only the intent of these presents is not to exclude the Indians from hunting deer, beaver, or other wild creatures on the tract of land aforesold, which liberty they yet reserve to themselves - and also to take fish and sometimes to set their wigwams on the commons, and to take wood and trees off on the commons for their use. In witness whereof the aforesaid Indians have hereunto set their hands and marks this 8th day of August, 1662.

Indian chiefs were inclined to get into debt, and Wequagon (or Weackwagen) and his wife and son Squomp owed Joseph Parsons of Northampton, 80 beaver skins, for coats, wampum and goods; and on the 28th of May, 1662, they mortgaged to him a parcel of land as security for the debt, and if the debt was not paid before the first of September, Parsons was to have the land. James Wright and Judah Wright of Northampton, were witnesses to the mortgage. This land, which was excepted from the sale in the preceding deed, was sold by Joseph Parsons to the inhabitants of Hadley, for a considerable sum which was paid, but through negligence, his quit-claim deed was not given until March 29, 1683. The land was then estimated at 60 or 70 acres.

This tract of land was purchased by Hatfield, Oct. 19, 1672. It was bounded on the south by the land bought of Umpanchala, July 10, 1660, and on the north by Weekioannuck or Sugar Loaf brook, where the Pacomtuck path crossed it, the north line running thence east to the great river and west 6 miles into the woods. Part of the land abutted on the farms of Major Denison and Mr. Bradstreet eastward, and extended 6 miles west of them, and part abutted on the great river. This had been the land of Quanquan, (same as Quonquont) a sachem, and was sold by his widow Sarah Quanquan, his son Pocunohouse, Mattabauge, a squaw, Majesset, daughter of Quanquan, and Momecouse, for 50 fathoms of wampumpeag.

On the loth of April, 1674, John Pynchon, acting in behalf of Robert Boltwood, Joseph Kellogg, John Hubbard, and Thomas Dickinson, of Hadley, and their associates, bought of several Indians, all the land from Nepesoaneag brook, (now Mohawk brook) next to Hadley bounds, up to the brook called Papacontuckquash, over against the mouth of Pacomptuck (Deerfield) river, and six miles easterly from the Connecticut into the woods. Two deeds were given, one by Mishalisk, an old woman, the mother of Wuttawchincksin, deceased, who owed Pynchon; and one by Metawompe alias Nattawwassawett, for himself and in behalf of Wadanummin, Squiskeag and Sunkamachue, for 80 fathoms of wampum and some small things. The lands were in Sunderland, Montague and Leverett. The Indians belonged to the Norwottucks. Pynchon paid for the lands and the Hadley purchasers paid him and his son £26.

The principal chiefs of the Norwottucks, north of Mount Tom and Mount Holyoke, were Chickwallop, Umpanchala and Quonquont. They claimed to be the owners of most of the land on both sides of the river, Chickwallop of the southern, Umpanchala of the middle, and Quonquont of the northern part of the territory. Besides these, there were petty chiefs and owners of land at Northampton, and at Sunderland. Awonusk seems to have been the daughter and heir of some deceased Norwottuck chief. Her husband, Wequogon, called also Wulluther, united with her in the deed of the land below Fort River, but he was a Springfield Indian and not a Norwottuck.

History Of Hadley 111

It appears from the names of witnesses, that the deed of Hadley was executed at Northampton; that of Hatfield at Hadley, and that of Hockanum and South Hadley at Springfield. It will be perceived that the orthography of Indian names is often changed in the same deed. This may have been partly the result of carelessness, and some words may have been designedly varied. It was very difficult to express some of the Indian sounds by letters.

The Indian names of some places may be ascertained from these deeds. They will be noticed elsewhere. Hockanum was an Indian name at East Hartford, but the Meadow near Mount Holyoke was so named by the English and not by the Indians. The English often gave the same Indian name to a stream and to the land adjoining it. The Indians may have done the same, or they may have varied the determination of the name, to distinguish land from water.

Indian signatures. - Indians, in signing deeds, commonly did something more than make a mark; most of them made a picture or representation of some object. In the old records at Springfield, many of these Indian hieroglyphics may be seen, as a beaver, a snake, a snow-shoe, a bow, a hand, &c. Wequogon and Squomp both drew a rude picture of a hand, including the wrist, thumb and four fingers. Umpanchala made a bow and string. Chickwallop made a circular figure with a neck to it, intended for - I know not what. Awonusk manifested a different taste from the male chiefs; her sign looks like a strip of net-work, and was intended perhaps to represent a piece of wampum. Quonquont only made zigzag marks, like two or three of the letter W put together, and Umpanchala sometimes did the same.

John Pynchon's account book has all the wampum and other articles, that he sold to Umpanchala, to pay him ']^£, or 300 fathoms of wampum, for his land in Hatfield, including his fine of two fathoms for being drunk. Accounts with Indians were kept in fathoms and hands of wampum. Pynchon, in this account, estimated 10 hands equal to a fathom, making his hands more than 7 inches, instead of the usual hand of 4 inches. Wampum was an article of traffic, and also the money of the Indians, - the standard by which they measured the value of all other things. Pynchon valued the cheaper or white wampum, in 1660, at five shillings a fathom. A fathom of wampum was a string of beads

"Umpanchala, the Indian Sachem and owner of the land at Norwotog, hath taken up of me towards pay for his land, which he promises to sell: -

Had of Joseph Parsons, Coat and wampum at Parsons's, Payment to Mr. Goodwin, Red shag cotton and knife, July30to / Wampum and 2 coats, Aug. 23. \ "For your being drunk," Sept.6toi4 Wampum, A kettle.

In all 300 fadams at 5s. which make £75. So much I engaged to him for his land at Nalwotogg; and I have paid him all to his own content, in the particulars abovesaid. This account is set off with Hadley town, it being paid for the purchase of their land. September, 1660."

