MARECHKAWICK

Preamble 

Presence in the Marechkawicking Heartland (Downtown Brooklyn / Boerum Hill)

Mound building in this area dates to 1000 BC and before, as preserved in Lenape knowledge and oral understanding of this land. The Marechkawicking heartland, currently known as Downtown Brooklyn and Boerum Hill along Gowanus Creek, contains ancient mounds and evidence of tool making that are part of the long Native history of this place.

This land was not empty ground and not transient ground. It was a place of long-standing Native settlement, burial, food production, ceremony, found building, and tool forging.

At that time, this shoreline and upland area was dense forest, freshwater streams, wetlands, and tidal marshes filled with fish, shellfish, birds, and game. Fires moved through the forest from lightning strikes and controlled burns used to shape the land, clear growth, and maintain living space. Smoke would have been a familiar presence rising from this ground from cooking, pottery firing, tool work, and land management.

Trees were cleared and shaped for shelter, fuel, and carving implements. Stone was worked into blades, scrapers, and hunting tools. Clay was formed into vessels. Food was grown, gathered, dried, stored, and shared.

The sky itself was part of daily life. The movement of the sun, moon, stars, and seasons guided planting, harvesting, ceremony, travel, and timekeeping. Astronomical observation was part of understanding the rhythms of the land and water that surrounded Marechkawick.

The Lost Mounds of Atlantic and Pacific

Archaeological understanding of this region includes shell middens, burial locations, and village settlement patterns consistent with Woodland Native life. This was confirmed during the construction of the modern city. In his 1824 chronicle, Notes Geographical and Historical relating to the Town of Brooklyn, historian Gabriel Furman documented the leveling of the massive hills to create the street grid. He explicitly noted that as workers dug down the high ground—in the corridor that is now Atlantic Avenue and Pacific Street—they repeatedly uncovered "Indian Mounds" containing skeletal remains and wampum. These were not transient camps, but permanent, consecrated grounds that were flattened to build the city. 

Oral knowledge and early site awareness record Native occupation along the shoreline near Gowanus Creek and the nearby uplands, including the Werpos village area associated with Marechkawick.

This represents an existence of temporal spirit and community in the Marechkawicking heartland.

----------------------------------------------------------

Treaty of Fort Pitt (1778)

Source

National Archives, Treaty with the Delawares, September 17, 1778, Record Group 11, Treaty Series No. 2 (National Archives Identifier 299798). Also recorded in the Library of Congress, Journals of the Continental Congress, Vol. 12.

The 1778 Treaty of Fort Pitt was entered into between representatives of the United States and the Delaware (Lenapehoking) Nation, the English name historically used for the Lenape people.

Article VI — Tribes Joining Together

Article VI states:

“…to invite any other tribes who have been friends to the interest of the United States, to join the present confederation…”

This is the treaty clause recognizing that other Native tribes may join together with the Delaware (Lenapehoking) in a unified confederation.

Article VI — Territorial Rights

In the same article, the treaty states:

“…the United States do engage to guarantee to the said Delaware nation… all their territorial rights in the fullest and most ample manner, as it hath been bounded by former treaties…”

This is the treaty clause recognizing the territorial rights of the Delaware (Lenapehoking) people.

Article III — Country of the Delaware Nation

Article III uses the phrase:

“the country of the Delaware nation”

This is the treaty’s own wording referring to the land of the Delaware (Lenapehoking) people.

In Substance (based only on these clauses)

Based directly on Articles III and VI, the treaty language:

• Refers to the land as the country of the Delaware (Lenapehoking) nation,

• Recognizes the ability of the Delaware (Lenapehoking) to join together with other Native tribes in a confederation, and

• Contains language where the United States guarantees the territorial rights of the Delaware (Lenapehoking) people.

U.S. Constitution — Supremacy Clause

Source: Supremacy Clause

Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution provides that all treaties made under the authority of the United States “shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby.”

This establishes that the 1778 treaty with the Delaware (Lenapehoking) carries the force of binding federal law to which all states and courts are bound.

Lenapehoking and Marechkawick

Lenapehoking is the ancestral homeland of the Lenape people across present-day New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. Within Lenapehoking is Marechkawick (modern Brooklyn, near Gowanus Creek and the ancient Werpos area), documented as a Lenape settlement. The “Delaware country” referenced in the treaty corresponds to Lenapehoking, and Marechkawick lies within that territory.

