The Ostrander Family TRADITIONAL History
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE OSTRANDER FAMILY TRADITIONAL HISTORY
THE ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF THE
TRADITIONAL ORAL RECORD OF THE
1ST AND 2ND GENERATIONS OF THE PIETERSEN/OSTRANDER
FAMILY OF COLONIAL AMERICA
A Review and Analysis of the History of the Hypothetical
First Family Branch Featured in the OFA BIG BOOK
Prepared by Kent DeGeer, CMC (OFA Member #704) on behalf of the Ostrander Family Association Research Committee
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Kent De Geer is a professionally accredited Certified Management Consultant (CMC). Now retired he spends a fair amount of his free time working on his family genealogy. His Ostrander ancestry places him in the line of Johannes(3) Ostrander [Pieter(2) Pietersen, Pieter(1) Carstensen] and he is a new member of the Ostrander Family Association (OFA) having joined the OFA in 2007. More recently he accepted an invitation to serve on the OFA’s Genealogy Research Committee.
November 2, 2008 (latest update) Table of Contents
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY …...... i-iii
RESEARCH REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION, PURPOSE and OFA Research (October 2007 – July 2008) … 1-2 PRE 1993 FINDINGS Early Ostrander Descendant-Researchers …………………………………… 3 Early Versions of the Ostrander Family History ……………………………. 3 Nathaniel Jacob Ostrander …………………………………………………… 5 Translations & Transcriptions of De Bonte Koe’s 1660 Passenger List ….. 7 Preliminary Summary ………………………………………………………. 11 THE ORIGINAL HYPOTHESIS ………………………………………………… 12 The Origin of the Names of the Wife and the Three Children ……………… 13 Dutch Naming Patterns and Baptismal Customs ……………………………. 14
THE INFORMATION GAP ...... 16
BRIEF HISTORY OF NEW NETHERLAND AND COLONIAL ULSTER COUNTY, NY ………17 Old Dutch Church of Kingston …………………………………………...... 18 Ulster County under Dutch Rule ……………………………………………. 19 Ulster County under Dutch Rule ……………………………………………. 22 The Other Pieter Pietersen (unconnected) ………………………………….. 23 Kingston of 1670 ……………………………………………………………. 24
Nathaniel Jacob Ostrander’s Manuscript, Notes and Correspondence ……………. 25 The Mysterious Geertje or Geestje Pieters[en] …………………………………… 26
AMSTERDAM RESEARCH 1993 ………………………………………………………. 27 THE 2ND HYPOTHESIS (1993) ………………………………………………………… 28 THE OSTRANDER FAMILY LEGEND …………………………………………………. 28 The Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) ………………………………………….. 29 AMSTERDAM RESEARCH (1997 – 2008) ……………………………………………. 29 The Family of Pieter Pieterss, the furrier of Amsterdam (1660) …………………… 31 Pieter(2) Pietersen of Amsterdam and Hurley, Ulster County, New York …………... 32
GENERAL SUMMARY …………………………………………………………………… 34 THE TRADITIONAL RENDITION OF THE 1ST AND 2ND GENERATIONS OF THE PIETERSEN/ OSTRANDER FAMILY FROM THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURIES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The traditional account of the Ostrander family history likely began in the 19 th century, perhaps earlier, and was completed by the early 20th century. It was predicated on a genealogical presumption that the Pieter Pietersen of Amsterdam who married Rebecca Traphagen in Kingston in 1679 was the son of Pieter Pietersen the cadet from Amsterdam who was listed as a passenger on the Dutch ship De Bonte Koe in 1660 with his wife and three children of 8, 4 and 2 years.
Some early Ostrander descendant-researchers believed the name of the cadet’s wife was Tryntje, others thought it was Catrina. Their children were purported to be Pieter Jr. (presumably the eldest child), Tryntje(2) and either Geestje(2) or Geertje(2) (Gertrude). A review of five Ostrander family biographies/histories and Nathaniel Jacob Ostrander’s manuscript, notes and correspondence revealed that most of the genealogical and historical claims did not include source citations, so the origin of some key information is unknown. For example, no explanation was provided to indicate how they determined the cadet’s wife was named Tryntje or Catrina and the third child was a daughter named Geertje of Geestje, who was said to have married a Jan Pier.
A scrutiny of the records of the Old Dutch Church of Kingston, NY confirmed that the Pieter Pietersen who married Rebecca Traphagen and the Tryntje Pieters who married Hendrick Albertse[n] Ploeg were siblings, and this kinship has long been accepted as indisputable. The same records suggest that Tryntje was likely the older of the two (perhaps by a year or two), but provide no evidence of the existence of a Jan Pier, a marriage between a Geertje Pieters (or Geestje Pieters) and a Jan Pier, or the existence of the family and/or children of the alleged marriage (said to have produced as many as ten children, by an unknown and unconfirmed source among Nathaniel’s papers).
According to Nathaniel’s material, Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet supposedly married a woman named Tryntje or Catrina, and they were probably the parents of the three children named above. Nathaniel’s historical account of the events between the arrival of De Bonte Koe in 1660 and the church record of the 1679 marriage of Pieter Pietersen and Rebecca Traphagen in Kingston almost two decades later follows the family’s traditional oral record that the
family presumably settled in Kingston (but he provided no documented record of their arrival or existence in the Dutch settlement there or in Hurley); parents were presumably killed during the Second Esopus War (there was no record cited to substantiate their tragic death and none exists); and children somehow managed to survive (he made no mention of a documented record of three orphaned Pieters[en] children in either Kingston or Hurley and none exists). ii The OFA Big Book acknowledges the absence of any substantiated evidence to support the original hypothesis. This is confirmed in a letter from Emmett Ostrander to a researcher in Holland, dated August 11, 1999, in which he indicated:
There is no genealogical or historical proof of our traditional story of Pieter Pietersen and his wife and their three children. It is simply an oral account that was passed down from generation to generation over the past one hundred years, but with no evidence.
It seems that the oral record went unchallenged for a century or more. In 1993, the OFA engaged a Holland based researcher to confirm the alleged kinship between the cadet of 1660 and the groom of 1679 and specifically to seek the:
record of a Pieter Pietersen who married a woman named Tryntje about 1651; and records of three children of this marriage who were baptized Pieter, Tryntje and Geestje.
This resulted in the recovery of two records in Amsterdam in 1993 (the announcement of banns and a baptism of a son of the marriage). Although the researcher failed to recover the baptismal records for daughters named Tryntje and Geestje, he presumed that the Pieter Pieterss of Amsterdam who married a Trÿntie vande Lande in November 1652 and had a son Pieter, bpt. 11 May 1653 was the same person as the Dutch cadet listed with his family as passengers on De Bonte Koe eight years later.
When the results became public, a Traphagen descendant-researcher Chris Brooks and an Ostrander descendant-researcher Kurt Brown both recognized that the information from the 1993 research was limited and inconclusive. As a result, two additional forays were made into the records of the Amsterdam Archives in 1997 and 1998 in an attempt to substantiate the new theory. Their combined research showed that the Pieter Pieterss of Amsterdam who married Trÿntie vande Lande in November 1652 was the
son Pieter of Pieter Henrixsz and Maritje Martes, bpt. 20th April 1625, in the New Church in Amsterdam - (Amsterdam Doopregisters – Bron 40, pg. 300); widower of Luytje Jans van Stapel, who he had married 15 May 1650 when he was a 25 year old bontwerker (furrier) in Amsterdam; father of a daughter Lijntie, bpt. 30 April 1651 in Amsterdam (from his first marriage); 27 year old groom of Trÿntie vande Lande, aged 35, from Amsterdam when they married in November 1652; and father of a son Pieter, bpt. 11 May 1653 in Amsterdam (of his second marriage).
Four separate searches of the Amsterdam Archives conducted in 1993, 1997, 1998 and 2007/08 failed to recover a baptism record of any other children of the marriage of Pieter Pieterss, the furrier and Tryntje van de Lande. The resulting evidence verified that there were two distinctly different families in Amsterdam in mid-April 1660:
One headed by a 35 year old furrier named Pieter Pieters[en], a member of Amsterdam’s burgher class who had a 42 year old wife (Tryntej van de Lande), a 9-year old daughter Lijntie, and a 6-year old son Pieter Jr.; and iii The other headed by the Dutch cadet Pieter Pietersen (of unknown age) from Amsterdam who had an unnamed wife of unknown age and three unnamed children of unknown gender, 8, 4 and 2 years of age.
