Last week, we discussed the concept of the American melting pot and the distinction between pluralism and assimilation. Binder and Reimer’s “All the Nations Under Heaven” also discusses the assimilation of Manhattan’s early immigrants. The ethnic and religious diversity and tolerance that Manhattan is now known for originated with the Dutch. Holland was considered the most tolerant European nation, and various groups of religious refugees, political exiles, and ethnic/linguistic minorities found acceptance there. These groups were able to participate in commercial activities in Dutch cities, which led to great economic successes. Ethnic and religious tolerance was clearly beneficial for Holland’s economy, so when the Dutch West India Company gained control over Manhattan, they decided to continue a policy of toleration in order to make New Amsterdam profitable. The majority of the first settlers in Manhattan were looking for economic opportunity, but also for refuge from religious or ethnic persecution. For example, the first permanent settlers in the NY colony were the Walloons, a French-speaking Belgian minority, in 1624.
This is where the fight between pluralism and assimilation begins. Although the Walloons spoke French, they didn’t attempt to create a separate and exclusive French congregation. They were not very concerned with retaining their heritage. The French settlers in Staten Island, however, were more interested in maintaining their former culture and asked for a minister who could preach in French as well as in Dutch. The Walloons were assimilating into their new culture and leaving the old one behind, while the French in Staten Island were supporting pluralism by embracing both cultures.
At first, it would seem that pluralism was winning over assimilation. There was an influx of non-French traders, artisans, clerks, and sailors. Ethnic diversity increased, and it was estimated that there were 18 different languages being spoken in a population of 1,000 settlers. Religious diversity and toleration also increased, even though it had not been viewed as an advantage in Europe. The Dutch West India Company ensured that the colony was receptive to diversity because of their commercial prosperity, which was dependent upon toleration.
After the British gained control of New Amsterdam in 1664, however, there was an increase in the number of intermarriages, and Dutch influence steadily decreased. By the 18th century, the younger members of the Dutch community began to balance their allegiance to ethnic culture with the mastery of English customs and language. This shows ethnic and cultural pluralism, but eventually, complete assimilation with English culture occurred. English became the language spoken at home when intermarriages occurred, and success in business and social life in NYC required mastery of the English language. “There were significant potential advantages for those of Dutch origins to shift basic allegiance towards the English community, to the point of effectively becoming themselves in habits and alliances.” (Binder and Reimers 22). It was more beneficial for the settlers to fully immerse themselves in the English culture, so they did. Assimilation wins.
In Danielle’s presentation last week, she raised the question of whether or not assimilation was really beneficial for immigrants. In the case of the settlers in New Amsterdam, I would say that assimilation was definitely the better choice. Assimilating into English culture led to greater economic advantages for the immigrants, which was an extremely important factor in a new colony. Although the various ethnic groups in Manhattan assimilated into English culture, the colony retained its tradition of religious and ethnic tolerance, which helped shape NYC into what it is today.