Umpanchala expended all he received for the first sale of Hatfield in one year; and in three months more, from Sept. to Dec. 1660, he bought of Pynchon goods to the amount of ;^I2, ids. and to pay this, sold the land to Hadley which he had reserved in the first deed. He had pledged this to Pynchon. Such want of foresight and calculation was characteristic of the Indians. A few chiefs seem to have sold all the lands and to have used the

Pynchon charged the people of Hadley for the Hatfield lands only the amount that he paid to Umpanchala, ']^£, and ;;^i2.io. Compensation for his services must have been derived from a large profit on the goods and wampum sold. His account against Hadley follows: -

Pynchon received his pay of individuals, and not of the town, from 1661 to 1668. The account was balanced Nov. 12, 1669. He has credit for most if not all the settlers. The remark of Hadley men, on page 20, that they had purchased lands of the Indians at higher rates than other plantations in New England, seems to have been true. In addition, they paid to Mr. Bradstreet 200;^ in money, and to Joseph Parsons not less than ^20. Their lands cost them 1400 dollars or more.

This large sum was paid when wheat in Hadley was only 3s. and 3s. 3d. per bushel; and in money not above 2s. 6d. Whoever takes into consideration all the circumstances, will come to the conclusion that the people of Hadley paid for the land which they cultivated, a much higher price than those now pay who buy good land of the U. S. government at $1.25 per acre. The people in the towns on the river had war with the Indians about half the time, for 50 years after 1674.

Pynchon paid from his shop, in wampum and merchandise, for almost all the lands near the river, that were purchased of the Indians, from Suflrteld and Enfield, to Deerfield and Northfield, and received his pay from the settlers and proprietors of the new towns, to whom he assigned the Indian deeds. Only a small part of the assignments of the three Hadley deeds are given on pages 107, 108 and no.

In Eliot's Indian Bible, the word for "the midst" of any thing, is usually noeu or noau, (sometimes nashaue,) and tuk at the end of a word generally signifies a river or brook. In our English version, the words, "the city that is in the midst of the river," are found in Joshua 13, verses g and 16; and in Eliot, in both verses, "the midst of the river" is rendered by noautuk. This is the Indian name of our valley. The peninsulas and projecting points of land at Hadley, Hockanum, Northampton and Hatfield, were "in the midst of the river." This Indian word was varied in different dialects, and in the records of the English. Some tribes did not pronounce / and r, and these letters are not in Eliot's Bible, The Nipmucks pronounced /, and some Indians on Connecticut River, below Massachusetts, had the sound of r. The following variations of the name of this valley, are taken from the records of Connecticut, Massachusetts, the United Colonies and Hampshire towns, and from the writings of the Pynchons.

Nawattocke, 1637, Nowottok and Nawottock, 1646, Nauwotak, 1648, Noatucke, 1654, Nanotuck, 1653, Nonotucke, 1653, 1655, 1658, Norwotake, 1657, Norwootuck and Norwuttuck, 1657, Northwottock, 1656, 1661, Norwottock, 1659, 1660, Norwoottucke, 1659, Norwotuck, 1661. John Pynchon has in his accounts Nalwotogg, Nolwotogg and Norwotog, and in his deeds Nolwotogg. The latter spelling was probably according to the pronunciation of the Nipmucks, who lived here. Nonotuck was used when there was no town but Northampton. The Hadley settlers introduced from Hartford, Norwottuck, and that name was more used by the English than the others.

Chapter Xiii

Indians near Connecticut River - The Norwottucks and their Forts - The Mohawks and their cruelty and cannibaHsm - The Mohawks in Hampshire county - -Talks at Albany - Presents to the Mohawks - Entertainment of Indians - Wampum, or the money of the Indians.

From 1636, when Springfield was settled, until the Indian war of 1675, the Nipmucks or Nipnets inhabited the interior of Massachusetts, occupying many places in the present county of Worcester, and in the old county of Hampshire, and some dwelt in Connecticut, south of Worcester county. They were not subject to a common sachem, but had many petty chiefs, and some were partially under the dominion of tribes not Nipmucks. There were four small tribes or clans upon Connecticut River, or a few miles from it, viz., the Agawams at Springfield and West Springfield, the Waranokes at Westfield, the Nonotucks or Norwottucks at Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield, and the Pocomtucks at Deerfield. Those who established themselves at Northfield for a time, may have been Pocomtucks. It is not known that there were any permanent Indian settlements above Northfield, nor upon the Housatonnuc River within the limits of Massachusetts, in the 17th century. There is some reason to suppose that a part of the Indians at Waranoke came originally from Hudson's River, and returned to that river in Philip's war. The Quabaugs at Brookfield were in Hampshire county. Few if any Indians resided constantly in the territory now in Suffield and Enfield.

The four tribes of western Nipmucks near Connecticut River and its branches, may be reckoned at ten or eleven hundred when most numerous. Their numbers were considerably reduced before they left this part of the country, and did not perhaps exceed eight hundred in 1675, and they were some hundreds less when the war ended. The Norwottucks may have been the most numerous clan; the Pocomtucks were the most energetic and manly.

The numbers of barbarous tribes and nations are almost always over-rated. There has been not a little exaggeration in regard to the Indian population of New England. Trumbull over-estimates the Connecticut Indians, and errs exceedingly in regard to those of Windsor. Misled by "manuscripts from Windsor," he supposes that about the year 1670, there were 2000 Indian bowmen in that town, and 19 Indians to one Englishman! Such accounts require no refutation. In 1680, the government of Connecticut received some official inquiries from England, one of which related to the number of Indian warriors in the colony; to this they replied, "as for Indian neighbors, we compute them 500 fighting men." This computation seems to include only the Indians in or near townships settled by the English, but it exhibits the great decrease of the Indians. From other documents, it might be inferred that the Indians in all the Connecticut River towns in the colony, with Farmington and Simsbury, did not exceed 1200 in 1680.*

*The Indians in the river towns were not destroyed by war, but they diminished so fast, that at the end of every 40 years, they were only about one-half as many as at the beginning. At this rate, only one-eighth of the number in 1640 would remain in 1760.