Since the records showed that the ages of the furrier’s two children did not match the ages of any of the cadet’s three children reported as passengers on De Bonte Koe, Mr. Brooks followed standard genealogical research practices and cast a much wider net to seek records of all children baptized Pieter, Tryntje and Geestje between 1650 and 1660, whose father’s first name was Pieter. This produced a large list as the names Pieter and Tryntje were very common in Holland, while Geestje was not. Through what was likely a tedious process of elimination, the list was reduced to fathers named Pieter who baptized both a son Pieter and a daughter Tryntje as these were the only names of siblings confirmed as brother (Pieter(2) Pietersen) and sister (Tryntje(2) Pieters) in the records of the Kingston church.
The final result was the discovery of a marriage between Pieter Carstensen, widower of Tryntje Thyssen and Geesje Jans in Amsterdam in 1654 and the baptism of their only son Pieter Pietersen in the Amsterdam Lutheran Church (3rd July 1657). A baptism of a daughter Tryntje of Pieter Carstensen was found in the records of the same church (29th December 1654), by Mr. Brooks but he noted that the mother’s name was not listed. However, other records in the Amsterdam Archives as well as the Old Dutch Church of Kingston confirmed that Pieter Carstensen and Geesje Jans had a daughter Tryntje(2), she was the older sister of our ancestor and family progenitor Pieter(2) Pietersen. Tryntje(2) was conceivably named after her father’s deceased first wife.
A detailed report entitled “THE VERIFIED ACCOUNT OF THE FIRST TWO GENERATIONS OF THE OSTRANDER FAMILY IN AMERICA” showing the recently corroborated genealogy is available to the membership on the OFA website at: www.ostrander.org
Summary and Conclusions
The works of the early descendant-researchers reflected a knowledge of and pride in the rich Dutch heritage of the Ostrander family of colonial New York. They appear to have been well educated and dedicated in their efforts to establish a genealogical connection between their confirmed ancestor Pieter(2) Pietersen of Amsterdam and Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet from Amsterdam who was listed as a passenger on De Bonte Koe in 1660.
Unfortunately they were unable to find any other record of the cadet after mid-June 1660. As a result, the entire documented existence of the cadet and his family is limited to a three month ocean voyage. Information recovered in the past ten years shows that the brief entry from the log of De Bonte Koe listing the cadet Pieter Pietersen with an unnamed wife and three unnamed children of unknown gender was a false lead.
On a positive note, the Ostrander surname that originated in Ulster County, NY at the start of the 18th century is unique to the descendants of Pieter(2) Pietersen and Rebecca Traphagen. The evidence clearly shows that Pieter(2) Pietersen was the only son of Pieter Carstensen and Geesje Jans and was the only male member of this line to emigrate from Holland to New Netherland (colonial New York) and his migration has been precisely traced from his baptism in Amsterdam iv to his marriage in Kingston, NY. As a result, Pieter(2) Pietersen and Rebecca Traphagen are the progenitors of the Ostrander family in colonial New York, and the verified identity of Pieter(2)’s parents has no significant impact on the thousands of Ostrander descendants in the United States and Canada, unless they are interested in tracing their ancestry further back in Europe. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE TRADITIONAL ORAL ACCOUNT OF THE OSTRANDER FAMILY’ s 1 ST AND 2 ND GENERATIONS
INTRODUCTION
I began my Ostrander research in October 2007 and soon learned from a handful of Ostrander descendants that there were two conflicting versions of the first two generations of the Ostrander family. They indicated that the account presented in the OFA Big Book was incorrect and referred me to a genealogy by Chris Brooks published in the July 1999 issue of the New York Genealogical and Biographical Record1 (THE RECORD).
Mr. Brooks’ article was a factual account that met the Genealogical Proof Standard2 (GPS). The OFA Big Book’s version, based on an unverified and unverifiable old traditional family oral account passed down from generation to generation for more than 100 years - plus two records recovered from the Amsterdam Archives in 1993, do not meet the GPS criteria.
PURPOSE
To determine the genealogical and historical validity of the first and second generations of the Ostrander family in New Netherland (colonial New York) as presented in the OFA Big Book. Specifically that:
Pieter(1) Pietersen, the Dutch cadet from Amsterdam and Tryntje van de Lande were the progenitors of the Ostrander family; It was their son Pieter(2) Pietersen, bpt. 11 May 1653 in Amsterdam, who married Rebecca Traphagen in Kingston, Ulster County, NY in 1679; and Our forefather the Dutch cadet came to New Netherland from Amsterdam on the Dutch ship De Bonte Koe in 1660 with three children (purportedly including the son Pieter(2) Pietersen, of Pieter Pieterss [Pietersz] and Tryntje van de Lande, bpt. 11 May 1653 in Amsterdam) and first settled in Kingston (and later in Hurley).
1 The New York Genealogical and Biographical Record, July 1999, “PARENTAGE OF PIETER PIETERSEN OSTRANDER AND HIS SISTER TRYNTJE PIETERS,” by Chris Brooks, pages 163-173. 2 The Genealogical Proof Standard
Proof is a fundamental concept in genealogy. In order to merit acceptance, each conclusion about an ancestor must have sufficient credible evidence to be accepted as "proved." Acceptable conclusions, therefore, meet the modern Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) when they:
Show evidence of a thorough search of all relevant records. Provide precise source citations for relevant records and every genealogical assertion. Explain the reasoning behind each and every uncertain (problematic) identification and/or assumption. Demonstrate a knowledge of the history and mores of the various periods covered by the work. Provide a soundly reasoned, coherently written conclusion. 2
OFA RESEARCH (OCTOBER 2007 – JULY 2008)
During the past year the following major tasks have been completed.
1. A diagnostic review of the evolution of the 1st and 2nd generations of the Ostrander family history compiled in the 19th century that formed the foundation for the original hypothesis that our ancestor Pieter(2) Pietersen [Ostrander] was supposedly the son of Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet from Amsterdam that came to America in 1660 on De Bonte Koe.
2. A detailed analysis of the
subsequent 1993 hypothesis, which purported that the “Pieter Pieterss” who married a “Trÿntie vande Lande” in November 1652 and had a son Pieter baptized 11 May 1653 in Amsterdam was also the same person as the Pieter Pietersen reported as a cadet among the passengers on the Dutch ship De Bonte Koe in 1660: and records, findings and conclusions presented in the articles published by Chris Brooks in 1999 and Lorine McGinnis Schulze and Chris Brooks in 2000.3
3. Research of records of the Amsterdam Archives, the colonial records of New Netherland, New York and Ulster County, NY and documentation of my initial analysis, research findings and conclusions, which were submitted in a draft Discussion Paper to officers of the OFA for review and comment in February 2008.
4. Additional research of issues, concerns and new and old information provided by officers of the OFA and specific queries raised by members of the Research Committee commissioned by the OFA Board of Directors in April 2008 “to objectively review all information (traditional, inconclusive and alternative) pertaining to the real and/or perceived progenitor of the Ostrander family.”
5. The review of Nathaniel J. Ostrander’s handwritten manuscript (the first comprehensive Ostrander family history), notes and correspondence, directly related to the 1st and 2nd generations, was conducted at the New York Genealogical and Biographical Society’s library in May 2008 by Peter J. Ostrander, Chairman of the OFA Research Committee.
6. Extensive review and deliberation by the OFA Research Committee regarding all information related to the traditional family history and the alternative genealogy published by Chris Brooks in 1999 and the Pier-Ostrander genealogy published by Lorine McGinnis Schulze and Chris Brooks in 2000.
FINDINGS
The findings on the origin and evolution of the traditional account of the 1 st and 2nd generations of the Pietersen-Ostrander family history are outlined below in two segments.
3 “ORIGINS OF THE PIER FAMILY IN NEW NETHERLAND AND AN UPDATE OF THEIR CONNNECTION TO THE OSTRANDER FAMILY” - The New York Genealogical and Biographical Record, July 2000, pages 163-181. 3 1. Pre-1993, which was a prolonged evolutionary phase focused primarily on the colonial and church records of New York of the 17th century from which the traditional family oral account seems to have emanated; and 2. 1993 research conducted in Holland for the OFA.