UNDRIP — Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Source: United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

UNDRIP Articles 8, 26, 28, and 37 affirm Indigenous rights to traditional lands, protection from dispossession, redress for lands taken without consent, and the recognition and enforcement of treaties. In 2010, the United States announced support for UNDRIP as guidance for federal policy toward Native peoples and treaty respect.

Statement on Marechkawick Land Status

Historical colonial records do not show a clear deed transferring Marechkawick from Lenape sachems into fee ownership as understood in modern property law. Lenape oral history maintains that this land was never sold by Sachem SaySay. This position is consistent with the treaty’s recognition of Lenape country and with UNDRIP protections regarding traditional lands.

Present-Day Council Composition

The present community identifies as a mixture of Native tribes and African descendants who are Afro-Indigenous. Members trace heritage to Lenape, Creek, Cherokee, and other Native nations, reflecting the interwoven history of Indigenous and African peoples within Lenapehoking and the eastern United States.

Combined Historical and Legal Statement

The Treaty of Fort Pitt (1778), entered into between the United States and the Delaware (Lenapehoking) Nation, contains language in Article VI allowing other tribes friendly to the United States to “join the present confederation” with the Delaware (Lenapehoking). In the same article, the United States states that it “engage[s] to guarantee to the said Delaware nation… all their territorial rights.” Article III of the treaty refers to the “country of the Delaware nation,” which Lenape historians and elders recognize as Lenapehoking, the ancestral homeland that includes Marechkawick (modern Brooklyn).

Under Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution (the Supremacy Clause), treaties made under the authority of the United States are the supreme law of the land and binding upon courts and states. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), particularly Articles 26, 28, and 37, further affirms Indigenous rights to traditional lands and the recognition of treaties.

Lenape oral history maintains that Marechkawick was never sold by Sachem SaySay or any other sachem, and that under Lenape custom, ceding land required the approval of the Council of Grandmothers. This understanding is preserved as part of Lenape tradition and memory regarding the status of this land.

Historical records also document that the area near the foot of the Gowanus Creek was a site connected to the enslavement of Africans during the colonial period, and that forms of slavery involving Africans occurred in surrounding areas involving multiple communities. The present Marechkawick community openly acknowledges this history.

Today, the Marechkawick community includes members of Lenape, Creek, Cherokee, and other Eastern Woodland Algonquin tribal heritage, along with members of African descent who are Afro-Indigenous. All members are recognized as full equals within the community. Members of the Marechkawick community are also citizens of the United States and of the states in which they reside.

Burial Grounds and Sacred Ground at the Foot of Gowanus Creek

The Boerum Hill / Gowanus landscape—especially the low ground and shoreline at the foot of the creek—sits inside an area repeatedly flagged by cultural-resource researchers as archaeologically sensitive for precontact Native American activity, including recorded site locations and a documented burial discovery in the vicinity.

Multiple NYC cultural-resource / archaeology studies (prepared for City review and published as PDF reports) identify previously recorded precontact sites near the Gowanus project area, including:

• an OPRHP-listed Native American burial (“human burial encountered by a private landowner,” with shell and possible red ochre context), and

• a nearby precontact village/maize field location (“Werpoes”) drawn from early site compilations (e.g., Bolton’s mapped sites).

These reports matter because they confirm—using the City’s own cultural-resource framework—that this part of Brooklyn has a documented burial record and repeated evidence of Native occupation and material culture in the immediate region.

In addition, Gowanus-area federal/cleanup planning documents explicitly require special handling and immediate stoppage protocols if human remains or funerary items are encountered during ground disturbance, reflecting that this corridor is treated as culturally sensitive.

Dutch Violence and the Burning of Marechkawick

The colonial-era record contains direct documentary evidence tied specifically to Marechkawick during the conflict period associated with .

A primary-source document preserved by the records a declaration by Ponkes (an Indian of Marechkawick) concerning destruction during this period. This is a documentary anchor you can point to without guessing motives or writing a reconstructed narrative.

You can pair that with the broader historical framing in City environmental/cultural resources materials describing the region’s early colonial conflict conditions.

The 1645 “Coney Island to Gowanus” Deed and What It Actually Says

A key document repeatedly cited in early Brooklyn land history is the 1645 deed dated September 10, 1645, describing land boundaries “from Coney Island to Gouwanes/Gowanus,” with sachem signatures including Seysey.

A modern scholarly/public-history repository that publishes the archival reference and an English translation identifies the document as:

• “Indian deed for the land on Long Island from Kynen (Coney) island to Gouwanes…”

• dated 1645-09-10, held by the New York State Archives (document reference included on the page), and

• providing the described boundary language in the translation.

