Brief Sketch 
of the 
First Settlement of 
DEERFIELD, MASS.
Together with a few of the events which took 
place there in early times.
__________________________________

By One of the Descendants of the 
First Settlers of the Town. 
_________________________________

Greenfield.
James P. Fogg........Printer.  
1833

Names found in this transcription:
Alexander, Avery, Bridgman, Chickatawbut, Church, Conanchet, Davenport, de Rouville, Denninson, Dudley, Hix, Hoyt, King Phillip, Lathrop, Massassoit, Mather, Miantinomoh, Mosely, Sheldon, Teacher, Treat, Uncas, Vaudrieul, Williams, Winslow

Indian Tribes mentioned in this transcription:
Mohegan, Narragansett, Pequot, Wampanoags

PREFACE.

	The writer of the following sketch is desirous of preserving to posterity some account of the incidents which relate to the early settlement of the town, with a view of handling it down to posterity; believing tat it will gratify the feelings of those who are descendants of the early settlers of the place; - to them it may be a source of satisfaction to learn what privations and sufferings their ancestors endured.  To those who are not immediate descendants from the suffers, it may be some gratification to read of the exploits, the sufferings, the hairbreadth escapes which were the lot of those who first ventured to take a stand on the borders between civilized man, and the savage state.
	A writer on this subject, a half a century ago, makes the following remarks: - "I have often heard it lamented: says he, "that no more care was taken in the first settlement of this country, to preserve the memory of the early transactions 
page iv
of our forefathers, of the many hardships and difficulties they endured in this wilderness, of the perils and dangers they endured, of the signal deliverances granted to them, and of the distinguished blessings conferred upon them, both of a spiritual and a temporal nature."*
	It has now become a matter of much interest to the Antiquarian, to learn what were the perils endured by the first settlers, the time and place of some of the principal incidents, which without some record, would soon be lost.  One object is to mark out the place where, and note the time when, such incidents occurred; together with as many facts relating thereto as can now be collected to substantiate them.  Time has obliterated many of the facts; - death has removed nearly all the ancient men, who once could have 
entertained us with much interesting information on those topics.  It is hoped that the time spent in collecting the facts for this little work, may not be wholly lost, but that it may serve to gratify the curiosity of some at least, into whose hands it may chance to fall.
	Deerfield, 1833.			E. H.
_______________________________________
*Rev. Mr. Breck’s century sermon delivered at Springfield, Oct. 16, 1775.

page 5 
FIRST SETTLEMENT
of
DEERFIELD.

	In the year 1669, during the administration of Governor Bellingham, the government of Massachusetts Bay, made a grant of 8000 acres of land to the town of Dedham in the County of Norfolk; this tract was located, and is a part of the territory which was in 1673, incorporated by the general Court, into a town by the name of Deerfield, situated in that part of the state which was afterwards erected into the County of Hampshire, (since into the County of Franklin.)  The Indian name of Deerfield was Pocomtuck.  The first meet-
ing of the proprietors of Dedham grant was held at Dedham, March 1st, 1670, at which time, measures were taken to lay out the town plat at Pocomtuck --
page 6
soon after a settlement was commenced there, (probably, in 1671,) a few houses were built on the main street, and the settlers continued to live in peace with their Indian neighbors, until the breaking out of King Phillip's war (so-called) in 1675.  In September of that year the place was attacked and one of the settlers slain; - they were again assailed by the Indians the same month while going to attend public worship on Sunday, fortunately no lives were lost.  There being at this time a considerable quantity of grain at Deerfield, it was deemed prudent to remove it to some place of safety; accordingly Captain Lathrop with about 80 men, marched from Hadley, (about 15 miles south of Deerfield) accompanied by suitable number of teams, for the purpose of moving the grain to that place; when on his return
from Deerfield, September 18th, 1675, about four and a half miles south of the village, at a place now called Bloody-Brook, he was suddenly assailed by a large body of Indians, lying in ambush, 
page 7
who were said to be commanded by King Phillip in person; the attack was
sudden, and furious. Capt. Lathrop and seventy three of his men fell in the actions, the teams were destroyed and most of the teamsters slain.  Captain Mosely who was stationed at the village of Deerfield, heard the firing, and immediately marched with his company, to the relief of Capt. Lathrop, but he arrived on the battle ground too late, Lathrop with nearly all his men were slain.  Capt. Mosely found himself obliged to engage the whole Indian force several hours.  When Major Treat very opportunely coming from a scout up the river hearing the firing and marched to his relief with a force of about one hundred men, consisting of English, Pequod and Mohegan Indians, with their united force they defeated the enemy and drove them off the ground; Maj. Treat and Capt. Mosely them marched to the village of Deerfield and encamped; the next day they returned to the battle ground to bury the dead.
In the mean time a body of the same 
page 8
Indians appeared before the village and threatening an attack, holding up to 
view the scalps, and the bloody garments which they had taken from Capt. 