The first naming of the Norwottucks in pubHc records was by the General Court of Connecticut in 1637. They were noticed in the records of the United Colonies in 1646, and Chickwallop was named for the first time. William Pynchon mentioned the Norwottucks and Chickwallop in 1648. For some years, the Norwottucks, Pocomtucks and others were at war with Uncas and the Mohegans. Uncas or his brother assailed these river Indians in 1656. In 1657, they and others made an incursion into Connecticut against Uncas and his Indians. The Pocomtucks were conspicuous in this war with Uncas, and when the United Colonies sent messengers to them in 1659, requesting them to suspend hostilities, the sachems declined to make peace, and replied to the messengers with moderation, shrewdness and firmness. About 1663, these river Indians with many others commenced a war with the Mohawks, and were defeated. Peace was made in 1671.

The Norwottuck chiefs could sell lands, but had little authority over the Indians, and were of little importance. The historians and novelists will not be able to make heroes of any of the river sachems, from Saybrook to Northfield. The Indians in this valley at times had no acknowledged sachem, and in 1668, they agreed that Chickwallop should be their chief, three men having been appointed by the General Court, at the request of the Hampshire deputies, to treat with them. There was nothing in Chickwallop to inspire the English or Indians with respect. He did not live many years after 1668.

The Norwottucks committed no great offences. They sometimes harbored evil-doers from other tribes. Some were inclined to petty thefts. When they could get strong drink, they became drunk, and brawls and tumults ensued, and they would insult and abuse the constable and others. When free from liquor, they were generally peaceful and respectful towards the whites, who intended to treat them justly and humanely.*

The last chief men of the Noi^wottucks. - In 1672, Petomanch committed divers thefts in Northampton and Hadley and fled to Quabaug; he came back to the "Indians' fort in Northampton," and when an attempt was made to take him, Wuttawan helped him to escape. Some of the principal men of the tribe then came forward, and agreed to deliver up Petomanch or Wuttawan, or otherwise make satisfaction, as the court should order. Their names were Wahinunco, Wadnummin, Massoamat, Wawwar-

*It is a hard and difficult matter, for those who are conscious and proud of their superiority, to treat inferiors with justice and humanity. Even good men are very deficient in this respect. The apostolic injunction to "honor all men," is not much regarded.

History Of Hadley 117

ranckshan, Sunckamachue, Wuchuwin, Mummuncott, Rollo, and blind James. The last two had names given by the Enghsh. Some of these nine Indians may be considered the last of the Norwottuck leaders, while they remained in their native land. Two of them sold land in Sunderland in 1674, viz., Wadnummin and Sunckamachue. In August, 1675, they and the tribe fled from their fort and became enemies. In the winter of 1675-6, these Indians were towards Albany, and were called Hadley Indians, and Sancumacha, (same as Sunckamachue,) was their sachem. In this war and after, they were denominated Hadley Indians, and Northampton and Hadley Indians; and in Connecticut, they were often called Norwottucks.

The Indians' means of subsistence. - There is no intimation that the Indians in this valley and others in the vicinity lacked food, or that their supplies had been perceptibly diminished previous to their departure. The forests in every direction remained nearly as extensive as ever, and wild animals, fish and wild fruits were still abundant. The whites sometimes hunted and fowled, but they were too industrious to spend much time in such pursuits. There was land enough for corn, but without fences it was useless, and the women took meadow land upon shares, which the English plowed. The squaws planted, hoed, picked and husked the corn, their lazy husbands disdaining such labor.* In Connecticut, the Indians divided the corn on the land, after it was husked, and had half of it. It may be inferred that the crop was divided in the same manner at Norwottuck. There is nothing to show that the subsistence of the Indians from the land was materially lessened.

The first settlers of Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield lived in peace with the Indians until Philip's war in 1675. There was frequent intercourse between them, the Indians often coming into the villages for traffic and other purposes, and the salutation of netop, (my friend,) was often heard in the streets. Indian men, women, young men, maids and small children, in their scanty dresses, were every-day sights, and excited no curiosity. The men sold furs and venison, and the women made and sold baskets and mats and other things. Among these laborious Indian women, were some that were mild and kind-hearted. The western Nipmucks continued to be pagans.

meet." The ignorant savage and those who think themselves the most highly civilized, viz., many of those in fashionable high life, harmonize in many things. Both contemn and scorn useful labor, and consider those engaged in toilsome occupations as mean and despicable; both delight in gaming, chasing animals and carousing.

The Indians of the Norwottuck valley had several forts, erected to protect themselves against the attacks of their enemies. Vanderdonck, the Dutch writer, says the Indians build their castles in places difficult of access, on or near the crown of a hill; the wall is made of palisades set in the ground and within are their wigwams. The forts of the Norwottuck Indians seem to have been generally built upon the top of a bluff or high bank, projecting into a valley or interval, near a stream. In Northampton, there were at least three forts in such places; they were probably successive and not cotemporaneous. One was near the north-east end of Fort Hill, overlooking the meadow; one was on Fort Plain, now in Easthampton, above the high bank near the Manhan; and the third was on another Fort Plain, about halfway to Hatfield, on the top of the high, bank of the Connecticut, opposite the north-west corner of Hadley Great Meadow. In Hadley, Indian bones have been found on several projecting points or ridges. One place was near the north-west angle of Fort Meadow, on a corner of upland long since washed away. Another was on Spruce Hill, near the southern extremity, which projects into Port River valley, and is now covered with light sand. There was an important fort on the western side of Lawrence's Plain, on the top of the high steep bank which is the eastern boundary of Fort Meadow Skirts and Fort River valley. The river and meadow were named from this fort. In 1684, Timothy Nash had a grant of two acres of land, "where the old fort stood" above the bank, adjoining his land in the Skirts below. These two acres and the site of the old fort can be easily identified. The old common fence from Connecticut River, on the north side of Fort Meadow, came up the steep bank, just north of the fort, continued easterly some distance, and then turned southerly towards Mount Holyoke, embracing the ground on which the fort stood. This ground had the almost perpendicular bank, rising 40 or 50 feet above Fort River, on the south and west sides, and the river flowed at the bottom of this bank on the west side. Lawrence's Plain, a high, pleasant tract of land, extended easterly.