PRE-1993 FINDINGS
In addition to the colonial records of Ulster County, NY and the records of the Old Dutch Church of Kingston, the primary sources reviewed were:
Five Ostrander family biographies/histories published between 1875 and 1910, which I conducted between October 2007 and January 2008. The review involved further research to locate and/or confirm the records that were presumably recovered by these same descendant-researchers to determine the name(s) of the Dutch cadet’s wife and three children and that the family settled in Kingston shortly after their arrival; and Nathaniel Jacob Ostrander’s handwritten manuscript, notes and correspondence (conducted by Peter J. Ostrander, chairman of the OFA Research Committee).
The Early Ostrander Descendant-Researchers
At least four, but perhaps all five of the family biographies/histories reviewed were compiled by descendants from the line of Hendrick(3) Ostrander and it seems that there was a particularly high level of interest among his descendants. The works reviewed were prepared by:
De Witt(7) W. Ostrander (William(6), Denysius(5), Willemus(4), Hendrick(3) - (in 1910) George(7) A. Ostrander (Abraham(6), Stephen(5), Christoffel(4), Hendrick(3) – (in 1895) Ogden(7) H. Ostrander (Philip(6) H., Stephen(5), Christoffel(4), Hendrick(3) - (in 1902) Stephen(7) M. Ostrander (Abraham(6), Stephen(5), Christoffel(4), Hendrick(3) - (by 1885) William B. Ostrander of Ulster County (c1879).
All appear to have been proud of their Dutch heritage, well educated, dedicated and sincere and among their ranks were a physician (Dr. George A. Ostrander, M.D.) and a lawyer (Stephen M. Ostrander, the brother of George). Brothers George and Stephen were from Brooklyn, De Witt(7) and William B. Ostrander apparently lived in Ulster County, NY and Ogden(7) Ostrander was born in New York City and relocated to Northumberland County, PA.
The Early Versions of the Ostrander Family History
The first ancestral profile was published c1879, two abridged family biographies were compiled by 1890, a more detailed family history was published in 1902 and the fifth abridged family history appeared in 1910, as follows:
1. In a biographical sketch of William B. Ostrander of Ulster County, family oral traditions record, “…the parents fell victim to the barbarity of the Indians during the warfare between that race and the Dutch…” [Source: Commemorative Biographical Record of Ulster County, NY (c1879), pg. 1259-61]. NOTE - This was the oldest reference of the “traditional” Ostrander family oral account that I found and suggests an early origin, perhaps from the 18th century. 4 2. “ A History of the City of Brooklyn and King’s County, N.Y.” by Stephen M. Ostrander [1832-1885], edited by Alexander Black, copyright 1894 by Annie A. Ostrander (widow of the author). Stephen(7) M. Ostrander was a graduate of Columbia College, a lawyer by profession and the first Ostrander to be admitted into the Holland Society of New York, a fraternity of descendants of Dutch origin.
The Holland Society was established in 1885 and Stephen was a member from June 25, 1885 until his death on November 19, 1885 (Source: Holland Society Yearbook, 1928/29). It seems likely Stephen submitted the brief biographical version of his ancestry in 1885 as proof of his Dutch origin as a prerequisite to membership in the Society. It suggested that Pieter Pietersen came from Holland in 1659 with his unnamed wife and three children, Pieter, b. 1650, Tryntje [no date] and Geertje [no date] and the family next appears in Kingston). From this work we also learned that Stephen(7)’s grandfather - Stephen(5) Ostrander (Christoffel(4), Hendrick(3)) was a minister of the Dutch Church in the 19th century and he preached in both Dutch and English.
Stephen(7) Ostrander’s biographical ancestry appears on pages xi-xvii in the preface to his referenced book and is viewable online on the Internet at: http://books.google.com/books?id=VI0gbOxPd4UC&printsec=frontcover&dq=stephen+ostrander#PPR11,M1
3. American Ancestry: giving the name and descent, in the male line, of Americans whose ancestors settled in the United States previous to the Declaration of Independence, A.D. 1776. (Source: Joel Munsell’s Sons, Publishers, American Ancestry, Volume 5, 1890, pages 95-96): - OSTRANDER, George A. He was a graduate of Columbia College, brother of Stephen M. Ostrander and a physician by profession.
Dr. George A. Ostrander, M.D. (1834-1917) of Brooklyn, NY, died the same year as Nathaniel Jacob Ostrander and evidently communicated and shared information with his cousin Nathaniel, perhaps for more than 20 years. His 1890 biography is the first early work recovered that makes mention of an alleged marriage between a Geertje Pietersen and a Jan Pier. According to this old biography “Pieter Pietersen came from Holland in 1659 with his wife Tryntje and three children, son Pieter and two girls - Tryntje and Geertje and the family next appears in Kingston. Tryntje married Hendrick Albertse Ploeg and Geertje married Jan Pier.” Unfortunately he gave no clue as to the source of the alleged marriage of Geertje Pieters and Jan Pier, so we have no idea where the information came from or if he, perhaps, simply obtained a skeletal family tree from another relative.
4. “The Ostrander Family in America: descendants of Pieter Ostrander 1660-1902,” by Ogden Hoffman Ostrander was published in 1902. This work claims Pieter Pietersen (Ostrander) and his family emigrated from Holland to Kingston, Ulster County, New York in 1660.
5. “ THE OSTRANDER FAMILY,” by De Witt W. Ostrander, Clintondale, Ulster County (from Olde Ulster Magazine, July 1910, page 214 – Pieter Pietersen came from Holland in 1660 on De Bonte Koe with his wife Tryntje and two children, Pieter and Tryntje and a third child Geestje was born after 1660. The father seems to have come to the Esopus with the troops sent to suppress the Indian outbreaks). The full text is viewable on the Internet at: http://www.hopefarm.com/ostrand.htm 5 As will be noted there were some disparities between the various renditions of the respective ancestries, but the essence of their family biographies/histories were apparently all based on the same original supposition that the Pieter Pieterss who married in Kingston in 1679 was the son of a Dutch cadet, Pieter Pietersen who was said to have arrived in New Amsterdam in either 1659 or 1660 and soon after settled in Kingston. Most compiled and published narrowly focused skeletal family trees showing four generations that only included the family branches of their direct paternal Ostrander lineage from their father to their great, great grandfather Hendrick(3) Ostrander and his parents Pieter(2) Pietersen Ostrander and Rebecca Traphagen.
The most disappointing aspect of these works is that none provided precise source citations to indicate where the evidence for their genealogical claims came from, but a random audit of three biographies confirmed the validity of their family histories back to Pieter(2) Pietersen Ostrander and Rebecca Traphagen. All five family trees seem to have claimed that the groom Pieter(2) Pietersen was the son of a Dutch cadet of the same name, but provided no documented record to substantiate the purported kinship. Given the uncertainty of the presumed father-son relationship it was also noted that no rationale was provided to explain the basis of this pivotal assumption.
Nathaniel Jacob Ostrander (1843-1917)
A brief review of the OFA Big Book indicated that there was no mention of the cited works of four of the five early Ostrander descendant-researchers that I recovered, while Nathaniel J. Ostrander is justifiably credited for his dedication and years of effort, which is said to have begun in the late 1880’s and culminated with his handwritten manuscript some 30 years later. During his era Nathaniel seemed to be the focal authority on the history of the Ostrander family.
Nathaniel was also a descendant of the HENDRICK line – Nathaniel(6) Jacob Ostrander (Nathaniel(5), David(4), Hendrick(3), Pieter(2), Pieter(1)). The Big Book also states that Nathaniel:
Began to copy the records from his great grandfather Hendrick’s Bible in 1892 (page 455); “ Was the researcher and compiler of the first comprehensive Ostrander Family Manuscript. Much of the Ostrander genealogy in America derives from his research,” (page 492).
The Family Bible of Hendrick (3) Ostrander
According to Nathaniel’s notes he began his “verbatim seriatim” transcription [sequentially in chronological order] on the 13th day of June 1892 starting with Hendrick’s introduction - “I Henricus Oostrander, hort-delt bock toi yek desem Beybel go kogt-van Derick. Schepmoes vur 4 pont-6 Schelnum den 22 desember ent-jaar 1722.”4
The translation in the OFA Big Book indicates that Hendrick bought a Dutch Bible [printed in Amsterdam] from a Derick Schepmoes for 4.6 shillings on 22 December 1722. (It seems likely that the Bible was purchased from the Dirck Schepmoes recorded on the 1716/17 Kingston Tax Assessment List.)
