The short answer is 1624. Here's the long answer ... Native Americans inhabited the area long before Europeans arrived. Here's a short article about the Lenape Indians. In 1524, the first European to the area was Giovanni da Verrazzano, an Italian sailing for the French. The French never colonized the area. In 1609, Henry Hudson, an Englishman sailing for the Dutch East India Company, rediscovered it. (Like other explorers, Hudson was actually looking for a shortcut to Asia.) In 1626, the Dutch purchased the island of Manhattan from the Indians, famously, for a few dollars worth of beads and ribbons. This became the colony of New Amsterdam. Here is more information about the founding of the Middle Colonies and New Amsterdam. New Amsterdam separated the English colonies of New England from the other English colonies in the south. Clashes between the Dutch and the English were inevitable. England's Charles II claimed all the Dutch land, and in 1664 he gave it to his brother, the Duke of York. The Dutch weren't prepared to fight the English, so in 1664, New Amsterdam became New York.

Close, but no. The Dutch bought the island of Manhattan in 1624. The City of Niewe Amsterdam was founded in 1625. That is the date that appears on the Seal of the City of New York.

I know that the answer is...It was founded in 1664, I have done research and it is also in social studies and history books!

You mean, Peter Minuit. He arrived in New Amsterdam and instructed that all of Manhattan be bought from the Indians. As Legend has it, he paid only 24 dollars for 22-acres of land which would have cost so much more in modern money. It was the greatest real-estate bargains in history.

1664

• The Dutch, including Peter Minuit (who bought the Manhattan Islands from the Indians), started it all. He called it New Netherlands at first, expanding it by conquering New Sweden, which, was set up about 15 years earlier along the Delaware River. The next thing I remember was when King Charles II of England (don't know where that came from?!) gave New Netherland to his brother, the Duke of York; renaming the colony, New York.

• The first answer is incorrect. New York was peopled by the Native American Indians long before the Vikings explored it and long before the Dutch colonists rediscovered and settled it. When Peter Minuit bought it, New York was not yet founded for the charter for New Amsterdam (as New York City under the Dutch was called) was not granted until 1624 or almost two years after Peter Minuit purchased it from the Indians. New York was "founded" as a city in 1624 because the Dutch 1) needed a trading outpost for beaver pelts; and 2) the city had a great and strategically located port. The British took New Amsterdam almost by force in 1664 and renamed it New York City after the brother of the King of England, the Duke of York. * New York was founded by the Dutch in 1624. The Dutch wanted to expand their land development and trade in order to compete with England, France, and Spain.

• Why? To make money... The Dutch (or Nederlanders, or Walloons, or whatever...) established "New Amsterdam" (as "New York" was originally known) as a trading post and commercial colony. It was no nation, but rather a private corporation, the Dutch West Indies Company, that wanted to set up colonies as, you might say, franchises: people who wanted to try a new life, could go to one of their pre-established colonies, and give it a shot. They would then support industries in which the DWIC was engaged. The business in New Amsterdam was beaver pelts. This was a very popular material in Europe, particularly for hats (beaver is somewhat waterproof) and the Americas had a huge supply. Trappers would come down the Hudson and other rivers with beaver pelts, and trade them for goods. The DWIC would take their cut, and all would be happy. Problem was, the beaver trade was not lucrative enough to cover the cost of running and protecting a distant colony. So, when the British threatened to take New Amsterdam by force, the Dutch simply gave it up. As to why the British wanted it, it had a good port, and the Dutch were in the way of their consolidating the region under their control.

• It was mainly settled as a port to bring in and ship goods. Mainly for trappers and traders.

• New York actually started out it's life as New Netherlands and was founded by the Dutch before 1664. Well the English king, King Charles II did not like the Dutch trading with the English colonies so they sent out warships to fight the Dutch. The Dutch saw how many English warships there was and decided to give it up without a fight in August of 1664. They changed the name from New Netherlands to New York named after the kings brother the Duke of York.

Actually, the mayor of New Amsterdam sent a call out for arms against English. However, since he was largely unliked by the colonists there no one bothered with it. They were no where near about to fight (I know this because for 1; I've got the book sitting right next to me and 2; we're going over this time period in my history class.)

The New York Times never declared that God is dead. With such headers it was reporting on the theological faction from the sixties briefly discussed below.

The 1960s brought radical thinking about God to the forefront. Academics in universities and seminaries were pushing the envelope to the next stage. Judeo-Christian influence had dispelled and dispersed the ancient pantheons of Pagan gods and they now wondered if we needed any god at all.

Gabriel Vahanian, a professor of theology at Syracuse University, wrote in The Death of God (1961) that the "essentially mythological world view of Christianity has been succeeded by a scientific view of reality". This group of radical theologians were called the "God is Dead" theologians by the popular press. As one might expect the public was outraged at the thought their religious leaders may not believe in God.

An article published on April 8, 1966 in Time magazine entitled, "Is God Dead?", was written by John T. Elson the religion editor for Time magazine. He had been working on the article for months, examining the radical new ways of thinking about God. It became one of the most famous Time covers. The article covered the basic ideas circulating at the time which discussed the age old conflict between religious and secular ideas in Western culture. The article introduced William Hamilton, a tenured professor at a divinity school, as the leader of a new school of religious thinking. Hamilton and his associates believed the concept of "God" had run its course, civilization now operated on secular principles and churches should help people to learn to care for each other unconditionally with no illusions of going to "heaven" when they die. Hamilton received death threats when the article was published. He died on February 28, 2012 at the age of 87.

During that time, in 1966, John Cogley, the religious news editor at the New York Times, wrote an article about the "God is Dead" controversy/phenomenon as did many other writers of that period. Unfortunately the article cannot be found at this time. See link provided below.