From this fort, or from openings near it, the Indians had fine views of meadows and uplands; and some of the new village at Northampton was visible. The fort was about 140 rods east of the Connecticut. I visited this place in 1846; the brow of the bank was covered with trees; grass, johnswort, thistles and a few small buttonwoods grew upon the site of the fort, and cows were quietly ruminating in the shade of the trees. All was silent and desolate, where in former days the Indians danced and powowed, and indulged in noisy merriment and boisterous revelry.

This is an imperfect representation. The shape of the fort is conjectural. The outlines of the top of the bank are irregular. Those in the fort got water from the river below the bank. The cows now (1846) have a path down the bank a little south of the fort place.

North of the village of North Hadley, on a ridge that separates the eastern and western School Meadows, was another residence of the Indians, supposed to have been that of Quonquont. More bones have been found here than in any other place in Hadley. The ridge becomes wider near the north end, where it approaches the Connecticut, and this broad part may contain an acre. This was probably the seat of the fort or village. The Connecticut flows along the base of the hill, on the north-east and north, and the hill is partially protected from its ravages by rocks and sandstone. This is a pleasant place with a goodly prospect, and must have been so when the Indians occupied it.

The general course of the river is southerly, but for some distance against the upper and lower School Meadow, it is westerly. The triangle is River, the supposed site of Quonquont 's fort. The rocks are near the north-east corner of the triangle. The brook Wunnaquickset, of the Hadley deed, is Upper S. M. above this ridge, and crosses the Upper School Meadow.

Some have admired the taste of the Indians as exhibited in the picturesque situations which they chose for forts and villages. There is not much foundation for this admiration. The tribes were pugnacious, and it was owing to their wars that they selected elevated places for villages, where they could more easily secure and defend themselves, and more readily discern the approach of an enemy.

The last fortified residence of our Indians in the land of their fathers, was in the place before referred to, between Northampton and Hatfield, on a high bank west of the Connecticut, not far from the mouth of Half-way brook, and so near the river, that men could speak with the Indians in the fort, from the Hadley side of the river. This high plain, formerly called Fort Plain, is now crossed by the railroad, many feet below the surface. There was no fort in Hadley for some years before 1675. The Indians did not all live in forts, and when they feared the Mohawks or other enemies, many sought refuge near the houses and in the out-buildings of the English, and their living among them was very troublesome.

Hubbard says the fort from which the Indians fled in 1675 was within a mile of Hatfield, but it must have been about two miles from the main street in Hatfield. The records do not allude to any fort in Hatfield in 1675, or before, though Umpanchala doubtless had a fort on the high bank of Capawonk or elsewhere on his land, when he sold it in 1660.

The "Five Nations," so called, were the Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas and Senecas. The name Mohawks was often extended to all those confederate nations. They were brave, fierce and ferocious, and carried on an exterminating warfare more than a century after 1600, making a perfect desert of the country for 500 miles, west and south, and destroying more Indians than have been destroyed by Europeans in war since the country was settled. They were the worst of conquerors, and seemed to conquer to gratify their thirst for blood.* - The Mohawk tribe lived about 40 miles west of Albany.

They were extremely filthy, never washing face nor hands, and they cooked fish from the water, and the entrails of deer, without any cleansing.f

Cannibalism of the Mohawks. - The early Dutch and New England writers affirmed truly that the Mohawks were cannibals or man-eaters. A writer! in 1644, says they tortured their captives, and then roasted them before a slow fire and ate them. They were cannibals half a century later. In February, 1693, Col. Schuyler at the head of whites and Mohawks pursued a party of French and Indians and killed many Frenchmen, and the bodies of 27 were found. A letter from S. Van Cortland in New York, to Connecticut, dated March 2, 1693, says: - "Our Indians did quickly eat up the bodies of the 27 Frenchmen, after their natural barbarity, and have brought the scalps to Albany." Governor Fletcher of New York wrote to Connecticut, March 11, 1693: -

All savages are filthy. The New England Indians were not cleanly. By an agreement made with sachems at Concord in 1646, the Indians were not "to pick lice as formerly and eat them."

History Of Hadley 121

"Our Indians found 27 bodies of the enemy, whom (after their crowns taken off,) they most barbarously roasted and ate."* CannibaHsm was not however the worst part of the Mohawk character.f

War between the Mohawks and New England Indians. - About 1663, war was commenced between the Mohawks and the New England Indians, and in the summer of 1669, the latter united their forces, entered the Mohawk country and besieged the nearest Mohawk fort. In a few days they retreated, were attacked on their retreat, and more than 50 slain. They came home much ashamed, and retired under the shelter of the English. Sancumacha, a Norwottuck, is said to have been a captain in this expedition. During the war, the Mohawks, in small parties, made incursions into New England. Peace was made in 1671.

The Mohawks in Hampshire county. - In the summer of 1667, a number of hogs and some cattle belonging to Hadley, Northampton and Springfield, were killed in the woods. The inhabitants were satisfied that some of them were killed by the Mohawks, and they were suspicious of some Kennebec Indians who had been this way, and even of the Norwottucks. The Mohawks shot and scalped an Indian servant of Nathaniel Clark, of Northampton, Aug. 28, 1667.

In October, 1667, the deputies of Hampshire complained to the General Court of the injuries done by the Mohawks and other Indians. A committee recommended that a letter be written to the Mohawks demanding satisfaction for the damages, &c. The General Court, Oct. 31, wrote a long letter to the chief sachem of the Mohawks, and a short one to the Kennebec sachem. The former follows from the records - not retaining the old orthography.