4 Big Book, page 455 6 When Nathaniel copied the records from this family heirloom, he noted that the Bible was in the possession of Mrs. Marie Wilson who was then nearly 86 years old (b. c1806) and living at 107 South Oxford Street in Brooklyn, NY. Nathaniel also reported that:
She was the widow of David Wilson and a great granddaughter of Hendrick (3) Ostrander and Elizabeth Von Bommel; The old Bible was in a very fair state of preservation considering its age, one of the covers was loose and as it contained a number of family records; The first entry was that of Hendrick(3)’s birth in Hurley, NY on 18 December 1693 followed by the births of his children recorded in his handwriting.
The family Bible was obviously passed down from generation to generation as it included the record of Nathaniel’s grandfather David(4) Ostrander as well as those of David(4)’s sons and others.
More than one hundred years have passed since Nathaniel copied the birth, marriage and death records from the Bible purchased by his great grandfather and it seems that the location of the heirloom, if it still exists today, is unknown, but Hendrick(3) Ostrander’s legacy is priceless. He left us with handwritten evidence of our rich Dutch heritage and spawned at least a half a dozen descendant-researchers from the 19th century including Nathaniel, the architect of the first comprehensive Ostrander family genealogy.
Besides the family Bible records, Nathaniel indicated that the primary sources of the documented information on the 1st and 2nd generations of the Ostrander family came from the multiple volumes of Edmund Bailey O’Callaghan’s “Documentary History of the State of New York” (published 1849-51); and baptismal and marriage records of the Old Dutch Church of Kingston. Although not specifically mentioned, Nathaniel’s writings suggested he was aware of the traditional Ostrander family oral account as he reported some of the popularly held beliefs of the 19th and early 20th centuries that Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet from Amsterdam who arrived on De Bonte Koe in 1660:
Had a wife named Tryntje or Catrina; perhaps, first settled in Kingston c1660 with his wife and their three children, Pieter Jr., Tryntje2 (Catherine) and Geertje2 (Gertrude), although he noted that there was no documented record of the parents’ existence in Kingston or Hurley; Was probably the father of the Pieter Pietersen who married Rebecca Traphagen in 1679; and Was presumably slain by the Indians along with his wife during the Second Esopus War.
No mention was made by Nathaniel of a documented record of the family’s arrival or settlement in either Kingston or Hurley, but he did make a specific reference in his handwritten historical notes to the:
“ Documentary History of New York State, Vol. 3 page 57, List of Soldiers who embarked on the ship called Bonti Kow meaning Spotted Cow from Amsterdam, Holland, April 15, 1660.” 7 Translations and Transcriptions of De Bonte Koe’s 1660 Passenger List
The work referenced by Nathaniel was a translation and transcription of entries in the Account Books of the Dutch West India Company’s reconfigured into passenger lists by Edmund Bailey O'Callaghan. The lists were published in English in 1849-1851. The Irish born O'Callaghan (b. 1797) was a doctor (trained in Paris, France) and a physician, journalist and politician in Lower Canada (now Quebec) from 1827 until 1837. In 1837, O'Callaghan was involved with the wrong side of the Lower Canada Rebellion and when a warrant for his arrest was issued he fled south across the border to New York State. Years later O'Callaghan became secretary-archivist of the State of New York and he died in New York in 1880.
In addition, O'Callaghan was responsible for the publication (also in 1849-51) of the “Lists of inhabitants of colonial New York,” which were excerpted from his “Documentary History of the State of New York” and included the same passenger lists that appeared in Volume III (pages 52- 63) of his works. In any event, my local library has a copy of both of the referenced sources and it was noted that the Dutch name of the vessel was not recorded in either work. The O'Callaghan record cited by Nathaniel simply reads, verbatim:
“List of Soldiers in the Ship the Spotted Cow, 15th April 1660;” and “Peter Petersen from Amsterdam, with his wife and 2 children.”
Note: There was so mention of Peter’s military rank and no ages were recorded for his TWO (2) children. The same transcription of the passenger lists was reproduced in the 1896 Yearbook of the Holland Society of New York. It seems likely that O'Callaghan’s work was also the source used by De Witt(7) W. Ostrander (William(6), Denysius(5), Willemus(4), Hendrick(3), Pieter(2), Pieter(1)) of Clintondale, Ulster County, who wrote c1910:
“The record on the passenger list of the vessel (De Bonte Koe) reads: Peter Pietersen, from Amsterdam, with his wife and two children.”
De Witt also reported that Pieter Pietersen “is said to have been a cadet in the army under the States General of the Netherlands;” and “the two children who accompanied him to this country must have been his son, Pieter,” and daughter Tryntje.
Following the 1896 reprint of the Dutch passenger lists for 1657-64, the Secretary of the Holland Society of New York noted that there were some serious errors with the compilation made by O'Callaghan almost 50 years earlier and requested that they be verified by a comparison to the original Dutch manuscripts in the New York State Library at Albany.
The discrepancies, errors and omissions uncovered were extensive, e.g., the spelling of the passenger names was said to have been careless and grave mistakes were made in assigning the localities from which the people came. In addition, the Dutch name of the ship was sometimes not included, passenger lists for some of the vessels from Holland were omitted, the ages of the children were omitted and in some instances people were placed on the wrong ship.5
5 1902 Yearbook of the Holland Society of New York, pages 1-3 8 A revised and corrected compilation was published in the 1902 Yearbook of the Holland Society of New York. The more accurate and complete list of soldiers appears below and uses the precise spelling of names as printed in the 1902 Yearbook.
April 15, 1660 - Soldiers Who are to sail on the Dutch Ship De Bonte Koe
Name From Family/Notes # in Fam Petersen, Claes Ditmarsen Adelborst Self Haŷen, Claes Bremen Adelborst Self Pietersen, Jan Ditmarsen Soldier Self Mannaet, Gerrit Haen Soldier Self Croos, Coenraet Switzerland Soldier Self Eyck, Hendrick Nahuys Soldier Self Ruysh, Christian Bartels Amsterdam Soldier Self Sweterinck, Hendrick Ośenbrugge Soldier, [from Osnabruck?] Self Matteus, Peter "Van Laeren" ? Soldier Self Hamelton, Johan Hamelton Soldier Self Verpronck, Johan Ceulen Soldier, Smith and Baker Self Wishhousen, Jan Bergen, Norway Soldier Self
Petersen, Pieter Amsterdam Adelborst. With his wife and three Self + 4 children, 8, 4 and 2 years Hemmes, Brant Dockum Soldier Self Jansen, Dirck Bylevelt Soldier Self Engsinck, Harmen Jansen Oldenseel Soldier Self Levelin, Johannes Műhlhausen Soldier Self Bronval, Michiel Berg Cassel Soldier Self
The following names are crossed out: Jurriaen Fransen illegible Jans Hansen Graer Groeningen
And a NOTE says: “Presumably some of these soldiers will be found missing
It was noted that the patronymic for two of the three Adelborsts was PETERSEN without the “i” (Claes from Ditmarsen and Pieter from Amsterdam) while one of the soldiers was reported as Jan PIETERSEN (with the “i”) from Ditmarsen suggesting that a kinship between two, or perhaps all three, was plausible
Only two of the civilian passengers were later found in the records of Ulster County (but there may have been others) and the two were:
ROELOFF SWARTWOUT, farmer [on his return to New Netherland, where he previously resided]. He was accompanied by three men “in his employ” – Cornelis Jacobsz Van Leeuwen; Arent Mertensz, from Gelderland; and Ariaen Huijbertsz from Gelderland who presumably went to Esopus (later Kingston) with their employer.
ALBERT HEYMANS, farmer, from Gelderland, with his wife and eight children, 17, 15, 14, 9, 8, 7, 4 and 2 years. 9 There were only four other civilian families with a combined total of 22 children, one married couple, nine single men and four single women (maidens) among the 81 listed passengers (presumably 18 soldiers, 29 civilian adults (men and women) and 34 children.
