The Rebellious Son: Philip Jeremiah’s Elopement

By Jessie Serfilippi

Philip Jeremiah Schuyler.

 Myth: Only daughters of the Schuyler family eloped.

When Angelica Schuyler, the eldest of the Schuyler children, eloped with John Barker Church on June 23, 1777, she taught her younger siblings a valuable lesson: you can ask your parents for forgiveness later. She had no way of knowing that her actions would inspire three more of her siblings­­—one of whom, Catharine, wasn’t yet born at the time of Angelica’s elopement—to follow in her footsteps. Out of the four Schuyler children to elope, Philip Jeremiah, the fifth surviving child and second son, was the only boy to do so. He was only eleven at the time of Angelica’s transgression, but he clearly took his sister’s lesson to heart.

The Golden Child

Philip Jeremiah possessed every quality his brothers, John Bradstreet and Rensselaer, lacked, according to their father. He was a studious and well-educated boy. As a child, he was instructed in English grammar, French, Catechism, and the German flute among other subjects. He likely received some tutoring at the Academy at Albany, as a 1783 receipt indicates, as well.

While his brothers, especially Rensselaer, were competent students, Philip Jeremiah was the only son to go to college. In 1787, at the age of 19, Philip Jeremiah studied at Columbia College (now Columbia University). He studied with William Cochran, who taught Latin and Greek at the college. As the only Schuyler son to attend college, his father had high expectations for him. Elder brother Johnny had proven to be a lousy businessman, much to Schuyler’s disappointment. Although Rensselaer, aged 14 when Philip Jeremiah entered college, was still young, he would eventually become addicted to gambling and accrue a large amount of debt. Philip Jeremiah quickly became his father’s one chance at a son achieving renown. He likely hoped for Philip Jeremiah to become a lawyer.

Yet it seems as if Philip Jeremiah didn’t finish his coursework at Columbia. Instead, he did something his father did not want him to do. Philip Jeremiah, the golden child, eloped.

The Childhood of the Bride-to-be

Sarah Rutsen.

Sarah Rutsen came from a wealthy landowning family in Rhinebeck, NY. Her ancestry was full of notable Dutch families. Her paternal grandmother was Alida Livingston and her paternal great-great grandparents included Livingstons and Beekmans. Further back still, she was the x3 great granddaughter of Alida Schuyler. Her father’s family had been in the Ulster area for generations—her grandparents moving to Rhinebeck shortly after their marriage—whereas her mother’s family seems to have migrated upstate from the Long Island area. Her father, Colonel John Rutsen, likely served in the local militia. He died in 1772, when he was twenty-eight and his daughter was two.

Phebe Carman Rutsen.

Sarah and her older sister, Catharina, were raised by their mother, Phebe Carman. Phebe had been married to John for only five years when he left her a widow with two young children. The small family was said to have lived in a stone house in Rhinebeck, and were likely well-supported by the grist mill Sarah’s paternal grandfather, Jacob Rutsen, had established in 1739, and by Beekman land she, her mother, and sister inherited upon the death of her father. Their mother was able to collect enough rent from the tenant farmers living on the inherited land to keep her and her daughters comfortable.

How, exactly, Sarah Rutsen met Philip Jeremiah Schuyler is a bit of a mystery. At the time of their meeting, Philip Jeremiah was studying at Columbia College, but he did have relatives who lived in the Rhinebeck area, so he was likely familiar with the neighborhood and families living there. Sometime after Philip Jeremiah and Sarah met, his interest in his studies seemed to have tapered off, and his heart became set on starting a family.

The Elopement

Philip Jeremiah did two things that likely infuriated his father: he dropped out of Columbia College and eloped. He likely dropped out of Columbia College to elope and start his married life. Philip Jeremiah was twenty when he married Sarah Rutsen, who was eighteen at the time. They married on May 31, 1788. Where they married is not known, although her family home is certainly a possibility, since it doesn’t seem to have been an elopement for her, but only for her husband.

Philip Jeremiah tried getting his parents' permission to marry Sarah, but to no avail. Once it became clear to him his parents would not change their minds, he decided to marry Sarah anyway. In a letter from April 27, 1788, penned to his eldest son, Schuyler writes “Your Brother Philip is at Rhynbeck and I fear is married, I have not heard from him himself since he left [?]” Philip Jeremiah wasn’t actually married at that point, but would be within the next month.

There has long been an assumption that because Philip Schuyler didn’t approve of the marriage he automatically didn’t approve of Sarah Rutsen. It is evident that he had no contact with Sarah for at least the first year of her marriage to Philip Jeremiah, but whether that was because he was upset with his son or with his choice of bride remains unknown. What is known is that Schuyler attempted to make whatever bad feelings may have existed between himself and Sarah vanish by May of 1789.

In a letter to his son-in-law, Alexander Hamilton, Schuyler details out his plans for making Sarah Rutsen feel welcomed into the family. He writes this clearly in response to a question or concern Hamilton posed to him in his last letter. Schuyler states “Philip [Jeremiah] has visited me since his return from England he is returned to his wife with a message from me that will afford her comfort & confidence in my friendly intentions towards her. I have charged him to bring her here immediately on the Arrival of his Mother & Sisters.”

No matter how he felt for that year of no contact with his newest daughter-in-law, he at least attempted (and was later proven successful) in making amends and welcoming her into the family. He also seemed to have accepted Philip Jeremiah back into the family regardless of his transgression. This period of disapproval seemingly lasted much longer than Angelica’s two weeks after her elopement, and less is known of the circumstances. But whatever happened, within a year Philip Jeremiah and Sarah Rutsen were finally given their proper place in the Schuyler family.