To the chief Sachem of the Mohawks: The General Court of Massachusetts, upon complaint made to them by some of their people of Hadley and Northampton, that they have suffered much damage this last summer by the Mohawks, have thought meet to signify the same unto you and to let you know that about mid-summer last, some of our Englishmen saw some of your people, whom they had speech with, going with burdens from their fires and place of lodging, where several hog's feet, new and bloody, were left behind, viz., i6 feet of swine; Also others of ours have taken up shoes made of green hogskins, which were left at the places where the Mohawks made their stands, and from whence they were seen to go; and about the same time, we had several cattle shot and wounded, and some killed, and the flesh cut off from their bones and carried away; many Mohawks being then about our towns and seen by some English, we have cause to suspect that this also was done by some of them, (not to speak of the damage your people formerly, some years past, did in gathering, carrying away and

-j-There were rare instances of cannibalism in New England. In 1637, Uncas and iiis men made a horrid repast upon the body of a Pequot at Saybrook.

spoiling our corn.) Their killing of our swine as aforesaid being very evident, we have reason to move for speedy and full satisfaction, which our people expect, and we hope you will cause to he made them accordingly. We have further to let you know that an Indian youth who was servant to an Englishman at Northampton, was murthered about the end of August last, close by the town, and part of his hair flayed off his head,* on which day some Mohawks were seen nigh the very place where he was killed, and we have heard that not long after this time the Mohawks showed a lock of hair at Albany, which was short hair as this youth's was; so that we have probable grounds to think that some of your people are guilty of this murder, which yet we are apt to think may not only be unknown to you, but contrary to your order, and do presume you will not allow any such thing; and therefore do acquaint you therewith, desiring you would take some special course for redress of these insolencies and prevention of like evils for future, lest your people, if they go on in such ways, should occasion a breach of the peace betwixt you and us. We must also tell you that these actings are expressly against the promise of those of your nation, which we once had in our hands,-}- whom we secured from any violence by our Indians and sent them home with manifestation of love and friendship, and willingness for the continuance thereof, who told us that your people would not meddle with any Indians that wore English clotlies, or that had their hair cut short. But this aforementioned action, as it gives us cause to suspect your people, so also to let you know we do not judge it convenient for you to suffer your people in an hostile manner to approach nigh us or our Indians that are dwelling amongst our towns, which we desire you so to take notice of and consider as not to disturb our peace by any unlawful attempts of your men, but to cause them to shun and avoid all just offence and prejudice to us which may provoke our people against you. We never yet did any wrong to you or any of yours, neither will we take any from you, but shall right our people according to justice; yet are we desirous to continue all amicable correspondence with you, if the fault be not in yourselves by offering insolencies to our people, which we may not bear or suffer. Thus hoping of your readiness to make satisfaction for what is past, and care for your future continuance of friendship, your loving friends,

This letter had some effect. It was undoubtedly interpreted by men at Albany, and as the Mohawks desired to be on good terms with New England, they made some reparation. The records of the county court in March, 1669, mentioned that about 20 pounds had been received from the "Magnaws." It was sent to Milford, but was then in the hands of Simon Lobdell of Springfield, in leather. The court ordered that Springfield should have 5;^ for those who had lost swine and cattle; Northampton, "]£, of which, half was for Nathaniel Clark's Indian servant killed; and Hadley, 8;^, for those who had been damaged. Hadley had lost more cattle and hogs than any other town. Lobdell was to pay in shoes at fair prices.

In Philip's war, in 1676, Massachusetts and Connecticut tried to engage the Mohawks against the Indians of New England. Governor Andros of New York, in letters to Connecticut, pretended that the Mohawks had done "great execution on your

-|-In September, 1665, five Mohawks or Maquas came into Cambridge well armed. They were arrested and imprisoned at Boston. The English had never seen any Mohawks before, and they attracted much attention. The Indians flocked into Boston, and wished to put them to death. The Court dismissed them with a letter to their sachems, and a convov of liorse to conduct them clear of our Indians. A copy of the letter is extant.

History Of Hadley 123

Indian enemies" and trusted Connecticut would be mindful of their service. Connecticut, in reply, Aug. 31st, 1676, professed to be in the dark about these services, and said they could not be mindful of them, until they knew what they had done. Gov. A. did not enlighten them. These Indians had performed no important services. This was the first attempt to draw presents from New England for the Mohawks.

In the spring of 1677, Massachusetts desired to make a friendly league with the Mohawks, and very unwisely sought their aid against the Indians in Maine. Obtaining the concurrence of Connecticut, John Pynchon of Springfield and James Richards of Hartford, were sent to Albany. They treated with the Indians, and gave them presents of wampumpeag, duffels, powder and shot. The Indians gave three belts of wampum, boasted of what they had done for New England, and gave assurance of their endeavors against the Indians at Kennebec. New England was deceived by the pretensions and promises of the Mohawks.

The Indians did not regard their engagement, and instead of proceeding to Maine, they came down upon the peaceable, praying Indians of Massachusetts, in September, 1677, and again in June, 1678, and killed some and made captives of others.* They brought two squaws through Hadley, and the people of that place tried to redeem them, but the Mohawks would not let them go. They returned evasive answers to those sent to Albany to demand the release of the captives.

In November, 1680, John Pynchon was again sent to Albany. He charged the Mohawks with injuring our friendly Indians, and not delivering up those taken; with killing swine and cattle of the English, in the summer of 1680, robbing some houses, and marching through villages in a hostile posture. He said such things must be stopped. He presented his gift of duffels, shirts, blankets, wampum, rum, tobacco, &c., amounting to near 90 pounds or 300 dollars. - The Mohawks said he had spoken many hard things, but they were sweetened by the present. They made an artful, dishonest reply, and declined to give up the Christian Indians.