The two key phrases in the corrected passenger manifest that are disconcerting are:
Soldiers who ARE TO SAIL – suggesting they were expected to board the ship; and PRESUMABLY SOME OF THESE SOLDIERS WILL BE FOUND MISSING – implying that some of the soldiers may have been NO-SHOWS.
The possibility that Pieter Petersen, Adelborst was a NO-SHOW certainly provides a logical explanation as to why there is no record of the existence of the cadet and his family in New Netherland after June 1660. As a result, we have a catch-22 situation - we cannot prove that he got on the ship nor can we claim he did not. Whatever the case, the fact remains that there is no record of his existence anywhere in New Netherland after De Bonte Koe dropped anchor off Manhattan Island in June 1660 leaving us in a genealogical no man’s land. Either he:
Was a no-show and his family did not sail on the ship; or Boarded the ship with his family and they settled in an unknown location in the expansive New Netherland colony.
In either scenario we are faced with a black hole and there is no doubt that the early Ostrander descendant-researchers struggled with this same information void and this was confirmed by a letter written by Emmett Ostrander to a Holland based researcher in August 1999 in which he stated:
“ I have seen some of the original writings of the De Bonte Koe’s [1660] arrival and realize they offer no proof.”
The OFA Big Book indicates that the information came from the records of the Dutch West India Company and includes the following statement regarding Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet:
“the only known mention of his existence was an entry in the account book of Captain Pieter Lucasz showing the names of passengers and the fares they were to pay for transport on his ship De Bonte Koe, departing 15 April 1660 from Amsterdam” followed by:
“Pieter Pieters from Amsterdam 10 19 13.38, Adelborst with his wife and children of 8, 4 and 2 years.” Presumably the first set of numbers is related to the fare for the voyage. The OFA Big Book also has a note that “An Adelborst was a junior officer [cadet], in this case serving in the military forces of the Dutch West India Company.”
As will be noted, the passenger manifest did not list the names of the cadet’s wife or his three children and there is no clue as to the gender of the children. Nevertheless, from this sparse information one can make a number of reasonable assumptions regarding the cadet and his family. 10 For example, the
military rank of cadet (a junior officer-in-training) suggests a young man, probably in his early twenties, who had recently enlisted in the Dutch military service for a term of, perhaps, two or more years; age of the eldest child (8) indicates that he or she was born c. 1652 and probably before April 15, 1652; and age of the other two children (4 and 2) indicate that they (whether he or she) were born c1656 and c1658 respectively.
In addition, the age of the eldest child suggests that if the cadet was his/her father then it is likely he was in his mid to late twenties, say 26 to 29, i.e. about the same approximate age as his wife, and they would have married c1651. However, it also raises the possibility that the cadet was a young man who married a slightly older widow with one or more children of her previous marriage, in which case the cadet and his wife may have married later than 1651. In any event, in June 1660 we have a vague picture of a family of five consisting of:
Pieter Pietersen the cadet from Amsterdam aged 21-29; his unnamed wife (perhaps 26-29); An unnamed son or daughter, probably born before April 15, 1652; unnamed son or daughter, b. c1656; and unnamed son or daughter, b. c1658.
The 18 Soldiers on De Bonte Koe
At one point I attempted to track all of the passengers that arrived on De Bonte Koe and soon realized it was a mammoth task, but before abandoning the effort I had found evidence that several of the immigrants from Holland had taken up residence in or near New Amsterdam, which is understandable as it was the largest settlement in New Netherland. For a similar reason New Amsterdam also had the largest concentration of soldiers because of its militarily strategic location as the gateway to the Dutch colony.
By 1660, New Netherland encompassed parts of what are now the states of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Connecticut and Delaware and the Dutch had established a series of trading posts, towns, and forts up and down the Hudson River and elsewhere. Consequently, the 18 soldiers may have been deployed individually or in groups at any one of a number of forts in the Dutch colony, although the two largest garrisons were at New Amsterdam (New York) and Fort Orange (Albany).
A review of the records of the Reformed Dutch Churches in New Amsterdam, Esopus (Kingston) and Albany for the three Dutch soldiers Pieter Petersen (Adelborst), Claes Petersen (Adelborst) and Jan Pietersen, between 1660 and 1665, was unsuccessful. However, references of the third Adelborst (Claes Haŷen) that arrived on De Bonte Koe in mid-June 1660 turned up the following records in the New Amsterdam Reformed Dutch Church:
1. Marriages – 12 February 1661, Claes Haŷen, j.m., van Breman, soldat (sic, soldaat – soldier in English) en Marritje Claes, j.d. van Amsterdam.
11 Evidently the bride had arrived in New Amsterdam almost three years earlier as she was listed in the records of Capt. Cornelis Maertsen, skipper of the Dutch ship De Bruynvis (The Brownfish) as follows:
19 June 1658, Maria Claes, maiden, debt for passage and board, 36 guilders.
2. Baptisms - 4 December 1661, Gerrit, s/o Claes Heŷnen and Marritje Claes (page 63) - 7 January 1663, Maria Cathryn, d/o Claes Heŷn and Marritie Claes (page 68)
3. 25 February 1664 – “By order of the Lords Mayores. For as much as Claes Haey (her present husband) has agreed to pay and for this he has been debited, on the book of the receiver Van Ruyven, 36 gilders” (Source: New York Historical Manuscripts – Dutch, No. K., page A). It seems likely that the debt is related to Maria (Marritje) Claes’ passage to New Amsterdam in 1658.
No record was recovered to indicate that Claes Haŷen, the Dutch soldier was sent to Ulster County during the Second Esopus War in 1663, but it is apparent that he had been stationed in New Amsterdam upon his arrival and had probably resided in the area until 1664. As noted later, only three Dutch soldiers were killed during the concurrent attacks on Wildwyck (Wiltwyck) and New Dorp (Hurley) in the Second Esopus War (1663) and none of the reported names matched any of the military personnel that arrived on De Bonte Koe in 1660.
No record was recovered to show that any of the 18 soldiers were sent to the Esopus area between 1660 and 1663 or later took up residence in Kingston or Hurley. On the other hand, there are numerous records that mention their civilian co-passengers - Roeloff Swartwout and Albert Heymans, as inhabitants and/or landowners in both of these small Dutch settlements in Ulster County.
Preliminary Summary
There is little doubt that the early Ostrander descendant-researchers were proud of their Dutch heritage and that the efforts of their research were well-intentioned, thorough and sincere and for this we should be eternally grateful as they provided us with a family history that is verifiably sound starting from the date of the January 1679 marriage of our ancestors Pieter(2) Pietersen and Rebecca Traphagen. As will be noted from the preceding paragraphs, the early Ostrander descendant-researchers struggled with the identity of our family patriarch’s parents as they were working with nothing more than a single, vague entry in a ship’s log and they all ultimately ran into the same insurmountable “BRICK WALL.” In any event, they were also all aware of our ancestor Pieter(2) Pietersen’s Dutch origin and so it seems that at some point they simply became convinced that he was the son of the Dutch cadet, even though there was (and still is) no evidence of a kinship. Apparently this key premise was based on the following tantalizing, yet genealogically inconclusive factors:
Both Pieters’ came from Amsterdam, had the same patronymic and the chronology suggested that a father-son kinship was plausible; and Our ancestor Pieter(2) Pietersen first surfaced in the records of the Kingston church in 1679 (suggesting he may have settled in the area years earlier with his parents). 12 As a result, when we combine the limited information from the ship’s log with the suppositions from the traditional family oral account, the records of the Kingston church and the theoretical kinship featured in the works of the early Ostrander descendant-researchers we get a slightly clearer picture of the original hypothesis articulated in Nathaniel’s handwritten manuscript.
THE ORIGINAL HYPOTHESIS
Nathaniel organized his account of the 1st and 2nd generations of the Ostrander family as follows:
Historical
“List of list of soldiers who embarked in the ship called De Bonte Koe meaning Spotted Cow, from Amsterdam, Holland, April 15 1660. Pieter Pietersen, wife and their three children, they were probably the parents of the persons below mentioned” – [see Lineage below].
They are believed to have “settled at Esopus and we have no further information as to the parents, but there is a strong presumption that they fell victims to the savagery and treachery of the Indians in the continual warfare between them and the Dutch settlers. The son survived and we find his marriage recorded in the Reformed Dutch church in Kingston [in January 1679].” Nathanial made no reference as to the source of the parents alleged slaying, but the similarity of the wording suggests it might have come from the biographical sketch of William B. Ostrander of Ulster County, family oral traditions record, “…the parents fell victim to the barbarity of the Indians during the warfare between that race and the Dutch…” [Source: Commemorative Biographical Record of Ulster County, NY (published c1879), pg. 1259-61].