Read more: "Inquire of the Subscriber at Rhinebeck: Philip Jeremiah Schuyler and Slavery"

Want to explore Philip Jeremiah and Sarah's Rhinebeck? Click here to access a Google Maps with homes that would have existed, along with their own home, mapped out. Click each point for a picture and information about the home. Enjoy!

Philip Jeremiah and Sarah's Rhinebeck home, which still exists today as apartments.

Sarah Rutsen's ancestral home in Ulster, which burnt down in 1911.

Notes From the Northern Department: The Battles of Saratoga

By Andrew Bertorelli

On September 19, 1777, at approximately 12:30 pm, the opening volleys of the first Battle of Saratoga crackled across the field at Freeman's Farm, in what is today northern Stillwater and southern Saratoga, NY. In what may be considered a typical confrontation between the two forces by this stage in the war, the first battle lasted three hours, ending with neither side able to claim a decisive victory.

 

The Battlefield at Saratoga as it appears today.

Major General Horatio Gates, as painted by Gilbert Stuart

The site was chosen by General Horatio Gates, a political and military rival of Philip Schuyler and the man who replaced him as the commander of the Northern Department in August, and who had become a major proponent of Schuyler’s dismissal from his post as commander after the loss of Fort Ticonderoga. Gates’ army was accompanied by troops commanded by Major General Benjamin Lincoln, as well as a group of sharpshooters from the new Provisional Rifle Corps, commanded by Colonel Daniel Morgan. Gates was also joined by forces under the aggressive young general, Benedict Arnold, who had just returned from his encounter with the western pincer of the British forces at Fort Stanwix. Although the developed an early rapport, Arnold had infuriated Gates with his friendly relationship with Philip Schuyler and by bringing several of Schuyler’s former officers onto his staff.

Major General John Burgoyne,
as painted by Joshua Reynolds

Morgan’s rifle company engaged Burgoyne’s right flank, which was a combination of British regulars, light infantry, and grenadiers commanded by Fraser. Units such as the light infantry and grenadiers in Fraser’s force surely would have considered themselves a cut above the rest as compared to the regular regiments and militias of the 18^th century. Light infantry units derived their classification from the fact that they were highly mobile units, able to move fast from one position to another after their highly-trained men fire aimed shots. This strategic agility would allow them to consistently be just beyond the reach of the enemy’s fire, as well as allowing the commanding general to hastily place them on the battlefield and quickly adjust their position however he saw fit. For their increased usefulness to their commander and their high level of training, light infantrymen were often regarded as having slightly more status than a regular infantryman.

An artistic depiction of British Grenadiers

Unlike their fast and mobile comrades, grenadier regiments were the heavy hitters of an 18^th century battlefield. Grenadier units would specially select recruits who were taller and stronger than most, and would then give them arduous training to instill extreme discipline, making them less likely to rout in battle. Furthermore, grenadiers’ regimental uniforms were easy to tell apart from regular units because of the upturned miter caps, later replaced by bearskin miters, they wore into combat. These hats had initially helped the men in grenadier regiments to hurl their small bombs, or hand grenades (from whence they derive their name), overhand without hitting their arms on the brim of their hats and thus knocking them off. Grenadiers would often enjoy extra pay, and of course elevated status among their peers. At Saratoga, Burgoyne had tasked these men with trekking through the heavily wooded high ground northwest of the center-field and thus forcing the American left flank to turn and fight them, diverting some American fire away from Burgoyne’s center line. This maneuver, however was anticipated by General Arnold and he was granted a reconnaissance-in-force, consisting of Morgan’s rifle company and a Continental light infantry unit.

A detail cut-away of a rifled barrel.

The distinction between an early muzzle-loaded rifle, as used by Morgan’s men, and the typical Brown Bess smooth bore musket used by regular troops during the war is important to note. The rifling grooves forged into the barrel by the gunsmiths had originally come to North America with German immigrants settling the frontiers of Pennsylvania and Kentucky. Initially intended to ease the long, methodical process of cleaning a black powder gun, shooters and hunters quickly realized that guns with spiraled grooves running the length of the inside bore of the gun’s barrel would improve effective range and accuracy of the weapon. Today we know this accuracy is due to the gyroscopic stability achieved by a spinning ball in flight, such as with footballs. This difference in equipment between the American and British forces on the northwestern flank of the battle lines would allow Morgan to intentionally place skilled marksmen and their accurate rifles in positions enabling them to shoot the British officers whilst commanding their troops. However, Morgan’s men quickly found themselves fighting the bulk of Burgoyne’s main army which had come to reinforce Fraser and his men.

The Continental Army at this initial battle on September 19^th was numerically superior, having roughly a quarter more troops than the British. Nevertheless, the Americans were still be beaten back by aggressive British and German flanking movements under the command of Gen. Fraser and the Baron Von Riedesel, respectively.  As darkness set in, the hostilities gave way to a lull in the battle, bringing an inconclusive end to the day. While the British succeeded in holding the field, they remained outnumbered by the Continental Army who, though battered, remained intact. The battle on the first day cost the Continental Army about 300 casualties, while the British suffered approximately 460. The resulting damage to crops and buildings was also quite considerable.