This gives you a clean way to cite the existence, date, holding institution, and boundary wording without adding speculation.

“Grass / Use vs. Land” and the 1649 “Masters of What We Retain” Statement

The point about use (grass, grazing, planting, passage) versus the land itself is best expressed in two parts:

1. the community’s oral history / sachem tradition (clearly labeled as oral tradition), and

2. a documentary quote that shows the same conceptual distinction in the Dutch-era discourse.

A widely accessible published history that quotes the 1649 “Broad Advice” style reply (in English) records:

“…if we have ceded to you the country you are living in, we yet remain masters of what we have retained for ourselves.”

That quote is not the entire story, but it does support (at minimum) the idea that Lenape speakers articulated a distinction between what was ceded and what was retained—which aligns with the community’s preserved understanding that agreements about “grass” or “use” were treated differently from any claim of selling the land itself.

Council Record Context

City-published cultural and historical materials also document that early land transactions and boundaries in this area are complex and frequently contested in the record, and that multiple precontact sites and at least one burial discovery were recorded close to the Gowanus corridor—supporting the seriousness of the statement that the ground itself includes ancestral and sacred contexts.

The Chain of Void Title and Aboriginal Rights

The “Void” of Unsold Land

Because the specific lands at the foot of Gowanus Creek were taken by the Dutch through the burning of the settlement rather than by a valid purchase agreement or treaty, the Dutch never acquired legal title to this ground.

Passing Down a Void

When the English, and later the United States, assumed governance from the Dutch, the Dutch could only transfer the rights they actually held. Since they held no valid title to these specific unbought lands, they passed down a “void” — a status of unsold Indian land.

The Broken Chain

A legal chain of title cannot be forged from an act of violence. The absence of a valid deed from the Dutch period means the land remained Lenape territory throughout the transition to English rule.

The 1846 Constitution and Allodial Title

Allodial Land

The New York State Constitution of 1846 (Article I) declares that all lands within the state are “allodial” (held in absolute ownership, not subject to a feudal lord). As the original allodial owners, the Lenape hold this absolute title until it is legally severed.

Constitutional Protection Against Sale

The Constitution, and preceding colonial laws, explicitly prohibited the purchase of Indian lands without the authority and consent of the Legislature (an Act of the Assembly). This clause was designed to prevent the theft of Indian lands.

No Legislative Cure

Because the land was initially taken by burning (a void act) and was never subsequently validated by an Act of the Assembly as required by the Constitution, the “void” was never cured.

Conclusion on Title

Under this understanding, the land at the foot of Gowanus Creek is viewed as still held under Aboriginal Title. The state cannot claim fee simple ownership of land that was:

• Never sold by the Council of Mothers (Lenape Law),

• Never purchased by valid contract (Dutch Law), and

• Never ratified by the Legislature (New York State Constitutional Law).

Federal Non-Intercourse Act and the Question of Valid Land Transfer

Source: Indian Trade and Intercourse Act of 1790, now codified at 25 U.S.C. §177 (commonly called the Non-Intercourse Act).

Beginning in 1790, the United States Congress enacted federal law declaring that no sale of Indian lands is valid unless the transfer is made by treaty or convention entered into under the authority of the United States. This law has been reaffirmed in subsequent versions of the Act and remains part of federal law.

This statute establishes the federal rule for what constitutes a legally recognized transfer of Native land. Under this rule, private purchases, colonial-era transactions, or state-level claims are not considered valid transfers of Indian land unless they were confirmed through federal treaty or federally authorized agreement.

Historical records do not show a federal treaty or Act of Congress specifically transferring Marechkawick or the lands at the foot of Gowanus Creek out of Lenape ownership under this federal standard. This absence is noted here as part of the historical and documentary context surrounding the status of this land within Lenapehoking.

Documented Slavery at the Vechte–Cortelyou Farm (Old Stone House) in Gowanus

Source: Historical records of the Vechte and Cortelyou farms, now preserved through the Old Stone House of Brooklyn and New York City historical documentation.

The land in the Gowanus area later became the Dutch colonial farm of Claes Vechte, and subsequently the Cortelyou family farm. Historical documentation records that enslaved Africans labored on this property during the Dutch colonial period. The site is today preserved as the Old Stone House of Brooklyn and is recognized in local historical and museum records as a location tied to this history.