Lineage
1st Generation
Pieter Ostrander [i.e. Pieter Pietersen] and his wife Tryntje (Catrina) came from Holland. April 1660 . . . They had three children – Pieter2 Jr., Tryntje2 (Catherine) and Geertje2 (Gertrude). This pioneer and his wife were cruelly murdered in the Esopus War by the Indians. Their children:
2nd Generation
Note - modified to reflect the children’s approximate year of birth according to the ship’s log.
1. Pieter(2) Pietersen, b. c1652, married 19 January 1679 in Kingston, Rebecca Traphagen.
2. Tryntje(2) Pieters[en], b. c1656, married Hendrick Albertse Ploeg [c1672/73 - no marriage record, but they were recorded as the parents of ten children that they presented together for baptism in the Kingston church].
3. Geertje(2) Pieters[en], b. c1658, married in Kingston Jan Pier (no date indicated and no marriage record found). 13 The third daughter was reported, by an unknown source, to have had ten children (no baptism record was found for any of these alleged children). This daughter was later reported in the OFA Big Book as Geestje(2) Pieters[en] but there was no explanation provided for the name change.
No tangible evidence was provided to support this theory and it seems to have been based on a series of scenarios that suggest what might have happened to the alleged parents of Pieter(2) Pietersen during the information void spanning almost two decades. Apparently some of the presumptions seem to have become part of the family oral traditions record and over time these uncontested narratives became embedded in the traditional Ostrander family history that was ultimately accepted by many as de facto, although it was never proven. There is an unexplained gap between the arrival of De Bonte Koe in June 1660 and a Kingston marriage in 1679, as reflected in the following table.
Pieter Pietersen from Pieter Pietersen of Amsterdam, Amsterdam – arrived in New THE INFORMATION GAP resident of Westquansengh, m. Amsterdam on De Bonte Koe June 1660 – January 1679 19 July 1679 in Kingston, in mid-June 1660 Rebecca Traphagen
No other record of his existence after his presumed arrival
A sincere debt of gratitude is owed to the work of the early Ostrander descendant-researchers in general and Nathaniel J. Ostrander in particular as the combined fruits of their labors were likely precursors to the founding of the OFA and the publication of the Big Book.
The Origin of the Names of the Wife and the Three Children
The records of the Old Dutch of Kingston confirm that Pieter(2) Pietersen, who married Rebecca Traphagen, had a sister named Tryntje(2) Pieters and this indisputable kinship has never been questioned, although upon close scrutiny the church records suggest that Tryntje(2) was probably the older sibling, by a year or two. On the other hand, the works of the six early Ostrander descendant-researchers reviewed provide very little insight regarding the wife’s name (most often reported as Tryntje or Catrina) or how they determined that the third child was a daughter named either GEERTJE or GEESTJE.
According to the Dutch naming system, the patronymic Pietersen (i.e. Pieter’s son) indicates that Pieter(2) was the son of a father named Pieter and although it was presumed that he was the son of the cadet of the same name, it is conceivable he was simply the son of a father named Pieter with a different patronymic, such as:
Pieter Jansen (i.e., the son of a father baptized Jan); Pieter Albertsen (son of a father named Albert); Pieter Hendricksen (son of a father named Hendrick); or etc. 14
Dutch Naming Patterns and Baptismal Customs
The genealogical information given in the marriage and baptism registers is often sufficient in itself to assemble a skeleton family pedigree, because of the following helpful Dutch customs:
1. A couple was betrothed in the Dutch Reformed Church and then married after three banns had been read. The betrothal (marriage intentions) and/or marriage record ordinarily gives marital status and place of origin (which is usually place of birth). 2. A woman normally (but not always) continued to use her maiden name after marriage. 3. The first two children of each sex were usually (but not always) named for the four grandparents. 4. Children were baptized shortly after birth and usually had relatives as godparents. (Source: The New York Genealogical & Biographical Newsletter, Summer 1996)
It was customary for Dutch couples to name children after their own respective parents, alternating between paternal and maternal grandparents, sometimes in an orderly fashion, but not always. If the eldest child was a son he would typically be named after his paternal grandfather, then usually the first daughter would be named for the maternal grandmother, but once again not necessarily. Since they also tended to have large families, it was not unusual to find a child named for each of the four grandparents and not always in some preordained order. Usually male children later added an “s, sen, szen or zen” to their father’s first name so a son of Jan baptized Pieter was known as Pieter Jansen (Jans, Janszen or Janzen). Since the prefix “sen” denoted “son of” female children used the simpler patronymic of their father’s name plus an “s”, e.g., Jans or Pieters.
Because there is no documented record of the name of the cadet’s wife (who was presumed to be the mother of Pieter(2) Pietersen and Tryntje(2) Pieters), perhaps it was derived from the baptismal records of her alleged grandchildren. Starting with the first four children of Pieter(2) and Rebecca we get the following likely connections.
2.1 Pieter(3), b. c1680, no baptism record was found (which is unfortunate as the names of the witnesses or sponsors often help and most likely would have been one or both of the paternal grandparents). It is most likely the child was named after his paternal grandfather, who was originally thought to be Pieter Pietersen, the deceased Dutch cadet.
2.2 Willem(3), bpt. 24 September 1682, doubtless named after his maternal grandfather Willem Jansen Traphagen. The witnesses were Johannes Traphagen (brother of Rebecca) and Geesje Pieterz (perhaps the sister of the father who was recorded as “Pieter Pieterz,” although it was subsequently noted that this is the only mention of a Geesje Pieters in the Kingston church records between 1660 and 1699).
2.3 Arent(3), bpt. 5 October 1684 (namesake unknown, but the first two sons had already been named after their paternal and maternal grandfathers respectively.
Therefore, Arent was probably named after a friend or relative of his father. The witnesses were Hendric Albertz (brother-in-law of the father) and his wife Tryntje(2) Pieters (the father’s sister). 15
2.4 Catrina, bpt. 5 September 1686 (namesake uncertain). Traditionally, the rotation would have the first daughter named after her maternal grandmother “Joosje Willems”, but obviously this does not appear to be the case. It seems, however, that it may have been presumed by some that the child was named after her paternal grandmother and Catrina is a synonym of Tryntje, so when you consider the fact that the father had a sister named Tryntje the assumption seems logical, ergo the cadet’s wife was, perhaps, also named Tryntje or Catrina. The witnesses were Hans Burhans and Lena (Helena) Traphagen.
The baptismal records for the children of Tryntje(2) Pieters and Hendrick Albertse[n] are less definitive as none were found for three of the older children, a daughter Annetje (Anna) who appears to be the firstborn so perhaps, she was named after her unknown paternal grandmother. No baptism records were found for sons Albert (presumably the eldest and probably named after his paternal grandfather Albert (whose patronymic is unknown). The son Albert was sometimes reported as Allert. The next son for which no baptism record was found was Pieter, who could have been named after his presumed grandfather, the Dutch cadet. Although the year of Pieter Hendricksen Ploeg’s birth is uncertain, he appears in most family trees as the third son.
The second daughter of the couple was baptized Geesje (6 April 1679) suggesting her maternal grandmother was also named Geesje. Although Tryntje(2) Pieters and Hendrick Albertse[n] had four other daughters none were baptized Tryntje or Catrina suggesting the possibility that the mother of Pieter(2) Pietersen and Tryntje(2) Pieters was, perhaps, not named Tryntje or Catrina, but instead was named Geesje. In any event, the four other daughters were:
Geesje Hendricks Ploeg, bpt. 22 July 1683 (indicating the first daughter baptized with this name in 1679, probably died young); Maria Hendricks Ploeg, bpt. 28 February 1686; Rebecca Hendricks Ploeg, bpt. 3 February 1689; and Geertje Hendricks Ploeg, bpt. 8 June 1694
When we compare the female children of siblings Pieter(2) and Tryntje(2) we get the following.
