Selina Lee
IDC 4001H
Professor Maciuika
March 3, 2014

Shorto writes that New Netherland insisted on becoming a place, not just another one of the Dutch Empire’s trading posts.  It was so exotic and unique that none of employees that headed New Netherland truly understood it.  It’s interesting to read about New York City before it became such an important city, when it was just a quickly growing trading post with a lot of potential.  The East India Company had given up the monopolies and profit that came from the post but was still saddled with the responsibilities of running the budding post and keeping it safe.  In the end it was like a low paie

After reading the 6th chapter of Island at the Center of the World, I am surprised by Willem Kieft inept handling of New Netherland.  Gaining an appointment to head New Netheraland because of his family connections instead of his own skills is just the first of the few ingredients for a recipe of disaster.  Why was there no large protest for his leading ability in the long run?  His idea of a Council of Advisors was a two man team that included a man with debt to the East India Company and himself as the second member.  (Honestly, I thought that his “Council Sessions” were a joke)  Even his letter to Minuit was lackluster and week.  As a leader with expectations of New Netherland, Minuit had the right idea, especially when compare with Willem Kieft.  Minuit actually wanted to create a utopia and settle into the New York City of the past and stimulate its growth.  Too bad Minuit never made it past 1638.

Ultimately, Kieft was unable to handle the growth and expansion of New Netherland, the trading post that refused to stay a trading post.  He did try; he just wasn’t enough for the city.  He was hard pressed to figure a concrete solution to the blossoming currency crisis ad then later on the Indian crisis, both were issues way out of his league. Thinking of ideas to keep the city growing and prosperous.

Is Kieft an important figure in history because he led New York City in its early years? Or is Kieft an important figure in history only because he was present during New York City’s tumultuous, developmental years?