After the battle, the two armies proceeded to encamp within a few miles of each other, both awaiting reinforcements and supplies. While the British army remained static in number and experienced a diminishment of supplies, militiamen and supplies continued to pour into the American camp, including critical increases in ammunition, which had been severely depleted. During this lull in the fighting, the relationship between Arnold and Gates became even more strained. The situation came to a boiling point with a yelling match between the two men, which ultimately led General Gates to relieve Arnold of his command in favor of Lincoln, transferring Arnold to Washington’s army.

An artistic depiction of Fraser's death.

On October 7^th, 1777 hostilities were reignited as Burgoyne ordered another movement on the American left flank, this time with Grenadiers, the 24^th regiment of foot (British regulars capable of acting as both line troops and light infantry), and ten cannon. The men would march almost a mile into what was a wheat field overlooking Mill Brook, a good vantage point to be sure. Gates commanded Morgan’s riflemen, General Poor, and General Learner’s forces to meet the British in what would become the decisive victory of the two-and-a-half-week battle. The British Grenadiers gave ineffective fire to Gen. Poor’s men, before charging with fixed bayonets. As soon as the British were in range, Poor gave the order to fire with devastating effect, leading to a full rout by the Grenadiers. Meanwhile, Morgan’s rifles were engaged in heavy fighting with the British Canadians and Native Auxiliary forces, routing them before engaging Fraser’s main force of regulars. At a critical moment in the fighting, Fraser was shot from his horse by a long-range shot from one of Morgan’s riflemen with what would prove to be a mortal wound.

A contemporary depiction of Burgoyne's encampment following the second engagement at Saratoga.
General Fraser's funeral procession is depicted marching across the face of the second-to-rightmost hill.

Abraham Ten Broeck. The arrival of his New York troops
sealed the American victory at Saratoga.

The death of Gen. Fraser was followed by the arrival of a massive force of New York Militiamen led by Abraham Ten Broeck, forcing the British to fall back to their defensive lines en-masse. Ten Broeck, the Brigadier General leading the militia, was a lifelong friend of Philip Schuyle. Both had grown up in Albany close in age, and shared the privilege of being born into wealthy Dutch families in the New York Province. His arrival on this battlefield with a force of militiamen equal in size to that of the entire British expeditionary force must have truly solidified the realization of defeat in the British troops as they fled.

The famous "Unnamed Boot" monument at
Saratoga National Battlefield Park
honors Benedict Arnold's role in the battle.
His name is left off however, due to
his infamous later betrayal.

Burgoyne would ultimately lose over 400 men on this day and six of the ten artillery pieces sent with the Grenadiers. Following the break of the British line, Gen. Arnold left the camp and took command of Gen. Poor’s men who were in pursuit of the fleeing British. Arnold led an attack on one of the British redoubts, but when the attack stalled he quickly rode through the lines to take charge of Gen. Learned’s men in an attack on the second British redoubt. The capture of the second redoubt provided a gap in the British camp’s defenses, allowing the Americans to pour in and completely break the British force. Arnold himself, however was shot from his horse during this daring charge; the resulting injury to his leg, from both the shot and the force of the horse falling onto it, led to a long and painful recovery for the General.

Burgoyne’s remaining men retreated roughly ten miles to what is modern day Schuylerville, New York. He had lost approximately a thousand men during the two battles, and by October 13^th, he and his men were completely surrounded and outnumbered three to one. On October 17^th, he surrendered to Gates. This was not only an American victory in military terms, but also political. By defeating Burgoyne in open combat, Gates had shown the world that the American colonists had a real chance of winning the fight against the British on their own, bolstering the newly solidified French support for the Patriot’s cause in earnest. In addition to support in North America, the French would bring the war with Britain onto the global stage, forcing the British to divert attention away from the colonies.

The Surrender of General Burgoyne, by John Trumbull, 1821. Key figures include General Burgoyne presenting his sword to Horatio Gates in center, Daniel Morgan in white the left near the cannon, and Philip Schuyler in civilian clothing just behind the cannon wheel. A full key to the figures can be found here.

 The Saratoga battlefield is today preserved through the National Parks Service, and is available for visitation. Click here to learn more. We're nearly at the end of our regular tour season, so stay tuned for more articles over the late-Fall and Winter months. You can find other information on the Revolutionary War in Northern New York with our "Notes From the Northern Department" series. Check out our other series as well to learn about the Women of Schuyler Mansion, artifacts in our collections, slavery and the lives of the people enslaved at the house, ongoing restoration, and much more.

Paint in the Schuyler Mansion: Restoration

By Jessie Serfilippi

The current paint color in the Formal Parlor.

The Schuyler Mansion’s interior paint underwent a few different restorations between the state’s purchase in 1911 and the latest restoration in the early 1990s. In 1911, at the beginning of State ownership, the original paint was blow-torched off the walls. It was replaced with an inaccurate cream color. Only a few areas, mainly behind the window shutters, remained where later restorers were able to find samples from which they could determine some original paint colors.

The first attempt at uncovering the true colors of the Schuyler Mansion’s walls was in the late 1940s. Starting in 1948, restorers chipped away at the small remaining samples of paint and discovered seventeen layers of paint on the walls of the main hallway. They repeated the process in each room. Underneath all of these samples they discovered a variety of colors, such as gray-blue in the Formal Parlor and pea-green in the Master Bedroom. While the amount of research that went into backing these findings is credible—18^th century paints commonly used in the latter quarter of the century were consulted—the chipping technique the restorers used is not reliable.

According the restoration efforts undertaken by Mount Vernon as documented in an article for House Beautiful in the 1980s, there are several factors that can alter the original paint color’s appearance. Fading of the original pigment— eighteenth century paints in particular are known to fade to colors that differ vastly from the original— dirt, and aging linseed oil, commonly used as a finish, can add to the discoloration of the paint, rendering the chipping technique mostly useless.