Lathrop and his men, but at length they withdrew.  There were about ninety
men killed in Lathrop's defeat including teamsters; and it is said that the Indian loss amounted to ninety-six, during the day.
	Soon after this bloody catastrophe the garrison was withdrawn to Hadley, and the people left the town, which was destroyed by the Indians. 
	At the winter session of the General Court 1677, the following order was passed:  viz.:
	"Ordered that a garrison be sent to Deerfield, and that the inhabitants prepair to rebuild the town in a compact order, and that the inhabitants repair their this winter, that twenty soldiers be sent their."
	It appears that an attempt was made to carry this order into effect, the settlers repaired to Deerfield, and made an
page 9
effort to rebuild the town, but soon several of the inhabitants were slain by the Indians, and the town was again abandoned to the enemy; but in the Spring of 1682, the settlers again returned and commenced rebuilding the place and for several years lived unmolested.
	In 1693, the Indians again commenced their depredations on the inhabitants and continued to harass them until 1704.  At this period an expedition was fitted out by the Governor of Canada, (Vaudrieul) from Montreal, for the express purpose of making an attack on Deerfield, consisting of 200 French and 142 Indians, commanded by Major Hartell de Rouville, a French Partizen officer of note, they marched from Canada in the winter, and arrived and attacked the town February 29, 1704, a little be-
fore day light in the morning, they entered the for on the snow, it being then
four feet deep and sufficiently hard, (with a crust) to bear them up; they
came over the palisadoes, and immediately divided themselves into parties and
page 10
assailed the houses in various parts of the fort, at the same instant.  This was the first intimation that the inhabitants bad of their approach, there was a few 
soldiers stationed here, but as there was no apprehension of an attack during the winter season, the guards were in the habit of retiring to rest sometime before midnight, so when the assault was made all were in profound sleep.  The astonished inhabitants arose from their beds to defend themselves against the musket, the tomahawk, and the scalping knife; "at fearful odds," the struggle was soon over; the enemy succeeded in taking all that part of the village which was situated within the principal fort, except one house, which was bravely defended, but that was afterwards burned.  The population at this time amounted to about 280, of which there were killed by the enemy 47, and made prisoners, 112, nineteen of whom were slain on their way to Canada, principally on account of being unable to bear the fatigues and hardships of the journey, 
page 11
including two who starved to death:  viz. David Hoyt and Jacob Hix.  Of those who were carried to Canada 28 never returned; 62 were redeemed and
returned after an absence of two and a half years.  The descendants of some
of those who remained and settled among the enemy, after several years, and during peace came to visit their relatives; among them was Eunice, a daughter of the Rev. Mr. John Williams who with all his family (except his son Eleazer,) were either killed or carried into captivity this daughter was but about six years old when she was taken; she lived among the Indians until she was grown to a state of womanhood, when she was married to a native Indian, and reared up a family of children, who took the name of the mother, (Williams.) -- She became firmly attached to the Indian habits, and modes of living, and also to the Romish religion, her friends made an effort to persuade her to remain with them when at Deerfield, but all in vain; She could not be induced to give up her
page 12
Indian habits, she utterly refused to sleep on a bed, but choose to camp down upon the floor with her blanket.  One of her descendants was educated in New England and has been a preacher of the gospel, somewhere on the borders of Lake Michigan, he bears the name of Eleazer Williams, his father is an Indian and lives at St. Rigis in Canada.  During the attack on the town the enemy set fire to, and destroyed all the village within the fort, except the house mentioned above, the house that is now standing (1833) and a small log church. As fast as they took prisoners they confined them in the church , or in the house now standing, and this is believed to be the reason why those buildings were not burned.  It is said that the last mentioned house was set on fire by the enemy when they left the town, but the people who had escaped captivity came in soon and extinguished the fire before it had made much progress; at this time, this was a frontier town there being no other settlement between it and
page 13
St. John's in Canada, (nearly 300 miles.)  The house now owned and occupied by Elihu Hoyt, was at that time owned and occupied by Capt. John Sheldon, he was absent, but the principal part of his family were either killed or taken; his wife was killed by a musket ball, fired through a hole cut in the front door; by the tomahawk, (marks of which are now to be seen) the place where the ball passed into the wall is still to be seen, as are several other ball holes, which were fired through the front window into the walls of the same room.  It is said that the Indians dashed out the brains of two children who were taken in this house, upon the flag stones, which still remain at the front door.  There were many people in the house at the time, as it was the custom for all the inhabitants to retire to the forts at night for safety.  The enemy did not force their way into the house through the front door, but effected their entrance by a back passage which had been left open by a lad who had escaped from the house during the
page 14
assault.  Wheat is meant by the principal fort here spoken of, is all that part 
of the village contained within the pickets, or palisadoes.  The principal fort 
extended around a tract of the village containing probably fifteen or twenty
acres, and included, as near as can be now ascertained, ten or twelve dwell-
ings, besides out buildings.  The houses were some of them built in form of a 
block-house with port holes, to fire down on an enemy; their walls filled in with brick, making them proof against musketry, as may be seen by the house now standing, besides, there were mounds (so-called) built of hewn timbers and were ball proof; they were intended to be occupied for places of defense in case of an attack, but they were of no use in the present instance for instead of occupying the block-houses, the few troops here and the inhabitants were occupying their beds, instead of being on the watch, the were all asleep until they were roused from their slumbers by the 
page 15
savage yells of the enemy at their doors.