In October, 1683, the Mohawks sent a presentf of 20 beaver skins to Massachusetts; and the colony sent in return a much more valuable present, in wampum, shirts, duffels, stockings, rum and tobacco.

says the Mohawks did not attack the hostile Indians in New Hampshire, but the friendly ones; and the scheme of engaging them in our quarrel was a source of many calamities.

expression, "an Indian gift" was a by-word in New England, denoting a present made by a person who expected five or ten times as much value in return.

After the war between England and France and between their colonies in America, commenced in 1689, it was an object of great importance to please the Five Nations and keep them faithful to England and her colonies. As New York was a feeble colony, Massachusetts and Connecticut deemed it necessary to contribute largely for this purpose.

In 1689, three Agents from Massachusetts and one from Connecticut were sent to Albany. They left Westfield, Aug. 27, escorted by 10 troopers, and were gone more than four weeks. They gave large presents to the Maquas, small presents to the river Indians, gifts to the sachems privately, and feasted 100 of their people. All expenses were '^2']£. Great Britain and New York also gave presents to the Five Nations. Robert Livingston, who resided in or near Albany, in a letter dated July 2, 1691, "wished that we needed not to court such heathen as the Maquas for assistance, for they are a broken reed to depend upon."

The Mohawks or Maquas were the allies of Great Britain, New England, and the other English colonies. Sensible that they were of some importance, they were sometimes insolent and injurious in houses, in these river towns, and farther east. The people generally submitted to these things; it would not do to quarrel with the Mohawks.

Entertainment of Indians. - Parties of Indian chiefs often came to Boston whose principal object was to obtain presents, and to feast and carouse at the expense of Massachusetts. In 1723, Aug. 21, 63 New York Indians, chiefly Mohawks, came to Boston, "with sham proposals of alliance against the Eastern Indians, but their real object was only to receive presents."* They were treated with much respect, were received by the General Court and feasted at the castle. They were entertained in Boston four weeks, and furnished profusely with the best of food and liquors, and received rich presents to a large amount. The whole expense to the colony was above 1000 pounds. Luke Smith of Hadley had a bill for entertaining some of these Mohawks. They returned to Albany, and eventually denied what they had promised at Boston.

Other Indians who had been enemies, as the French Mohawks in Canada who had been converted by the Jesuits,t and the Penobscots and other eastern Indians, came to Boston in time of peace and made fair promises, and feasted at the colony's expense

+One great object of their conversion was political influence. The converted Indians, so called, became friendly to the French and ready to fight against the English and other heretics.

History Of Hadley 125

and received presents, but joined the French as soon as war commenced. It was difficult to restrict any of these Indians; they must have what they desired. They had a great abundance of beef and other meats, rum, wine, cider, beer, pipes and tobacco, and indulged in drunken revels. In 1733, John Sale charged the colony 195 pounds for keeping 22 French Mohawks 19 days, including a feast at the castle. He charged for their breaking windows, tables, chairs, knives, mugs, cups and glasses, and for daubing the walls, tables and chairs. They had in 19 days, 48 dozen pipes and 39 dozen of tobacco. In 1736, John Sale entertained nine Penobscot chiefs 24 days, and charged the colony 145 pounds. In his bill, he says they ate between 50 and 60 pounds of the best of meat daily, (six pounds to a man,) and each had daily one pint and a half of wine and a shilling's worth of rum, and in all they had 120 gallons of cider and two gross of pipes with tobacco. They were taken down to the castle and treated. He had charges for their breaking furniture, and for "washing 49 of their greasy shirts," and his charge for "cleansing and whitewashing two rooms after them" was 60 shillings. It was no easy matter to cleanse a room that had been occupied by these dirty bacchanals.

"The European governments encouraged the natural propensities of the Indians. Both France and England courted a disgraceful alliance with savages, and both armed them against the defenceless inhabitants of the other party." - Gallatin.

Wampum, or the Money of the Indians. Wampum, used by the Indians for money and ornament, was first brought to Plymouth in New England in 1627. In 1643, when Roger Williams wrote, wampum or wampumpeag or white money, and suckanhock, or black or blue money, were so plenty that the English, French and Dutch bought with them, furs and other things of the Indians, for 600 miles north and south from New England. This Indian money, which was in the shape of beads, was made of sea shells, by the Indians of Long Island, and afterwards by those of Block Island, and others. Six of the white beads, or three of the black ones, including blue and purple, passed for a penny, and a fathom or six feet of the white shell beads were worth five shillings. The black beads were of double the value of the white. The English used the words white wampum, and black wampum, but as wampum was the Indian word for white, these expressions sounded strangely to the Indians. The wampumpeag or white beads were much more plenty than the black ones. When the price of the white beads was 6 for a penny, and 5s. for a string of 6 feet, the number of beads was 360 in a fathom, and 5 in an inch. These prices continued nominally many years, but the supply exceeded the demand; the value became less and less, and white beads fell to 8, 12, and 16 for a penny, anS in 1675, some were sold for money at 24 for a penny. The price of the black beads fell answerably. Massachusetts ordered, in 1650, that wampumpeag should pass for debts to the value of 40 shillings, the white at 8 and the black at 4 for a penny, except for country rates. This law was repealed in 166 1, and wampum had no legal price.

Silver coins were scarce, and the people found wampum very convenient, and much of it was used in the Hampshire towns, and in other parts of New England. It was frequently used to balance the accounts of traders, and it was often paid at the ferries and inns. Many men when they paid a tavern bill on a journey, did not take out a purse of coins, but strings of wampum and loose beads. Inn-keepers and ferrymen received much wampum, and they complained of losses, for large quantities could not be disposed of as they received it.