In the 1990s, another effort to uncover the real colors of the Schuyler Mansion’s walls was undertaken. This time, there was more technology to aid the restorers in their work, but the same issue earlier restorers faced persisted—there was little paint left to sample. For this study, hand-held magnifiers, raking lights, and a binocular microscope were used to take samples that could provide a stratigraphic look at the paint. A stratigraphic view of the sample allows researchers a comprehensive look at the layers that have been painted onto the walls and is helpful in determining the color of a specific layer of paint.

It is in crevices formed by shutters like these
from the Master Bed Chamber that original paint samples
  may still be found, due to the blow torch's inability to reach them.

These samples were then mounted onto slides and studied under high magnification. Some were exposed to ultraviolet light for a few days so researchers could obtain a better view of the original oil paint. Once a paint color was determined from each sample, they were matched to tones on the Munsell scale. Yet even with the new technology in use, the findings of this study were limited by the lack of sizeable original paint samples. In some instances, original colors could not be definitively determined because the samples taken were too small to be conclusive.

So, what did the walls of the Schuyler Mansion look like when Philip Schuyler called it home? Even though the results from the paint analysis aren’t conclusive for every room, we can still make an educated guess. We’re going to focus on the main hallway, since it runs throughout the home and was a space that was visible to all who entered the house.

From the paint analysis, we know the walls were primed with oil to prevent the pigmented oil paint from seeping into the them. The window seats of the hallways were grained in dark brown. The wooden sidings of the hallway were found to be painted a shade of grey or green. But what if the color the restorers saw on the walls was the faded version of the original? What if the walls were once Prussian blue, as were Mount Vernon’s?

A window seat in the Main Entrance

Prussian blue is known to be vibrant when first applied, and later fades to a green or grey color—exactly the shade restorers found on the walls. It was an expensive color, and one a man as concerned with showing off wealth as Schuyler was would use in a space that all visitors to the home saw.

Even if another analysis with newer technology was performed, the issue of few surviving places with original paint still remains. There are still two other routes to uncovering what these walls truly looked like: a receipt from Schuyler turning up or a newfound account from a guest who goes into greater detail about the space. Until one of these three things happens, the true color of the Schuyler Mansion walls remains a mystery.

The current paint color in the hallway.

Prussian blue at Washington's Mount Vernon.

“Can Do All Sorts of Housework”: The Labor of Enslaved Women

by Ian Mumpton

In the last installment of  “The Servants” we looked at the disparity of records for the lives of women held in bondage by the Schuyler family compared to those of enslaved men. Despite women making up roughly half of the enslaved workforce, they are mentioned by name far less frequently than are the men, and the details of their specific lives and labor often went unrecorded except in the most general terms. Too often these difficulties place a mantle of silence over the experiences of a group of people already marginalized in the documentary record by virtue of their bound status. However, breaking that silence is far from impossible. Where direct documentation is lacking, evidence of general experiences gleaned from a variety of sources, when looked at in the context of the Schuyler family and household, can help paint a surprisingly detailed picture, especially of the sorts of labor performed by these women.

While slave holders might be less likely to record the specific work that they tasked women with on their properties, the skillsets that they sought in their slaves is telling. Slave merchants advertised their “wares” through a variety of printed sources, including handbills, broadsides, and advertisements in newspapers and gazettes. Marketing is nothing new; the advertisers specifically highlighted the skills and backgrounds most likely to appeal to prospective buyers.

The Adverts 250 Project hosts an amazing collection of 18^th century advertisements for all manner of things, from property and tools, to services and wanted ads. They have also amassed an excellent collection of slave advertisements from all across the colonies (which they publish on their Twitter feed). The specific form taken by slavery varied considerably across the colonies however. The experiences of someone in South Carolina could differ markedly from that of someone in Rhode Island, and both of these could differ from the experiences of someone in Albany, New York. Most of the people that the Schuylers enslaved over the years were purchased in Albany or New York City, so we can restrict our search to advertisements published in New York itself. For the purposes of this article, we will be sampling from advertisements published between April 13^th and June 25^th, 1767, just two years after the construction of the Schuylers home in Albany. Let’s dig in!

The most common descriptors applied to the women in these advertisements refer to their ability to do housework. On April 13^th, 1767, a Mr. H. Gaine advertised a 28 year old woman, “who is a tolerable cook, and can do all sorts of housework, fit for town or country.” The same advertisement was run a week later, presumably for the same woman and with the same description.[1] On April 16^th, the New York Journal ran an advertisement for a young woman 17 or 18 years old, described as able to do, “all sorts of House-Work.” This specific phrase, or near identical variations, abound in the sources. On April 16^th of the same year, the New York Gazette ran an ad for, “A Smart likely active Negro Girl, about 14 Years of Age, has had Small-Pox; is very handy, and sold for no Fault but Want of Employ.” On the 20^th, the New York Mercury listed a 25 year old woman, described in the exact same language, with the addendum that she could also cook. H. Gaine used the same sort of terminology to advertise an 18 year old woman and her four month old infant on June 22^nd, saying, “she is a good cook and can do all manner of work, belonging to a house.” These examples indicate that the ability to cook and familiarity with housework were considered two separate areas of accomplishment.

