A dining accessory that functioned as a place card, this napkin ring belonged to Gertrude M. Deyo as a child. At just over an inch in all dimensions, this square napkin ring embellished with Cupid riding a dragonfly sat atop a finely set dining table awaiting guests. Outside wall of the very same dining room, resided the skeletal remains of colonial conquest and slaughtering.

Despite the name, napkin “ring,” this item is one and a quarter inch square napkin holder made of silver. It has scalloped edges, two curves to a side, along both the top and the bottom edges. Given the approximate date of creation for the item in the mid 19^th century, it has suffered minimal damage, leaving the only trace of wear and tear small areas of old sticky tape.  The main aesthetic feature of the napkin ring is the image of Cupid riding a dragonfly due to the intricate details on the wings of Cupid and the unique pairing of beings. However, the other engraving on it bears the historical significance of the object. This other engraving holds the personal history that’s embedded in the communal past of New Paltz, through three simple letters: “GMD” for Gertrude M Deyo.

Gertrude was born in New Paltz to Matthew Deyo and Julia Etta Deyo, in 1868 as the eighth generation of Deyo’s born in the United States (Van Wagner 184). She was given this prior to her marriage based on the use of her maiden name, and probably at a younger age since it is dated closer to the mid 19^th century and Gertrude was born in 1868. It accompanied her most likely into her married years, and then was passed along to either to her sister, or directly to her niece, Mrs. Henry E Downer, the last owner of the ring (Van Wagner 255).

During the years of Gertrude’s marriage, she most likely kept her designated napkin ring with her, bringing her family’s silver dining accessories into her next life as a married woman. It would sit with the other dining furnishings, holding Gertrude’s name and place at the table with it. All would remain the same until  1894 when Gertrude’s husband, Abraham D Brodhead, decided to renovate the home in which they were living on Huguenot Street (NPT 1894). The home was to become “scarcely recognizable” and it was believed by members of the community that at least one of the other old stone houses should be “strictly guarded” to prevent a similar process of renovations from occurring (NPT 1894). The community feared that future generations would forget the lifestyle of their ancestors, that the culture of the time would be lost (NPT 1894). During this time, the couple moved all of their furnishings and themselves to the Tamney House for the duration of the renovation (NPT 1894). While excavating near the back of the home, a skeleton was discovered, along with parts of a shear and axe (NPT 1894). The New Paltz Times reported that very same month that the bones were of a Native American.

This, however, was not the first appearance of Native American corpses on the couple’s homestead, although it is reminiscent of a time of turmoil and conflict between the Huguenots and the native tribes of the area. Travel back in time another thirty years and Henry Johnson, much like Abraham Brodhead, while digging in his yard, revealed the human skeleton of a “red man” in the perfect state of preservation (NPT 1862). This body was seated upright, in the proper burial position of the Native American culture, and was determine to be at least two hundred years old, dating the skeleton back to the mid 17^th Century (NPT 1862).

Flash back to the time in which the first Native American who was discovered lived, and the time in which Huguenots were only beginning to settle in present day Ulster County region.  The Natives still lived in peace, practicing their culture freely, without the interference or destruction of the settlers. The Huguenots, signing a contract with the native tribes in 1660, began to increase their population in nearby Esopus with rapid numbers (Sylvester 3). With more Huguenots, there became a need for more space, and less concern for the people that were sacrificing their lands for the Huguenots. In 1663, the Second Esopus War took place, resulting in the plundering of the Huguenots’ village (4). The Natives captured men, women, and children, and the Huguenots in return held a Native of respectable status hostage (4). With the help of the Native they held hostage, the Huguenots traversed the county to retrieve their wives, discovering the bountiful lands of New Paltz, the believed promised land of the Huguenots (5). It is along this area, on the east side of the Wallkill, that a single Native was killed along the journey, a person who attacked the caravan of men single-handedly and fell victim to the leader of the troop (5). Interestingly enough, the Natives of this time fought primarily with tomahawks and battle axes, being their most efficient weapons (4). The Huguenots returned to the fruitful land upon rescuing the women, thus settling in present day New Paltz.

Could this tale of the single Native American slaughtered during the first appearance of the Huguenots in New Paltz be the same Native found during the renovations of the Deyo House under Abraham Brodhead? Or could the body belong to another Native, evidence of another incident of colonial conquest and Western privilege? The Huguenots’ settlement in New Paltz was not one of harmony and community with the Natives of the region. It held bloodshed, captivities, pillaging, and destruction. The Huguenots built the life they felt they deserved, one of grand houses and silver, personalized dining accessories on top of the rotting and forgotten culture of the people whose land they invaded.  In the midst of a community shocked at Brodhead’s ability to alter a part of their past culture, they discovered the culture that they had impeded on and demolished for their own wanting, another community trampled in the name of modernity and self-fulfillment.

Works Cited

Van Wagner, Carol et al. The Deyo (Deyoe) Family. New Paltz: Huguenot Historical Society 2003. Print.

“New Paltz Times.” New Paltz Buildings. 1862. Print.

“New Paltz Times.” New Paltz Buildings. 1894. Print.

Sylvester, Nathaniel Bartlett. “New Paltz.” History of Ulster County, New York. Philadelphia: Everts &      Peck 1880. Print.