William Pynchon, and afterwards his son John Pynchon, were extensively engaged in trade with the Indians and whites, and they dealt more largely in wampum than any others on Connecticut River, above or below Springfield. They purchased some bushels of loose shell beads at a time, whether by weight, or measure, is not known; and employed the women and children of Springfield to string them at their dwellings, at three halfpence per fathom of 6 feet. Near 20,000 fathoms were strung in Springfield at this rate. One kind of wampum was called scosue. John Pynchon sold to those whom he had licensed to trade with the Indians, wampum to the amount of 20, 50, 100, and even 125;^ at a time, and he received great quantities in payment for goods. Wampum continued to depreciate, and in 1675, a fathom of white beads was worth only is. 3d. in money, and the English did not deal so much in them.

The Pynchons' accounts with Indians were always kept in fathoms and hands, or in fathoms, hands and pence; never in shillings and pence. They made use of compound addition and subtraction that are not found in arithmetics.

History Of Hadley 127 Chapter Xiv

The Indian War of 1675 and 1676* - Erroneous notions about Philip - Importance of the Nipmucks - Destruction of Brookfield - Mr. Stoddard's account of the attempt to disarm the Norwottucks, and of their escape - Fight above Hatfield - Deerfield burnt - Men slain at Northfield - Capt. Beers and his party cut off at Northfield - Northfield deserted - Attack upon Hadley repelled by the aid of Gen. Goffe - Capt. Lathrop and his company slain at Bloody Brook - Deerfield abandoned - Burning of Springfield - Attack on Hatfield.

This war is commonly denominated "Philip's War," from the English name of the sachem of the Wampanoags or Pokanokets, who commenced it. His chief seat was called Mount Hope by the English, and is now within the town of Bristol, R. L In this war, the people of Massachusetts, and of some of the adjoining colonies, first experienced the devastation and barbarity which distinguish Indian warfare.

Our ancestors viewed Philip as the master spirit, who influenced the councils and conduct of other tribes, and contrived and directed most of the attacks, slaughters and desolations of the war. They represented him as a malignant demon, bent on the blackest deeds. Some of their descendants are inclined to view him as "a great warrior, a penetrating statesman, and a mighty prince." Neither the old nor the recent writers seem to have formed a just estimate of his character. Philip, in great qualities, did not surpass many other sachems in New England and other colonies. Indeed, some Nipmuck sagamores seem to have been as enterprising and eflScient actors in this bloody and desolating war, as Philip him.- self. The great foresight, profound schemes, and unbounded influence attributed to him are to a great extent imaginary. He was no more inhuman and cruel than other Indians.

Philip was not able to combine against the English in 1675 more than 850 or 900 fighting men,f nor so many at one time; these men, and the women and children connected with them, may have numbered 3500.I More than half were Nipmucks, some of whom were subject to Philip. He did not persuade a single tribe in Connecticut, Rhode Island, or New Hampshire, to unite with him, though Indians from those colonies may have aided him. The Indians in Plymouth Colony were more numerous than in Massachusetts, and many owed some kind of allegiance to Philip, yet not many were willing to engage in his quarrel.

The Indians in Massachusetts and New Hampshire in 1674 did not exceed 4400. Gookin,* in 1674, estimated the Pawtuckets in New Hampshire and Massachusetts at 250 men, and the Massachusetts nation at 300 men. Reckoning every fourth person, a man or warrior, the whole number of these two nations would be 2200. The Nipmucks or Nipnets may have been about 2200 more, and their fighting men, 550. BayHesf estimated the Nipmucks at 1000 and Felt| at 2400. Some of these were praying Indians who did not unite in the war. About onethird of the Nipmucks were in the vicinity of Connecticut River.

Not many of the Pawtucket and Massachusetts nations joined in the war. The hostile Indians in 1675 were mostly Nipmucks. Philip's Wampanoags and others that aided him in Plymouth Colony may have been 250 fighting men. But after he left the Pocasset swamp, Aug. i, 1675, and fled towards the Nipmuck country, many of his men withdrew from him, and the squawsachem of Pocasset and her men drew off" to the Narragansetts. Gookin had been "certainly informed that he had little above fifty men left, but hundreds of old men, women, and children. "§

It may be supposed that some Indians from Plymouth Colony, and from tribes elsewhere, joined Philip after he came to Hampshire with 40 or 50 men, but his warriors exclusive of Nipmucks, were not numerous at any time, perhaps 200. His Wampanoags were not distinguished from other Indians and performed no greater deeds than others. It is a little remarkable that the histories, letters and other documents relating to this war, do not furnish any evidence that Philip, after he came among the Nipmucks, was present in a single fight with the English. No particular exploit or achievement performed by him is recorded. It is hardly to be doubted, however, that he was actively engaged in some of the furious attacks made upon the English near Connecticut River. But the Nipmucks showed that they were capable of planning and executing daring enterprises without the assistance of Philip. They destroyed Brookfield, and made numerous fierce assaults upon the garrison house. The river Nipmucks burnt Springfield. The dreadful carnage and devastation

§George Memecho, a Christian Indian, who was taken by the Nipmucks, was present when PhUip and his party first came to the Nipmucks, on the fifth of August, a few miles from Brookfield, and he related that Philip then had about 40 men, besides women and children. The greater part of the men who were with him when he escaped from Pocasset, had left him.

History Of Hadley 129

The Narragansets favored the hostile Indians, and protected those that fled to the Narraganset country, but did not assault the English plantations until February and March, 1676, after the English had destroyed their fort and many of their people.

When assaults were made by Indians, it was impossible to know how many there were, and loose conjectures always exaggerated their numbers. There is no reason to believe that 500 Indians were engaged in any fight or attack during this war, the Narraganset swamp fight excepted.

The number of Indians which the English imagined they had killed in an engagement, was usually much over-rated. They did not find the dead bodies, and could judge only by guess. They lelied too much upon what captive Indians "owned" or "confessed." These Indians often told a story to please those in whose power they were, and their admissions are seldom worthy of credit.