Many of these advertisements are vague to modern eyes, unfamiliar with the types of labor that would have been obvious to a prospective 18^th century buyer. For example, it is clear that an ability to do housework was a desirable skill, but what exactly did that entail? Another posting from April 13^th offers a few specific examples of essential household tasks: “A likely handy Negro Girl, between 13 and 14 Years of Age, that can make Beds, sweep, and do many other Things about the House…” 
In this case, housework refers to general housekeeping ability. Another specific example comes from a June 25^th advertisement, which describes a young woman of sixteen years as being “forward with the Needle, and handy in a family”.

Other advertisements emphasized skills specifically related to country life. On June 22^nd, Robert Lettice Hooper advertised the sale of an entire estate near Trenton in the New York Mercury. In addition to 200 acres of land, a dwelling house, and sundry other property, Hooper advertised that, “The Gentleman that purchases the plantation, may be supplied with three negro men and a wench, that understands all manner of farming.” While the vast majority of Philip Schuyler’s farmland was tended to by tenant farmers, the people enslaved by the family were sometimes tasked with clearing new fields and assisting with agricultural labor. It was also not uncommon to rent the labor of enslaved men and women to assist with such tasks. For example on February 5^th, 1762, Col. John Bradstreet, Philip’s friend and mentor, paid 68 pounds, 9 shillings on Philip’s behalf for, “ye Labour of a Negro man and Wench from ye 9^th of April to ye 29^th of Septembr [sic].”

One area of women’s work that is less often mentioned in the advertisements is personal attendance. Enslaved servants to wait upon one’s person and to assist in daily tasks were considered a clear status symbol and part of the comfortably refined lifestyle of a gentleman or lady. Philip Schuyler was attended by a man named Prince, while several references indicate that the women of the family were attended by female servants. For instance, there are references to an enslaved woman named Caty Betty (or possibly “Caty’s Betty”) who accompanied Catharine Schuyler on travels. In 1781, Alexander Hamilton negotiated the purchase of a woman specifically for his wife, Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton, likely as a personal attendant. Catharine and Elizabeth would have expected their attending women to aid them with their toilette, caring for children, and as travel companions and assistants.

From sources like these, a picture emerges in which women were assigned a wide variety of tasks associated with the smooth running of an 18^th century estate such as the Schuylers' Albany property. The beautiful furnishings of the house itself required constant upkeep. Seven of the eight chambers of the house featured flocked wallpaper, and the furniture throughout the home was upholstered in fine silks and wools. These ornate textiles are prone to collecting dust, and needed special attention. The carpets- five rooms of which were purchased for the equivalent price of 9,000 loaves of bread- needed to be carefully swept to avoid damage from dirt or gravel being ground into the pile. At times these same women would be expected to assist Catharine and her daughters as personal attendants.

The Schuyler’s home in Albany was more than just an elegant mansion however. The working courtyard attached to the West face of the house, hidden from the view of guests approaching from the river, was the scene for other labor associated with the house, labor which was often assigned to enslaved women. The working courtyard featured a brick kitchen structure where all of the meals would have been prepared. The women assigned to the kitchen would not only have been responsible for food preparation, but for the laborious work of cleaning dishes and laundry, which required hauling large amounts of water, and for the odiously odoriferous task of rendering animal fats to make tallow for soap and candles. While it is unclear to what degree Philip rented out the agricultural labor of enslaved women, livestock in the back courtyard were likely tended to by both men and women, but may have also been assigned to the children of the women working in the courtyard.

Unfortunately, due to the limited number of sources specifically referencing the experiences of the women held in slavery at the site, most of our understandings of their lives comes through extrapolation and generalization, however these generalizations hold true in the wider Albany community, and there is little evidence to suggest any meaningful divergence from the norm at the Schuylers’ home. Work is only one aspect of a person’s life however, and while it is often the first question that we ask in regards to an enslaved person, other important questions can help us uncover even more about the lives of these women. One of our next projects on “The Servants”, will be to try to piece together the familial relationships of the men, women, and children held in bondage by Philip Schuyler. Check back soon! In the meantime, check some of the other series on our blog with the links at the top of the page, and be sure to check us out on Twitter @SchuylerMansion. You can follow the Adverts250 projects on slavery @SlaveAdverts250

---

[1] Gaine posted another ad the week after, with the same terminology, however in this third iteration he paid for an eye-catching floral border to the ad and larger, italicized, text. Interestingly, he lists the woman in question as being only twenty years old. This raises questions- Was this a different woman than was advertised previously, or was Gaine trying to make his “wares” more appealing by listing her as younger than she was?

Paint in the Schuyler Mansion: 18th Century Paint

By Jessie Serfilippi

A copy of Schuyler's paint receipt

Painting the interior of a house in the 18^th century greatly differed from modern paint methods. In the 18^th century, paint had to be mixed specifically for each job and used quickly so it wouldn’t develop a skim on top. Paint also came in powdered form, allowing it to be mixed at the convenience of the user. Surprisingly, what these powders were made of not only determined the cost of the paint, but also made certain paint colors into status symbols. Because of this, the wealthy social elite of the colonial era used paint to further display their wealth. As a man of great wealth, Philip Schuyler may have sought to show off his status through paint colors, too.

One of the few paint-related receipts from the early days of the Schuyler Mansion details the colors, form, quantity, and prices for a variety of paints Schuyler purchased. According to this receipt, he bought four bags of white paint “Ground in Oil,” two bags of “Brown paint Ground in oil,” 20 bags of “Umber” paint, two bags of lamp black paint, and three ounces of Prussian Blue. Schuyler also purchased 20 gallons of oil with his paint, indicating that his paint was made from an oil base. Oil paint was made from three main ingredients—linseed oil, the ground-up pigment, and turpentine. 