This same Gowanus lowland exists within the documented landscape of Lenape settlement, later Dutch agricultural use, and African enslavement. It is one of the few places in New York City where the historical record clearly shows this overlap of Lenape presence, Dutch colonial occupation, and the forced labor of Africans on the same ground.

Historical accounts and Brooklyn historical research also describe enslaved Africans, many brought from the Guinea coast of West Africa, being used as laborers in large physical works in this region, including the dredging and shaping of the Gowanus Creek and surrounding tidal marshlands to make them suitable for colonial agriculture, drainage, and infrastructure. This labor was not confined only to the farmstead but extended into the landscape of the creek itself and the modification of the natural waterways that defined Marechkawick.

This history is acknowledged here because it forms part of the lived ancestry of the present Marechkawick community. Families of African descent have been present on this land for more than four centuries, and over generations have interwoven with Lenape and other Native tribal families of the region.

Continuity of Shared Native Foodways and Community Practice

Federal Indian policy recognizes that continuity of community life—gatherings, foodways, kinship, and oral tradition—demonstrates a living Indigenous presence across generations.

Across Eastern Woodlands cultures, everyday foods, gatherings, and family patterns have carried forward for centuries. At Marechkawick, this continuity is expressed through communal events in the form of block parties, jams, and shared meals that serve the same social function as traditional Native gatherings, and through foodways long associated with this region.

These include:

• Fish from local waters: catfish, salmon, eel, shad

• The “Three Sisters” and related crops: corn, beans, squash, pumpkins

• Corn-based foods: grits, cornmeal, hominy

• Breads: flatbread, johnnycake, ashcake

• Sweeteners: maple syrup, wild honey

• Root and field crops: sweet potatoes, turnips, onions

• Native fruits and plants: tomatoes, berries, grapes, nuts

• Wild game and fowl traditionally used in the region

These shared foods remain part of daily life and memory for many families of Native and African descent in the region today. Family and community structures likewise reflect patterns common to Eastern Woodlands peoples.

Shared Experience of Native Communities in New York

Marechkawick recognizes the history of the Montaukett Indian Nation on eastern Long Island, whose people experienced severe injustice through past New York court rulings that questioned and disrupted their tribal standing despite clear historical continuity on their ancestral lands. Their experience stands as part of the broader story of Native communities in New York whose identities, lands, and governance were challenged through legal systems not of their own making.

Marechkawick acknowledges this history with respect and expresses hope that the Montaukett, alongside other Native communities across Lenapehoking, Long Island, New Jersey and upriver nations, will see their histories and rights treated with fairness and justice.

Ongoing Intertribal Relations

Marechkawick maintains ongoing relations with Native communities and tribal families on Long Island and in New Jersey, reflecting the historic and continuing interconnections among the peoples of Lenapehoking and the surrounding regions.

Present Community and Continuity

In New York today, within Lenapehoking, the Marechkawick community includes people of Native heritage alongside descendants of freed and free African people whose histories are rooted in this place. These families are concurrently living in New York and Lenapehoking at the same place and time, carrying forward shared foodways, gatherings, kinship patterns, and oral traditions common to Eastern Woodlands Native cultures.

Within this community, Native and African traditions have fused over generations. Native customs remain strong, and the community does not shy away from its African ancestry. Both heritages are openly acknowledged, practiced, and carried forward with equal pride.

This lived, present-day community life reflects continuity across generations and ties everyday practice to the history of Marechkawick in Lenapehoking.

Marechkawick Position Statement 

Marechkawick in Lenapehoking is treated by our council as ancestral homeland and sacred ground. The foot of Gowanus Creek is recognized in our tradition as burial ground territory tied to the old settlement landscape. Modern cultural-resource documentation for the Gowanus area identifies recorded precontact sites and a documented Native burial discovery in the vicinity, underscoring the sensitivity of the ground in this corridor.

We acknowledge the documented colonial violence connected to this period, including primary records connected to Marechkawick individuals in Dutch-era documentation.

We further maintain that surrounding lands of Marechkawick were never sold as land by Sachem Seysey or any other sachem under Lenape law; rather, what was discussed in the Dutch period concerned use rights (grass, grazing, planting, passage)—not a permanent alienation of the land itself. The concept that some things were ceded while other rights and lands were retained is reflected in English-quoted Dutch-era discourse from 1649.

Earl S. Bell
Acting Sachem, Marechkawick

Marechkawick, Lenapehoking
At the Long House Wigwam upon the burial ground near Werpos, at the end of Gowanus Creek
(Brooklyn, NY, USA)