	There was one small fort about sixty rods south of the principal one which was not taken by the enemy; it is said they did not make a very powerful attack upon it, they had probably full employ in the great fort, for the time they had allotted to themselves to finish their work, they  commenced their retreat by sun an hour high on the morning of the assault, their departure was most likely hastened from an apprehension that they might be visited by a force from the towns down the river, where there were 
troops stationed, particularly at Hadley and Northampton.
	Could the Inhabitants have been apprised of the approach of the enemy, sufficient time to have prepared for defense, very little doubt exists that the fort might have been defended, and the people delivered from the bloody tragedy which followed, for it is well authenticated that they had exhausted their stock of provision, and were well nigh
page 16
a state of starvation, and there were some symptoms of mutiny among them, had they have failed of success in their assault, and met with a defeat, they must have been compelled to lay down their arms and surrender at discression, for they were 300 miles from their supplies, and they could not have subsisted their army by hunting or fishing at this season of the year; but by the fatal security felt by the inhabitants; the enemy succeeded in taking the fort, massacring one portion of the people and carrying nearly all the remainder into captivity.
	A son of Capt. Sheldon with his wife lodged in the chamber directly over the room in which Mrs. Sheldon, (the mother) was killed, on the alarm they leaped out of the window, at the east end of the house, by the fall she so injured her ancle as to be unable to escape, being sensible that they should both fall into the hands of the enemy, she pursuaded her husband to leave her to her fate, and secure his own safety by flight, or they
page 17
would be both made prisoners with little chance of having their lives spared; he with much reluctance left her, and escaped from the savage enemy, and wonderful to relate, she was taken, and notwithstanding her lameness, was carried to Canada where she remained a prisoner about two and a half years, when she returned from captivity and lived with her husband and reared up a family.
 	During the time the prisoners were confined in the house, one of them by the name of Bridgman, secreted himself under a quantity of bark in the garret, but his enemy soon sought him out; the Indian who discovered him called to his companions, and they came up and marched him down stairs forthwith; soon after, they proceeded to the cellar in search of plunder, where Bridgman had again concealed himself behind the cellar door, and he remained there until all the Indians had passed him on their way up stairs, he came to the conclusion to follow them, lest he should
page 18
meet with harsh treatment if found a second time concealed; he rejoined them at the head of the stairs without having been missed.  When the enemy
were preparing to march, the prisoners were brought out pinioned, preparatory to moving off; while waiting orders a young Indian Came to Bridgman and took him by the hand, and with his knife deliberately cut around his forefinger and twisted it off, and went his way.  Whether this cruel transaction was to punish him for having concealed himself, or to try the young savage's skill in the use of the knife, or for some other purpose is unknown.  Bridgman felt a disposition to retaliate on the spot, and abide the consequences; but his hands being confined, he was under necessity of submitting to this savage insult.  Soon after this they commenced their march.  Bridgman began to loiter in the rear, and before they had proceeded far, he turned from them and made an effort to regain the town, and he succeeded in effecting his object, but he was severely
page 19
wounded by a shot from the enemy, while ascending the hill a short distance from the fort. 
	When the enemy commenced their retreat from the fort, all those capable of bearing arms, who had escaped the fate of their neighbors, mustered out, aided by a few who had arrived from Hadley and elsewhere, pursued and overtook the enemy in the meadow about one mile from the village, where they engaged them for a considerable length of time, and it is said that our people fought bravely, notwithstanding they were greatly outnumbered, and at one period of the battle they pushed the enemy so hard that their commander was apprehensive of a defeat; he sent and Indian runner with orders to the guard who had the charge of the prisoners to put them all to death; but before the runner had proceeded far, a lucky ball put and end to his mission.
	The Indians soon after prevailed, and our people were compelled to re
treat.  The savage order was not renew
page 20
ed and the prisoners escaped death for this time.  They had been sent forward under a guard, and were bound to the trees until the action was over, and the army came up, from whence they were marched forward about four or five miles, were they encamped for the night.  Here "they dug away the snow and made some wigwams, cut down some small branches of the spruce tree to lie down on, and gave the prisoners some what to eat."  During the night one of the captives by the name of Alexander escaped.  In the morning Rev. Mr. Williams was called for, and ordered by the commander, "to tell the captives, that if any more made their escape, they would burn the rest of the prisoners."   The loss of the enemy in the meadow fight was thirty-six, and they had eleven killed in the assault on the fort.  The loss of the English in the meadow was nine, and they also lost about for-seven killed in the attack on the town.