Out of the four paints purchased, the easiest pigment to make was brown. This was made using whichever minerals were available locally. Most commonly, dirt was used to achieve what was sometimes referred to as Spanish Brown. This paint was commonly used as a primer, so its exact color—which varied widely, from red, to orange, to brown—didn’t matter.

White paint, according to Colonial Williamsburg’s Making History, was not exactly white. It was rather a creamy off-white that sometimes faded to khaki over time. This is because white paint is made from either chalk or lime, which would be available to colonials in nearby quarries. Because the pigment is created through these minerals, a pure white color could only be achieved through white washing. Whether or not Schuyler white-washed after painting anything white is currently unknown.

Lamp black paint, which Schuyler purchased two bags of, was created with either soot from oil lamps or burnt vegetable oil mixed with the base, which was oil in this case. These common resources would make is fairly cheap to produce, much like the brown paint.

Schuyler also purchased umber paint. This is a shade of brown named for the clay material from which it’s derived. The clay is typically mined in Italy or Cyprus, meaning the import value alone likely caused it to be more expensive than the other shade of brown.

The most expensive paint color of all was Prussian blue, of which Schuyler purchased only three ounces. Those three ounces cost 1 pound, 1 shilling, while two bags of brown paint cost him one pound, twelve pence. Prussian blue paint was the first artificially manufactured paint. It was discovered through experimentation with the oxidation of iron by a German man named Diesbach. Not only did it become popular in the centuries following its discovery, but it was also expensive, making it a status symbol. George Washington put it in his home. Did Philip Schuyler, as well? Discover the answer in the next blog post in this series, which will focus on restoring the paint in the Schuyler Mansion!

Prussian Blue at George Washington's Mount Vernon.

Note: A previous version of this article included information on milk paint which has since been removed after further research revealed only questionable historical evidence for the existence of milk paint.

The Many Graves of Philip Schuyler

by Jessie Serfilippi

Philip Schuyler's grave
 in Albany Rural Cemetery.

There are many questions and myths surrounding the journey Philip Schuyler’s body took after his death in 1804. Some people believe there was a burial vault on Schuyler property that both he and Catharine were interred in. Others believe he was placed in the Van Rensselaer vault upon his death.

In reality, there was no Schuyler vault, and the Van Rensselaer vault was not Schuyler’s first resting place. This begs the question: where did he go?

When Philip Schuyler died at the Schuyler Mansion on November 18, 1804, he was eulogized throughout Albany and beyond. One newspaper laments: “At Albany, on Sunday evening, at 6 o’clock, P.M. after a lingering illness, Gen. PHILIP SCHUYLER, in the 73^rd year of age,­­-- As an officer of Superior merit, a most valuable citizen, and enlightened and able statesman, his loss is deeply regretted.” The Boston Gazette reports his death “At Albany, on 18^th inft. Gen. PHILIP SCHUYLER, aged 73.” While both of these newspapers cite him as being 73 at the time of his death, he was actually days shy of his 71^st birthday. An Albany newspaper still incorrectly cites him as being 71, but spends half a column extolling him:

Albany, November 22, 1804.

IT is with deep regret that we announce the death of the Hon. MAJOR GENERAL PHILIP SCHUYLER, on Sunday evening last, in the 71^st year of his age… A man eminent for his useful labours, in the military and civil affairs of our country. Distinguished by strength and intellect, extensive knowledge, soundness and purity of moral and political principles. He was an active, not a visionary patriot. He was wise in divising [sic], enterprising and persevering in execution of plans of great and public utility. Too intelligent to found his notions of political or civil government, upon the perfectibility of man, or upon any other views of the human character, than those derived from the experience of ages: And too honest to tell the people, that their liberties could be preserved in any other way, than by the wholesome restraints of a constitution and laws, energetic, yet free.

In private life, he was dignified but courteous; in his manners, hospitable; a pleasing and instructive companion; ardent and sincere in his friendships; affectionate in his domestic relations, and just in his dealings.

                                     The death of such a man is truly a subject of private and public sorrow.

On Wednesday his remains were entered, with military honors, in the family vault of the Hon. ABRAHAM TEN BROECK.

It is from this obituary that we learn two important facts about Schuyler’s death: he received military honors at his funeral and he was buried in the Ten Broeck family vault.

The military honors Philip Schuyler received upon his death were not unlike what deceased veterans receive today. Schuyler’s casket was draped with the American flag, then decorated with fifteen stars instead of today’s fifty. He also would have been honored with three volleys over his gravesite. This tradition originates from a signal used during ceasefire in battle to let the opposing army know all the dead have been removed from the field and the fighting may continue. It likely serves as a sign of respect for deceased veterans both now and during Schuyler’s time.

After the funeral, Schuyler’s body was placed in Abraham Ten Broeck’s vault, which sat some distance behind the Ten Broeck mansion on the north side of Albany. Schuyler was the first to be interred there. He was followed by Abraham himself in 1810, the Ten Broeck’s daughter, Margaret, in 1812, and Abraham’s wife, Elizabeth, in 1813.

While Schuyler’s body rested there peacefully for some years, that changed in the late 1830s. According to Theodore H. Fossieck, who writes twice about the vault and journey the bodies inside of it took for the Albany County Historical Association’s newsletters in August and September of 1989, the Ten Broeck’s vault fell into disrepair and collapsed in 1836.