Philip cherished enmity against the English, because he supposed they had wronged him; yet the tradition in Rhode Island, sixty years after his death, was, that Philip himself was not for war, but was forced into it by the fury of his young men, against his own judgment and inclination.* "The commencement of the war was accidental. "f

There are no intimations that the Nipmucks, who entered into the war so furiously, had ever complained of being wronged by the English. The Qiiabaugs, and perhaps other Nipmucks, had long been accounted subjects of the Wampanoags, and when Uncas attacked the Quabaugs in i66i,they were defended by a brother of Philip. They were intimately connected with the Wampanoags, and readily joined them in the war. The Norwottucks and others near Connecticut River, were closely related to the Quabaugs.

This memorable war began near Mount Hope, on Thursday, June 24, 1675, when the Wampanoags slew nine of the inhabitants of Swansey. Soldiers were sent from Boston and Plymouth, and Philip and his people fled to Pocasset, now in Tiverton; and houses were burnt and people slain in some places in the vicinity. The English enclosed Philip and his Indians in Pocasset Neck, but early on the first of August, they found means to escape.

On the 14th of July, while Philip was near Pocasset, the Nipmucks began their mischief, and killed four or five persons at Mendon. This was the first English blood shed in war, in Massachusetts.

When the war began, Hampshire county contained the following towns and plantations: - Springfield, including West Springfield and Longmeadow; W^estfield, Northampton, Hadley, Hatfield, Deerfield, Northfield, Brookfield and Suffield. The people at Sufiield soon left the place; and if there were any settlers at Swampfield (Sunderland,) they did not long remain.

The second attempt of the Nipmucks was in the county of Hampshire. The council ordered Capt. Edward Hutchinson to take Capt. Thomas Wheeler and about twenty horsemen, and Ephraim Curtis for a guide, and go to the Nipmucks near Quabaug, and treat with them. They reached Brookfield, with three Christian Indians, on Sunday, the first of August. The Indians, who were at Meminimisset,* supposed to be about ten miles distant, northerly, promised to meet Capt. H. the next morning, on a plain,f about three miles from the village. On the 2d of August, Capt. H. and his party and three of the principal men of Brookfield, rode to the plain and found no Indians. Capt. H. was persuaded by the Brookfield men to go farther, and when they had proceeded northerly four or five miles, and were in a narrow passage, having a bushy, rocky hill on the right, and a thick swamp on the left, a large body of Indians lying in ambush on both sides, suddenly fired upon them and killed eight and wounded five. The survivors were forced to go up the steep hill, and by the guidance of the Christian Indians, they escaped to the village. Having arrived before the Indians, they took pos-

*Meminimisset, or Wennimisset, the new seat of the Quabaugs in 1675, is often named in the Histories of this war. Ephraim Curtis visited it twice in July, 1675, ^^^ noticed its situation. Here Philip first came to the Nipmucks on the 5th of August. Mrs. Rowlandson was brought to th-" same place, a captive, in February, 1676, and here her wounded child died. It was part of a tract of land which is now in New Braintree, about eight miles from West Brookfield, and has Ware river on the north, the meadow or swamp in which Meminimisset brook flows on the west and south, and the same low, swampy land on most of the east side. The road from Hardwick to New Braintree crosses it. I visited this place in 1854. - The spot where the party of Capt. Hutchinson was ambushed, was southward from the Quabaug camp, and cannot be identified. It seems to have been on the east side of the valley.

History Of Hadley 131

session of one of the largest and strongest houses,* and fortified themselves as well as they could in a short time. The inhabitants, fifteen or sixteen families, being informed of the disaster, all came in haste to the same house, bringing but little with them. The Indians soon flocked into the village and assailed the house with their bullets, and began to burn other buildings. During the two succeeding nights and days, they continued to besiege the house, and made various attempts to burn it, without success. One man was mortally wounded at the garret window, and another was killed without the building, and some others were wounded. The house contained twenty-six men capable of doing service, the wounded, and fifty women and children. The twentysix men, vigilant and brave, extinguished the fires upon the building, and repelled the assaults of the Indians, until the evening of the third day, August 4th, when Major Simon Willard came to their relief with Capt. Parker and forty-six men and five friendly Indians. Before the next morning, the Indians left the place. The Indians were judged to be 300, and one afterwards taken, "confessed" that they had about 80 killed and wounded. f

On the first night, Ephraim Curtis, to obtain help, crept out on his hands and knees, and reached Marlborough, on the morning of August 4th. Some travelers towards Connecticut River, observing the burning at Quabauo;, returned to Marlboroujrh, the same morning, a little before Curtis arrived, and a post had been sent to Major Willard, who was near Lancaster.

The eight persons killed by the Indians in ambush, were Sergeant John Ayres, Sergeant William Pritchard, and Corporal Richard Coy, all of Brookfield; Zechariah Phillips, Timothy Farley, Edward Coburn, Samuel Smedley and Shadrach Hapgood, of other towns. Captain Hutchinson, severely wounded at the same time, died at Marlborough, Aug. 19. Those killed at the house were Henry Young, and Samuel Pritchard, son of Wm. P. Besides these eleven, James Hovey and another were slain somewhere in Brookfield the same day.|

*They selected the house used for an inn, and the Hampshire records show that John Ayres kept the inn. It was on Foster's Hill, and the site is about 60 or 70 rods south-east of the dwelling-house of the late Judge Foster. The village was on this hill, and the road between Hadley and Springfield and Boston, passed over this hill, near 150 years after 1675.

J^'A list of men slain in the county of Hampshire" in 1675, prepared by Rev. John Russell of Hadley, and now in the State archives, says 13 men were slain at Quabaug, Sept. 2, but names only 11.

The wounded left the house as soon as they were able to travel, and the inhabitants of the town removed to other places.* The buildings were all burnt except that of John Ayres, and another that was unfinished. The meeting-house was burnt, and also a grist-mill owned by John Pynchon. A garrison was kept in the place till sometime in October, and it was re-established early in March, 1676.