	During the engagement in the fort one house (situated a few rods form the
page 21
house now standing,) was bravely defended by seven men, and they maintained the defence against the whole French and Indian force during the time they remained.  Great efforts were made by the enemy to carry the house by stratagem, or to set fire to it.  They procured an ox sled, and loaded it with straw, and set it on fire, and forced it against the house; but the brave men within sallied forth and extinguished the flames; and at length succeeded in driving the enemy from the house.  While these men were thus engaged, their wives were employed in the cellar, casting balls to supply their husbands with the means of defending their families and their homes.  One of those brave men lost his life by a shot from the enemy by imprudently exposing himself at the window after they commenced their retreat; another of them fell while engaged fighting the enemy in the meadow battle.  
	While the inhabitants were thus engaged with the Indians in the meadow, the fire rekindled in the house which 
page 22
had been so bravely defended, and it was consumed.
	The people of Deerfield did not desert the town, but maintained themselves there through the Indian wars, but they were frequently harassed by them until the conquest of Canada in 1760.  During this period many lives were lost, after which they had no more visits from the Indians, except a few straggling ones in time of peace.
	Among the trophies which the enemy carried away, was a small bell, which they took from the log Church; it is said they transported it on a ledge until they arrived on the borders of Lake Champlain, where they buried it, and let it remain there unti the opening of the Spring, when they returned, took it up and transported it to the village of St. Regis, and placed it in the Catholic Church, where it has remained ever since.
	There is a tradition that this bell was first purchased in France by the Romish Priest, belonging to St. Regis, and that 
page 23
the Indians, by his direction furnished sufficient amount of furs to pay the cost and charges, and it was expressly intended for their Church; that the vessel on board which it was sent out, was captured by an English cruiser and brought into Salem where the ship and cargo were sold for the benefit of the captors.  The bell was bought at auction by some one, and sold to the people of Deerfield, and put up in their church for the use of the parish.  Tradition says further, that when the people of St. Regis learned the fate of their bell, there was great lamentation among them, not so much for the loss of it, but because it had fallen into the hands of heretics; and their Rev. Teacher gave them to understand that it must be rescued out of the hands of these unbelievers in the true faith, at all hazards, and persuaded them to offer their services to join an expedition against Deerfield, for the purpose of recovering the bell out of unholy hands; hence they say was the origin of the expedition, but it is believed
page 24
some more definite account of this transaction would have been transmitted to us than we now find, if these facts were so.  We see no account in the history of those times relating to this event; we are therefore disposed to believe that it is at least problematical.
	Soon after the destruction of the town Capt. Sheldon conveyed his house and homelot to his son Ebenezer Sheldon, and removed to Hartford in Connecticut, the place of his nativity.
	In the year 1744, Ebenezer Sheldon sold this Homestead to Jonathan Hoyt, who at his decease devised the same to his son David Hoyt, and he gave it by will to his son, the present owner.  It is now (1833) eighty nine years since the place was purchased by the Grandfather of the present owner.  The precise time when this house was built is not now known, but is believed that it was not far from the time that the inhabitants returned to rebuild the town in 1682, certainly between that period and the time of the attack in 1704.
page 25
	David Hoyt, Great Grandfather to the present owner of the house was taken by the enemy at the time, together with his wife and four children; he starved to death while in the hands of the Indians, at, or near, what is now Newbury, Vermont.  One daughter was slain on the way to Canada; one son never returned from captivity, but he remained with the Indians until his death, at what period it is not known.  One son and one daughter were redeemed, and returned to their native town, after and absence of two years and a half; his son Jonathan, (the one mentioned above) was about 16 years of age when he was taken by the Indians, and he lived with them two and a half years at a place called Lorete, a few miles from Quebec, upon the river St. Charles; he could speak their language fluently until his death, which was in the ninety second year of his age.  After he had a family and was settled in Deerfield, his old Indian master came from Canada to make him a friendly visit,
page 26
he was well received and treated kindly.  When he left, they took an affectionate leave of each other expecting to meet here no more.  The government of Massachusetts employed an agent to redeem such as had been carried into captivity by the Indians.  In 1706, Major Dudley, son to the Governor of Massachusetts, was residing at Quebec in that capacity, by whom Jonathan Hoyt was redeemed from his master in the following manner:  The Indians were in the habit of raising and bringing to market, garden sauce &c.  One day Major Dudley saw young Hoyt in the street, he said to him, are you not an English boy? he answered yes; do you not wish to go home and see your friends?  I do, was his answer; where is your master?  said the gentleman; somewhere in the city said the boy; bring him to me said he; the lad now tripped over the ground with a light heart, in pursuit of his master, who soon came.  The agent said to the Indian, I will give you this for the boy, holding out to him twenty dollars; the temptation
page 27 
was too great to be resisted; the bargain was made, the money handed over, and the Indian went away well satisfied.  The gentleman immediately sent the boy on board a ship then lying in the river for the reception of the ransomed prisoners.  The agent was aware that when the Indian had leisure to reflect he would return and make a proposition to give up the money and take his boy again; he was not mistaken in his conjecture; he soon came back and desired to give up the money for the boy; he was told he could not have him, he was out of his reach; the Indian went away lamenting that he had parted with his favorite captive boy, for a few dumb dollars, that would neither hunt nor fish.  By this means the captive was restored to his home and his friends; the ship sailed from Quebec to Boston, from whence the captives were sent to their respective places of destination, rejoicing once more to meet and enjoy their friends, and to be free from bondage.