Daughters of Pieter(2) Pietersen & Daughters of Tryntje(2) Pieters & Rebecca Traphagen Hendrick Albertse[n] 2.4 Catrina (1686) 3.1 Annetje (Anna) – no baptism record, b. about 1673, m. c1691/92 2.9 Lea (Leah) – 1698 (a twin) 3.5 Geesje (1679), d.y. 2.10 Rachel – 1698 (a twin) 3.7 Geesje (1683) 2.11 Geesje – 1700 3.8 Maria (1686) 2.12 Rebecca (no baptism record, reported 3.9 Rebecca (1689) as born c1702 – might have been the eldest daughter of Pieter(3) Pietersen & Rachel Dingman, bpt. 1706) 3.11 Geertje (1694)
The only two female names common to both sides of the table are Geesje and Rebecca, although it was noted that there is no record of the baptism of a daughter Rebecca of Pieter(2) Pietersen and Rebecca Traphagen. However, their eldest son Pieter(3) Pietersen Ostrander and his wife Rachel 16 Dingman baptized their first child6 Rebecca, a daughter who was likely named after her paternal grandmother Rebecca Traphagen. It was noted that the OFA Big Book contained no other information on Rebecca(4) Ostrander (Pieter(3), Pieter(2), Pieter(1)) and it is plausible that she was inadvertently assigned to the family of her grandparents (Pieter(2) Pietersen and Rebecca Traphagen). This issue is currently under review.
It seems quite probable that Geesje was the only common name and suggests that perhaps, the first name of the mother of Pieter(2) Pietersen and Tryntje(2) Pieters was GEESJE and, if so, this certainly would explain why Tryntje(2) Pieters baptized a second daughter Geesje after the probable infant death of the first daughter between July 1683 and February 1686. Whatever the case, we can see from the above table, potential clues that led the early researchers to consider the third child of the Dutch cadet was a daughter named either Geestje or Geertje.
THE INFORMATION GAP
It is important to note that the Ostrander descendant-researchers of the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries had less than a handful of records to work with, while struggling to verify a perceived kinship. They held in one hand, documented proof that their ancestor Pieter Pietersen who married Rebecca Traphagen was born in Amsterdam. In the other hand, they held a record from a ship’s log indicating that Pieter Pietersen, a cadet from Amsterdam presumably arrived on De Bonte Koe in 1660 with his wife and three children. On the surface, a genealogical connection was certainly plausible and the circumstantial historical evidence truly enticing, so it must have been very frustrating to them not to be able to find any records to substantiate a kinship connection between the two Pieters from Amsterdam.
In hindsight, it must have been truly perplexing not being able to find any record of the existence of the cadet and his family in Kingston or Hurley between 1660 and 1679, particularly when the Dutch settlements at these two locations were so small and concentrated. As a result, a detailed review of the history of colonial Ulster County was undertaken to see if there was anything that might explain the:
Uncertainties of the family’s whereabouts after June 1660 and the parents’ unreported death; and Problematic identification of the names of the cadet’s wife and three children.
The primary period of focus was between mid-June 1660 when the family is said to have arrived at New Amsterdam and mid-June 1663 when the parents were allegedly slain in Hurley (or Kingston) during the Second Esopus War. Emphasis was placed on the detailed accounts leading up to and including the concurrent attacks on New Dorp (Hurley) and Wildwyck (changed to Wiltwyck and later Kingston by the British) as well as the aftermath.
In addition, the Dutch records of the Kingston court were scrutinized for a mention of the:
Appointment of a guardian (or guardians) for three underage Pieters[en] children, tragically orphaned by the alleged massacre of their parents; and
6 Rebecca, of Pieter Van Oostrande, Jr., and Rachel Dingmans, bpt. 13 January 1706. Wit.: Adam and Aaltje Dingmans, Reformed Dutch Church of Albany, Part 2, 1700 – 1724, Baptism Register, page 38. 17 Net proceeds from the sale of the deceased father’s estate (house, property, possessions) that would have been placed in trust for the care and upbringing of the three children (ranging in age from 5 to 11 in 1663) in accordance with Dutch law and custom.
The research centered on the following specific uncertainties stated in the OFA Big Book:
1. The only known record of the existence of Pieter Pietersen the cadet from Amsterdam was an entry in the account book of the captain of De Bonte Koe that made mention of an unnamed wife and three unnamed children of unknown gender - aged 8, 4 and 2;
2. No record exists to tell us where Pieter Pietersen settled his family in their new homeland, nevertheless they are presumed to have gone early to Esopus (later Kingston. NY);
3. Family tradition says that Pieter Pietersen and his wife were killed by Indians, but their names appear nowhere in the list of those individuals killed, wounded or captured in the Second Esopus War nor in the military accounts of soldiers sent in pursuit of the Indians;
4. The answer appears lost forever in history, but another more fortunate part of the mystery is that, somehow, their three children managed to survive; and
5. Nothing is known of where Pieter and his sisters lived until an entry in the marriage register of the Dutch Church at Kingston states that on 19 January 1679 Pieter Pieterzen and his bride Rebecca Traphagen were both residents of Westquansengh,” ... “an Indian name for a locality believed to be in the Hurley area.
BRIEF HISTORY OF NEW NETHERLAND AND COLONIAL ULSTER COUNTY, N.Y.
New Netherland was a Dutch colony in North America along the Hudson and lower Delaware Rivers and it encompassed parts of what are now the states of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Connecticut and Delaware. Although the Netherlands only controlled the Hudson River Valley from 1609 until 1664, in that short time, Dutch entrepreneurs established New Netherland, which consisted of a series of trading posts, towns, and forts up and down the Hudson River (and elsewhere) that laid the groundwork for towns that still exist today.
Fort Orange was the northernmost of the Dutch outposts and is known today as Albany; New York City’s original name was New Amsterdam, and the New Netherland’s third major settlement, Esopus (later Wiltwyck), is known today as Kingston. Unlike New York City and Albany where the traces of colonization can be difficult to find, in Kingston, the documented history of New York’s Dutch colonization is more abundant and better preserved. Nevertheless there are some gaps in the records of Kingston and Hurley.
Little research was done on the other Dutch forts outside of the area that became New York State and it is quite conceivable that the cadet Pieter Pietersen could have remained in/near New Amsterdam or been sent to Fort Orange or stationed at another garrison in New Netherland outside of the area that became New York State. Although they provided no evidence, it seems 18 that the early Ostrander descendant-researchers believed that the cadet first settled in Wildwick when it was still known as Esopus and later relocated to New Dorp (Hurley) where it was thought his alleged son Pieter lived when he married in January 1679.
Significant Dates - an Ulster County Chronology
1652/53 - Permanent settlers arrive (mostly from Albany) and first name their village Esopus
1659 - The Reformed Dutch Church of Esopus is organized
1659/60 – First Esopus War
1660 – The first wooden church is built in Esopus (later named the Old Dutch Church of Kingston)
1661 – The Dutch build a fort at Esopus and the name of the village is changed to Wildwyck
1662 - A new village is established southwest of Wildwyck and is first called New Dorp
1663 – Second Esopus War, New Dorp is destroyed, Wildwyck is attacked and partially burned
1664 – The Dutch surrender New Netherland to the British and Wildwyck becomes Wiltwyck
1669 – The British rename the two villages Kingston (Wiltwyck) and Hurley (New Dorp)
When the British seized the New Netherland colony in 1664 there were only about 55 to 70 families living in the Dutch settlements at Kingston (40 to 50) and Hurley (15 to 20).
Old Dutch Church of Kingston
The church played an integral part in the early generations of the Pietersen (Ostrander) family in America. Organized in 1659, "The Reformed Protestant Dutch Church of Kingston, NY" familiarly known as the "Old Dutch Church", is the 6th oldest Reformed Church in America, having a continuous ministry and worship on practically the same ground. The baptism and marriage records of the Old Dutch Church, dating from 1660 (recorded in Dutch until 1810), are the most complete and among the oldest in the country still in existence. All services were in Dutch until 1809 and it was the only church in Kingston for 170 years.7
Ulster County under Dutch Rule
There were only three small settlements of interest to the Ostrander family history during the brief Dutch era of Kingston, Hurley and Foxhall (Fox Hall Manor). The common focal points were the Old Dutch Church in Kingston and Kingston itself, which was the largest settlement, as
7 Excerpts from the History of The Old Dutch Church of Kingston by James W. Werner http://home.att.net/~jwwerner51/OldDutchChurch.html 19 well as the functional capital of colonial Ulster County. In 1661, Peter Stuyvesant, the Director- General of New Netherland established a local court at Esopus, and it was at this time that he gave the name Wildwyck to the settlement. He also recognized the strategic practicality of a fort located halfway between New Amsterdam and Fort Orange. In the aftermath of the First Esopus War he had the soldiers he sent up from New Amsterdam to crush the Esopus Indians help build a stockade at Wildwyck with 40 houses for the settlers.