Preceding the collapse of the vault was its journey through numerous different owners. The plot the vault sat on was sold three times between Elizabeth Ten Broeck’s death in 1813 and 1831. In addition to this, in the 1830s the City of Albany proposed the creation of three new streets in the area surrounding Ten Broeck’s former grounds, including the vault. The construction of these streets is what caused the grounds around the vault to erode, leading to its collapse in 1836.         

It is between 1839 and the late 1860s that the location of Schuyler’s body becomes somewhat of a mystery. The bodies in the Ten Broeck vault were moved by 1839, but the grounds of Albany Rural Cemetery, Schuyler’s current resting place, were not purchased until 1844. What lends further credence to the theory that Schuyler was not buried in Albany Rural until at least the late 1860s is that no General Schuyler grave site is mentioned in the first walking tour of the cemetery, which was published in 1858. It is not until 1871, in another walking tour of the cemetery, that Schuyler’s grave site is mentioned. So where was his body for about fifteen to twenty years?

A letter from a Schuyler descendant to the Albany Rural Cemetery board of trustees provides a clue. In yet another walking tour of the cemetery published in 1893, the letter, written in 1869, from this descendant, Mrs. W. Starr Miller, is included. In it she refers to “the funeral of the late Patron Van Rensselaer.” The funeral she writes about is likely that of Stephen Van Rensselaer IV, sometimes known as the “young Patroon” or “last Patroon,” who died in 1868, one year before the letter is written.

Letter from Mrs. W. Starr Miller as published
 in 1893 walking tour of the cemetery.

The Van Rensselaer Manor Home.

 

In the letter she laments finding “the old family vault broken up,” and relays surprise when she discovered that its “contents had all been removed.” Among those remains said to be moved were “Gen. Schuyler, his wife and son, John Bradstreet Schuyler [who] had been placed, and interred in the Van Rensselaer lot […] without note or mark as to the spot, save the diagram of the lot [in Albany Rural]!”

The old family vault she refers to is likely the Van Rensselaer family vault, which sat on the Van Rensselaer Manor property in Albany. When the property was later surrounded by railroads the family abandoned it, and it was eventually dismantled in the early 1890s. But even as early as 1868—at the time of Stephen Van Rensselaer IV’s funeral—the vault which held the remains of the family had crumbled beyond repair.

It is with the help of this letter that the journey Schuyler’s body took after his death becomes slightly clearer. It seems as if, after his removal from the Ten Broeck vault in the late 1830s, he was placed in the Van Rensselaer family vault. He remained there until it was pillaged, and was then removed to Albany Rural Cemetery at some point before 1868, when Mrs. Starr Miller was present for Stephen Van Rensselaer IV’s funeral, and was placed in the Van Rensselaer plot at the cemetery with no headstone to mark his resting place. While so far the exact year when this transfer took place cannot be determined, it was at some point between 1858—when the walking tour that does not include him is published— and 1868.

Monument to Philip Schuyler as pictured
in 1893 walking tour of cemetery.

In 1870 Mrs. Starr Miller was granted permission by the Albany Rural Cemetery board of trustees to move Schuyler’s body to its current resting place within those grounds. She then commissioned the monument which still marks his grave site.

Where Catharine Van Rensselaer Schuyler’s body is remains somewhat of a mystery. If she actually was in the Van Rensselaer vault with her husband at the time of his removal then it is likely that she—and her son, Johnny Bradstreet, who was said to be buried there, as well—is still in the Van Rensselaer plot in Albany Rural, where her daughter, Margaret “Peggy” Schuyler Van Rensselaer, her husband, and his second wife, are buried. Also buried there is Abraham Ten Broeck, whose grave is marked not by a headstone, but by a flag holder that declares him a veteran of the Revolutionary War.

Philip Schuyler’s body went on quite the journey after his death in 1804, leading him from the Ten Broeck vault, then to the Van Rensselaer vault, and finally to Albany Rural Cemetery. Hopefully this is his final destination!

Back Hall

In the back hall you will find the rear entrance of the home which would have led into the working courtyard of the estate. From maps and descriptions, we know that this courtyard included two twenty foot by twenty foot wing buildings - a public office and a nursery; likely for plants rather than children - the kitchens, and the "necessary" (outhouse). Other buildings were interconnected with these by a covered walkway or "shed" which extended from this back entrance, but 19th-century changes to the property left modern historians with little evidence of where precisely these buildings may have been during the Schuyler's residence. They included a "lumber loft", "fowl yard" (chicken houses), a "small room to warm in", a gardening shed for tools and seeds, an ice house, and a coach house. Reference to a room with an "ash hole" beneath may imply that a furnace for smithing was also available, or that this building was intended for soaking wood ashes to make lye, needed in the making of soaps.

A scaled portion of a 1790s map of Albany
shows less than half of Philip's estate,
including a 2 acre enclosed yard where
the labor for the house was done by
enslaved servants and laborers.