page 28
	The Rev. John Williams, minister of the town, together with his wife and children, except his son Eleaser, were all either killed or taken prisoners. Two of his children were slain at the threshold of his own door.  Mr.  Williams was a son of Mr. Samuel Williams, of Roxbury, where he was born, Dec. 10th, 1664.  He took his degree at Harvard College 1683; Settled in the ministry at Deerfield, May 1686, He married Eunice, daughter of the Rev. Eleazer Mather of Northampton.  At the time of the attack on the town Mrs. Williams was weak and unable to travel; the next day after she was taken, in crossing the Green river, in the north part of what is now Greenfield, about six miles from her home she fell in the water, and was unable to proceed; her savage master thereupon sunk his tomahawk into her head, and she expired on the spot, and was left unburied.  Her husband had requested his master to let him go to her assistance before she fell, but he refused to grant the request
page 29
Her remains were soon after found by some of the people of Deerfield and were brought in and decently interred.  The tomb stones show the place where her remains rest, on which is the following Inscription: viz:-
"Here lyeth the body of Mrs. Eunice Williams, the vertues and desirable consort of the Rev. John Williams, and daughter of Rev. Eleazer and Mrs. Esther Mather of Northampton.  She was born Aug. 2, 1664, and fell by the rage of the barbarous enemy, March 1, 1703-4."
"Proverb 31--28.  Her children rise up and call her blessed."
	Mr. Williams with his remaining children was carried into captivity where they endured much hardship; he eventually effected the redemption of all his children except his daughter Eunice, spoken of above.  She married an Indian and lived in their habits and died in the Romish faith.  Mr. Williams returned from captivity in November, 1706, after and absence of two and a half years;
page 30
"Here lyes the body of the Rev. John Williams, the beloved and faithful pastor of this place, who died on June 12, 1729, in the 65th year of his age."
"Rev. 14 - 13.  Writes, blessed are the dead which die in the Lord."
	Mr. Williams had three sons educated at Harvard College, and they were all eventually settled in the ministry as follows:  viz.
	Eleazer, at Mansfield, Conn.   Stephen,
page 31
at Longmeadow, Mass.  Wareham, at Waltham, Mass.
	There are not now living in Deerfield any descendants from the Rev. John Williams, in a direct male line; but one of Mr. Williams' daughter's, by his second wife, married Doct. Thomas Williams of Roxbury, (now deceased,) who has one son settled at Deerfield.  It is believed that there are many descendants of Rev. John Williams, in Connecticut and elsewhere.  We have always understood that the Rev. Eleazer Williams left a family at Mansfield, and Rev. Stephen Williams at Longmeadow, some of whom we have seen.  Rev. Wareham Williams of Walthan left a family, but we know little of them, except his son Samuel, who was a professor in Harvard University; he afterwards removed to Vermont, where he died, leaving posterity; some of them have recently visited Deerfield to view the place 
where their ancestors met with severe trials and sufferings.
	The inhabitants of Deerfield suffered 
page 32
as much by the cruelties of the savages, according to their number, perhaps, as those of any other town in New England; it was for a long time a frontier settlement; from the time the people began to settle in 1671, to the conquest of Canada in 1760, a period of eighty nine years, there was but a short space that the inhabitants were not exposed to the attacks of the enemy; during which period the town was twice destroyed, and its inhabitants mostly killed or carried into captivity; many of the latter were compelled to spend their days among the Indians, and adopt their habits and mode of living, those who were young seemed soon to forget their relatives and friends, and reconcile themselves to their condition, and in a short space of time lost the ise of their native language, and adopted that of the Indians of the French, and in some instances intermarried and formed connection among them, but with few exceptions,
page 33
very little is known either of those whose lot it was to fall into the hands of the French of Indians.  There are doubtless many of their descendants now living in Canada, who are unknown by their connections here, and probably will always remain so. 
	Two brothers were taken from Deerfield and carried to Canada, and resided among the Indians, a short distance from Quebec, on the river St. Charles.  The elder one lived with them two and a half years, when he was redeemed out of their hands and returned to his native town, where he settled.  He said that his younger brother, (who was about 14 years old) had so far adopted the Indian habits, before he left them, and become so much attached to them, that he always avoided meeting him, if in his power, and could never speak the English language, but make use of the Indian dialect.  That in fine he had become in the short space of two and a half years, completely Indian in his habits, manner and feelings.  His friends
page 34
never heard more from him after his brother's return, he probably lived and died among the Indians.
	Much has been said in relation to the manner by which our ancestors procured their titles to the lands which they purchased of the Indians; many entertain an idea that the first settlers of New-England took from the natives their lands without giving them any consideration therefor; that this may have been the case in some instances is probably true, and it would be very strange if it were not so, after the sever struggles and trials which were had between the settlers and the natives; but there is reason to suppose that the purchase of lands of the Indians was much more extensive than is generally believed to be; by a little recurrence to the history of our country, we find evidence to show that a large portion of New England was procured either by treaty, or by deed, from some of the head men of the several tribes inhabiting the lands so conveyed; and a valuable consideration paid therfor.
page 35
Most of the lands lying along the Connecticut river, were purchased of the natives by deeds, (many of which are still extant.)  So far as we have examined, we find that the territory contained in the following towns, along the valley of the Connecticut, is among that which was purchased by deed, viz.:
	East and West Haddam, Wethersfield, Hartford, Windsor, Suffield in Conn.; and Springfield, Longmeadow, Westfield, Northampton, Hadley, Deerfield, and Northfield, in Mass.
	Many more might be mentioned die we deem it necessary; that these purchases were made in good faith by both parties, we have no doubt.  If any doubt exists on our mind, it is whether the persons who sod the land had sufficient authority to do so, and if they had whether they were not deceived in the amount or value, of what they received in payment.*  But taking into view the
__________________________________
*When the Rev. John Davenport and company first went to settle at Quinipiack, (now New Haven,) they purchased the territory of Monanguin, [cont'd bottom. p. 36]
the Sachem of that part of the country.  Besides engaging to protect him against the Indians of the neighborhood, they paid to him and his tribe, twelve coats of English cloth, twelve alchimy spoons, twelve hatchets, twelve hoes, two dozen knives, twelve porringers, and four cases of French knives and scissors.[end]
__________________________________
page 36
natural sagacity of the natives, add to this the jealousy they entertained towards their white neighbors, we may pretty safely conclude that their bargains were as well understood by the Indians who participated in them, as by the whites; they were doubtless considered by both parties, as a bona fida ale, and conveyance of the lands.  The natives perhaps did not consider the consequences which would by likely to follow, by dispossessing themselves of their lands. This we think is most likely to have been the case; still we incline to believe that the sales were mutually satisfactory at the time they were made, and that not so much injustice was done the natives in the purchase of their land, as has by some been imagined.  It would have been a difficult matter to have taken the
page 37
advantage of the Indians in those bargains, if the Settlers had been so minded, as the government early took the whole management of the land sales into their own hands, and passed prohibitory laws upon this subject, as will appear by an extract of a letter from Governor Winslow dated May 1st, 1676, wherein he says, "I think I can clearly say that before the present trouble broke out, the English did not possess one foot of land in this colony, but what was fairly obtained by honest purchase of the Indian proprietors.  Nay, because some of our people are of a covetous disposition and the Indians are in straits, easily prevailed upon to part with their land, we first made a law that none should purchase or receive of gift, and lands of the Indians without the knowledge and allowance of our court, and a penalty of a fine of five pounds per acre for all that should be so bought or obtained."  This was the regulation of the Plymouth Colony, and Massachusetts Bay passed a similar act.  None were allowed to take
page 38
deed of the Indians, except under certain conditions pointed out and regulated by the Government.*
	That the Indians were sometimes harshly treated by the whites in time of war cannot be denied; notwithstanding their mode of warfare, and their barbarous disposition to cruelty and bloodshed, yet we are satisfied that there are some acts of the first settlers, which do not fall a whit behind those of their red enemies.  We have reference particularly to the treatment of their prisoners, which in
__________________________________
*Soon after the termination of the Pequod war, about 1637, the settlers on the Connecticut River, above Hartford and Windsor, were extremely straitened for want of bread corn, and where under necessity of applying to their neighbors for a supply, but not having any to part with, they next sent to the Narragansett country, but they were unable to find sufficient relief. Agents were then sent up the river to Pocomtuck, (now Deerfield) to purchase corn of the Indians, who fitted out a fleet of fifty canoes loaded with corn, and descended the river, and sold it to the English at Windsor, this in some measure relieved the suffering people, and the most delicate fed on bread of this coarse, though wholesome material.