This courtyard would have been the work space for many of the people enslaved by the Schuylers. This grueling labor involved long days working as carters, cart-wrights, laundresses, cooks, servants, smiths, and carpenters. Census records show between 8 and 13 enslaved laborers in residence at the property at any given time, and references in family letters imply that they did the majority of the skilled and semi-skilled labor that kept this household running. This back hall space was their entrance to the home.Shipping barrels are on display to demonstrate the types of goods the family was importing from Europe and the other colonies. [Read about the movement of goods by enslaved laborers Lisbon, Dick, and Bob]

The most famous feature of the back hall is the noticeable gouge in the railing of the staircase, purportedly the result of a historically documented attack on the house - when a force of Loyalist militia and British soldiers attempted to kidnap Philip Schuyler from his home in August 1781. While Philip and the family were unharmed, several defenders were wounded during the fighting and two of Philip's "life guards" (body guards) were taken prisoner. The gouge in the Bannister became infamous through a later family legend attached to this Loyalist attack which attributes the mark to a tomahawk. The story claims that the Schuyler's infant daughter Caty was left downstairs during the attack, and a throwing ax was thrown at 3rd daughter Margaret "Peggy" Schuyler when she went to retrieve her baby sister. Primary sources from both Philip Schuyler and the Loyalist band led by Captain Jans Waltermeyer however, make this story unlikely, and the true origins of the mark remain a mystery.

A legend, first told in a memoir of youngest daughter Catharine Schuyler Cochran Malcolm (Caty) in the 1830s, spread like wildfire during the 19th-Century as an explanation for a cut discovered in the banister of the Schuyler's former home. There are no contemporary mentions of the mark in the railing, or the story that spawned from it, during the Schuyler's residence (c.1765-1804). The earliest versions of the story relate it to the Loyalist kidnapping attempt in 1781 (see the British uniforms in the background of far left) whereas later versions turn the story into an Indian raid, which never occurred on the property.

With the Front Entrance at Your Back:

Going backwards will bring you to the Central Hall

Left will bring you to the Library

Right will bring you to the Dining Chamber

The staircase will bring you upstairs into the Salon

Other Rooms:

Formal Parlor

Family Parlor

Blue Chamber (Upstairs)

Yellow Chamber (Upstairs)

Green Chamber (Upstairs)

Green Bed Chamber

Schuyler describes parterre gardens in the French style to the
south of the house (image from OldHouseOnline). These gardens
would have provided a view to the guests of the Formal Parlor
and Green Bedchamber, as well as a recreational area where
guests could take strolls and have lively conversations in the
beauty of nature. Burgoyne described such walks during his stay.

This room was considered the best bedchamber of the house due to the elegant woodwork and furnishings, the sunlight it receives throughout the day, and the views - the rolling pastures which led to the Hudson River to the east, and the 200ft by 200ft formal parterre gardens which would have lain to the south. This room was used by Philip and Catharine but could also be given over to their most esteemed guests, inlcuding Benjamin Franklin, John Jay, the Marquis de Chastellux, and British General John Burgoyne.

British General John Burgoyne
by Joshua Reynolds. Virtually
unknown for his military career
in England, John Burgoyne
was a famous poet and playwright
  before and after fighting
in the American Revolution.

Burgoyne's stay is particularly intriguing and well documented, as he was taken as "Prisoner Guest" after his surrender to General Horatio Gates at Saratoga. Much of the battle of Saratoga took place on Schuyler's industrial estate in Bemis Heights (Schuylerville) by his design, and since many of his buildings were burned as part of Burgoyne's attack, Schuyler remained at that property while Burgoyne, along with an entourage of other prisoners, French and Continental officers, aides-de-camp, and other personnel, were escorted to the Albany home and placed under Catharine's care. Despite their status as prisoners, Catharine treated Burgoyne and the other captured officers as esteemed guests, surrendered the nicest rooms in the house to them, fed them multiple course meals, and treated them with respect and dignity. This "gentlemanly" treatment was an expectation of warfare of the period, and benefited Schuyler and wealthy officers like him, who hoped to be treated the same should they be captured by the British. It also served to remind people of Philip's insturmental role in the 1777 campaign, in which he led the Northern Army prior to Gates being given command by teh Continental Congress in August.The chaos described on Catharine's behalf - as Continental (American) troops stationed in the farmland uprooted crops, stole fruits and vegetables, ate the laying hens, and milked the dairy cows, making it difficult for her to supply the visitor's inside - did not seem to phase Burgoyne, who later described the stay as pleasant and purportedly sent a pair of shoe-buckles back to 3rd daughter Peggy, as thanks for the friendship extended to him during his stay (the buckles in question are on display in the Visitor's Center).

Philip Schuyler's house in Bemis Heights (Schuylerville), as rebuilt by Schuyler after the Battle of Saratoga in 1777. The house still stands and is open to the public seasonally as part of the Saratoga National Battlefield Park operated by the National Park Service. Philip spent the fall of 1777 rebuilding while Burgoyne and co. were sent to Schuyler's Albany home.

Philip and Catharine would also invite guests to share more intimate meals with them in this room.

Philip’s personal attendant, an enslaved man named Prince, would have assisted Philip with his morning and evening toilette, pouring hot water into the wash basin, combing and powdering Philip’s hair (a lengthy process in itself), and assisting him with his garments. Catharine would have had a similar attendant, perhaps a woman referred to as "CatyBetty" (Caty's Betty) in letters and receipts.

The medicine chest on the floor is representative of Schuyler’s poor health, for which he was regularly treated by Dr. Samuel Stringer. Stringer’s treatments included bleeding and purging, the use of “Peruvian Bark”, an early form of quinine for fevers, opium as a pain killer, and an early oxygen machine for Philip’s use. [Read about Dr. Stringer in the Revolution.]

As You Exit:

You will pass through the Salon

Straight ahead you will find the Yellow Chamber

Diagonal from this room is the Blue Chamber

Left will bring you downstairs to the Back Hall

Other Rooms:

Library (Downstairs)

Dining Chamber (Downstairs)

Central Hall (Downstairs)

Formal Parlor (Downstairs)

Family Parlor (Downstairs)