__________________________________
page 39
some instances are not easily reconciled to the principles of justice, and the humble requirements of christianity.  We have particular reference to the disposition made of Anawon, (Phillip's great captain and counsellor,) when he was made prisoner by Capt. Church, soon after the death of Phillip, he was conducted to Boston, and there perfidiously put to death, and we have too much reason to believe that it was done with the knowledge, if not the consent of the government.  This violent procedure could not be justified by any act of this high-minded chief.  He had conducted himself with the utmost propriety, after his capture, he had fallen into the hands of his enemy by the fortune of war, and so ling, as he submitted to his fate with humility, he was entitled to protection.  He was taken by surprise, and submitted to his fate nobly.  His conduct to Capt. Church was open, fair, honorable and high-minded; when he surrendered himself and his little army, 
page 40
he brought forth all Phillip's richest wardrobe, consisting of elegant wampum belts, on which were wrought flowers, beasts and birds.  One to which two flags were appended, and one whit a star, and richly edged with red hair, curiously wrought; a rich red cloth blanket, and two horns of glazed powder.  He addressed Capt. Church in the following language:
	"Great Captain, you have killed Phillip, and conquered his country; I believe I and my company are the last who war against the English.  I suppose the war is ended by your means."
	He then proceeded to deck Capt. Church with Phillip's royal robes, which when he had done, he said; "you have won them, and I am happy in having an opportunity of delivering them to you."
	Who does not remember with some degree of gratitude, the many favors and kind acts of Massassoit the chief of the Wampanoags and father to Phillip, and Chickatawbut the principal chief of Massachusetts Bay.  Both of whom rendered
page 41
essential services to our fathers when they first landed and commenced a settlement.  The former particularly made a treaty with them and he faithfully observed it for more than fifty years, and his people were friendly to the English.  Some have believed that these two chiefs had it in their power to have destroyed the infant settlement, but by the appointment of Providence, or some other cause they remained friendly while many of 
the neighboring tribes were hostile.
	Much is due to Uncas, chief of the Mohegans, who remained friendly to the English, and joined them in their wars against his Indian neighbors; he assisted them with his warriors, in fighting many a hard battle against their enemies.  There is something noble in many actions of these high-minded Indians.  When Uncas met his enemy Miantinomoh, chief of the Narragansetts, in time of was; the former at the head of five hundred, and the latter with nine hundred of his warriors, Uncas addressed his antagonist thus; "You have a number of men with you and so have I with 
page 42
me; it is a great pity that such brave warriors should be killed in a private quarrel between us.  Come like a man, as you profess to be, and let us fight it out.  If you kill me, my men shall be yours; but if I kill you your men shall be mine."  Miantinomoh replied, my men came to fight, and they shall fight."
	As soon as this answer was give, Uncas gave the signal and his warriors poured in a shower of arrows upon the Narragansetts with a horrible yell, and advanced rapidly upon them and put them to fight.  About thirty of them were slain; Miantinomoh was overtaken and seized by Uncas, who by a war whoop brought back the pursuers.  Miantinomoh finding himself in the hands of his implacable enemy, he remained silent, not could Uncas by any art, force him to break his sullen mood.
	"Had you taken me," said the conqueror, “should have asked you for
my life."  No reply was made by the indignant chief, and he submitted without a murmur to his humiliating condition.
page 43
He was conducted by his conqueror, to Hartford, where I regret to state, he was informally condemned to be executed by Uncas, on the same ground where he was taken prisoner; he was marched by him to the battle ground, accompanied by some of his most trusty warriors, and also two Englishmen, to see that no torture was inflicted; the moment he arrived at the fatal spot one of Uncas' men came up behind, and with his hatchet split the skull of the unfortunate chief.  The body was burried on the spot, and a heap of stones piled upon the grave.  The place since that time has been known by the name of Sachem's plain.  It is situated in the town of Norwich in Connecticut.
	There is one other instance, more strongly marked by the independent and high-minded character of one of those great captains, who fought against the English, at the first settlement of the country.  It was Conanchet the principal Sachem of the Narragansetts, who, after Winslow's defeat of the Indians in
page 44
the great swamp, in the Narragansett country, fled to Connecticut river, and had now returned to procure seed corn, to plant the lands on that river, he was fallen in with by Captains Dennison and Avery and taken prisoner.  A young man belonging to the expedition, coming up began to question the chief, on various subjects, on which the indignant captive, with a look of contempt, replied, "you much child -- no understand matters of was; let your captain come; him I will answer."  He was conveyed to Stonnington, after a short trial condemned to be shot by the Mohegan and Pequot Sachems.  On being offered his life, provided he would make peace with the English he rejected the proffer. When told his fate he complacently replied, that "he liked it well -- that he should die before his heart was soft, or he had said any thing unworthy of himself."  This high-minded chief was a son of the famous Miantinomoh, mentioned above; and he seemed to possess much of the spirit of his father.
page 45
	Subjoined is a list of a few towns in Massachusetts and Connecticut, with their former Indian names, which will be generally found correct, except perhaps some variation in spelling.
		In Massachusetts.
	Boston,		Shawmut.
	Salem,		Naumkeag.
	Worcester,		Pahachoog.
	Brookfield,		Quaboag.
	Petersham,		Nichewaug.
	Athol,			Poquaig.
	Northfield,		Squakeag.
	Pittsfield,		Pontoosuck.
	Deerfield,		Pocomtuck.
	Hadley,		Norwothuck.
	Springfield,		Aggawam.
	Northampton,	Nonotuck.
	Westfield,		Woronoke.

		In Connecticut.
	Haddam,		Machemoodus.
	Hartford, 		Suckiang.
	Wethersfield, 	Pauquiaug.
	Middletown, 	Matabesick.
	Windsor,		Poquanock.
	New Haven, 	Quinipiack.
	Lyme, 		Nehantick.
	Symsbury,		Massecoe.
	Derby,		Paugassett.
	Woodbury,		Pomperang.

	Indian names of the following rivers: viz.  Connecticut River, Quoncktacut, Deerfield River, Pocumtuck.  Green River, Pickomegan.  Miller's River, Poquaig.
	Recapitulation of events in Deerfield.
First grant of land to Dedham,		1669
Began to settle at Pocomtuck,		1671
Capt. Lathrop's defeat, town destroyed.1675
Began to re-settle, were driven off,	1677
Commenced settling 2d time, 		1682
Settled a minister (Mr. Williams,)	1686
Town destroyed second time,		1704
Number of inhabitants at this time, 	  280
Killed by the enemy, 			    47
Taken prisoners at same time, 		  122
Slain on the way to Canada,		    19
The number that never returned,	    28
The whole number redeemed from the 
		enemy,			    62

page 47
N O T E.
	In offering the foregoing work to the public, I can only say, it is not my wish to appear as an author to any work; but being frequently called upon to relate some of the incidents here recorded, I have been induced, at the repeated solicitations of my friends, as well as those who often call to view the marks made by the savages upon the ancient house now standing at Deerfield, to put them down in my humble style, claiming no credit for the manner in which the work has been done; nor "set down aught in malice" for criticism which any may choose to bestow upon it.  I am sensible that if I had afforded myself more time, the arrangement of this plain humble mater, might have been improved. 
	So far as relates to facts, I have endeavored to be as accurate as the means
page 48
before me would permit, I have been obliged to rely for many facts, on the memory of those who have had them handed down from their fathers, and from my own memory, as related to me by my ancestors, who were sharers in many of the sever trials with the natives.  I have also consulted, Rev. John Williams' Redeemed Captive; -- Church's History of Indian Wars; -- Hoyt's Antiquarian Researches; -- Williams's History of Vermont; -- Holme's American Annals; Bouchett's Description of Canada, the ancient journal of Massachusetts Legislature, and the records of the town, and sundry other authorities.
	In relation to Indian names, of persons and places, I have been governed vary much by authors before me.  It is not strange that the orthography should very as we consult different authors, but the variation is so trifling, that it is not believed to be essential. 
		The Author.

X/\X/\X/\X/\X/\X/\X/\X/\ END TRANSCRITION /\X/\X/\X/\X/\X/\X/\X

	This work is signed only "E. H., Deerfield, Mass., 1833."  Could E. H. be the son of David Hoyt? Page 24, the present owner of the home in 1833?
	Therefore, in an effort to find the author, male or female, the 1830 MA Census, Franklin Co., Deerfield Twp.,  was searched for - E Hoyt.  Hoyt is a surname in the text.  Here are the results, per the librarian at the Memorial Library, in Deerfield, the author was Epaphras Hoyt, see below.
Roll:  62 Page: 64 (Ancestry.com Image 9/24)
Elijah Hoyt, Deerfield, Franklin, MA
	M 5-10 = 1, 10-15 = 1, 50-60 = 1,  
	F 10-15 = 1, 15-20 = 3, 20-30 = 2, 50-60 = 1.
Experience Hoyt, Deerfield, Franklin, MA
	M 10-15 = 1  
	F 15-20 = 1, 50-60 = 1.
Roll:  62 Page:  65 (Ancestry.com Image 11/24)
Epaphras Hoyt, Deerfield, Franklin, MA
	M 15-20 = 1 30-50 = 1 60-70 = 1.
	F 10-15 = 1, 20-30 = 1, 50-60 = 1.
Ebenezer Hoyt, Deerfield, Franklin, MA
	M- 10-15 = 1 50-60 = 1.
	F 20-30 = 1 50-60 = 1.
Elihu Hoyt, Deerfield, Franklin, MA
	M 20-30 = 2, 50-60 = 1, 
	F15-20 = 1, 30-40 = 1 50-60 = 1.

X/\X/\X/\X/\END TRANSCRIPTIONIST’S ADDEMDUM\X/\X/\X/\X