Board by board, the settlers took their barns and houses down, and carted them uphill to a promontory bluff overlooking the Esopus Creek flood plain. They reconstructed their homes behind a 14-foot high wall made of tree trunks pounded into the ground that created a perimeter of about 1200 x 1300 feet8 based on a town plan that looked something like the illustration below.
After the fortifications were completed the men left their walled village during the day to go out and farm their fields, leaving the women and children largely confined within the stockade. When you exclude the normal disputes that arose over land and financially related matters (unpaid debts) the two communities were typically close knit and caring, bound together by families, friends and the natural instinct for survival. As a result, the inhabitants of the larger community in Kingston likely knew everyone else very well, at least by face and probably by
8 http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/travel/kingston/colonization.htm 20 name as they resided within the walls of the stockade at Kingston. They probably also knew most of their neighbors in Hurley as many of the families that settled in the new village came from Kingston and doubtless there were numerous intermarriages between families from these two tiny settlements as they were in close proximity.
Wildwyck (Wiltwyck)
As noted earlier, in 1661 Wildwyck consisted of 40 family dwellings and a wooden church all cloistered within the protective walls of a stockade. While some new settlers probably arrived in Wildwyck prior to the outbreak of the Second Esopus War on June 7, 1663, the community was still quite small even by 1689. More than 50 years after the Second Esopus War, Kingston had only grown to about 175 families.9
New Dorp (Hurley)
The first European settlement began in June of 1662 when five businessmen in Albany, NY petitioned Governor General Peter Stuyvesant, head of the Dutch New Netherland Colony, to establish a second village to the southwest of Kingston, allowing more of the Esopus Valley to be cultivated. It was given a temporary Dutch name, Nieuw Dorp, (new village) until a better name could be chosen. By mid-1663 only eight (8) family dwellings had been built in New Dorp when the village was destroyed by fire by the local Native Americans during their attack on June 7, 166310 and all eight houses were lost.
The Second Esopus War 1663/64
“On the 7th of April, 1663, Albert Heymans (Roosa) and his fellow commissaries reported to Governor Stuyvesant that the savages would not allow the building of palisades or fortifications at the new village, because the land was not included in the treaty made with them in the year 1660, and had not been fully paid for; and praying that the gifts promised the savages the previous autumn be sent at once, and that the new place and village be assisted with a few soldiers and ammunitions of war, at least, until the new settlement should be put into a proper state of defense and inhabited by a good number of people; that 'your humble and faithful subjects may remain without fear and molestation from these barbarous people, and with some assurance for the peaceful, undisturbed and unhindered continuation of the work begun, for if rumors and warnings may be believed, it would be too anxious, if not too dangerous an undertaking for your humble petitioners and faithful subjects to continue and advance their work otherwise." (Source: Colonial History of N. Y., Vol. XIII., pages 242-3).
These warnings were not heeded and the requests for additional troops were not complied with and on June 7th, 1663, the Indians attacked the New Village and Wildwyck. At Wildwyck they
burned twelve dwelling houses; killed eighteen persons (three soldiers, nine other men, four women and two children), and carried away ten persons as prisoners.
9 Tax Assessment List for the County of Ulster, 1716/17, Kingston http://www.co.ulster.ny.us/archives/exhibits/burning/TaxAssessment.html 10 A Brief History of Hurley, by David Baker, Town of Hurley Historian, 2005, viewable online at: http://www.hurleyheritagesociety.org/Pages/HHistory.htm 21
The civil and military reports of the attack on Hurley were detailed and surprisingly thorough as noted in the right hand column in the table below.
1662 LAND PATENTS11 JOURNAL OF THE SECOND ESOPUS WAR 12 NEW DORP Inhabitants June 1663 Taken Prisoner
Blanshan, Mattys (Matheu) Blanshan, Mattys (Matheu) 2 children Crispell (Crupel) Anthony Crispell (Crupel) Anthony 1 woman, 1 child De Bois, Lewis du Bois, Louwis 1 woman, 3 children Gerrets, Gosen Ariaensen, Derrick – slain Hall, Thomas Barents, Jan 1 woman, 1 child Huyberts, Lambert Huyberts, Lambert 1 woman, 3 children Kool, Lambert Ferre, Michiel (perhaps Freer) 2 children (his house in Kingston was burned) Roosa, Albert Heymans Heymans, Albert 2 children Schuyler, Petrus Gerritsen, Jan 1 man (himself) Swartwout, Roelof Harmensen, Barent 1 woman, 1 child (resided in Kingston) Thomassen, John Harmensen, Marten - slain 1 woman, 4 children Varlett, Nicholas Jochems, Hendrick 1 child Volkert, Jan Joosten Jan 1 woman, 2 children Martensen, Hendrick 1 child Tyssen, Jacques – slain Westercamp, Grietje 1 woman, 3 children
It appears that some of the individuals that were in New Dorp when it was attacked and destroyed in 1663 were residents of Wildwyck. Since the new village was only established a year earlier it seems logical that some settlers were in a transitional phase, probably farming and building houses prior to taking up permanent residency in Hurley. According to a report prepared by Roelof Swartwout and other officials of Wildwyck following the attack, the surviving men from New Dorp took refuge in the larger fortified village and when mustered in the evening of June 7th numbered “69 efficient men, both qualified and unqualified.”
In all it appears that there were, perhaps, 50 to 75 families in the two settlements on that fateful day, but there is no mention of the tragic death of Pieter Pietersen and/or his wife and there is no mention of their three orphaned children in the various reports of the attacks, as well as in the records of the aftermath.
There was also no reference to the three orphaned Pieters[en] children in the records of the Wildwyck (Kingston) court, suggesting that there was no evidence that the Dutch cadet and his family were anywhere in the area during the attack. Similarly, there is no church, land or court record to substantiate that the family had ever settled in Kingston or Hurley. Surely with so very few families in the two small settlements there should have been something to place the Dutch
11 History of Ulster County, Nathaniel Sylvester, page 146 12 http://www.hudsonrivervalley.net/colonialAmericaLesson/esopusjournal1863.php 22 cadet and his family in either Kingston or Hurley, but sadly this was not the case and no record of their existence in Ulster County has been found in the past two to three and a half centuries.
According to Sylvester’s History of Ulster County (page 146) – just how soon “after the destruction of the village the settlers rallied and rebuilt their homes is not clear but it seems probable that it was within a few months. Only three residents were killed (as reflected in the preceding table). The majority of the village’s population was taken prisoner, but later rescued and few families were broken up.”
Ulster County Under British Rule
It appears that little changed in the three small settlements in the first two decades after the British takeover, so it was basically business as usual with Dutch being the predominant language. Growth was slow and came primarily from within. By 1700, some 37 years later “the population of Hurley was only 174 so the growth of the village had been slow and there could hardly have been more than 30 families in the village in 1700” (Sylvester). By 1716/17 there were about 42 families residing in Hurley.13
In order of their permanent settlement, the five original towns of the county were Kingston and Hurley as highlighted above, followed by:
Foxhall (a.k.a. Fox Hall and Fox Hall Manor)
Located just north of Kingston, Foxhall was a small 330-acre manorial estate granted to Thomas Chambers about 1667. It is here we find reference to Westquansengh variously described as “a tract of land” and “certain farm names Wisquaemsickx” [Westquansengh]. The latter description comes from the KINGSTON PAPERS and is in reference to a Kingston court record of a contract between Capt. Thomas Chambers and Hendrick Albertsen, whereby Hendrick Albertsen leased certain farm names “Wisquaemsickx” from Chambers for 10 years (October 7, 1671 through October 7, 1681). [Source: Kingston Papers, Vol. 2, pages703-04 and 724].
Marbletown
The settlement of this locale only began as early as 1669.
New Paltz
New Paltz was founded in 1677 by French Huguenot settlers.
13 Tax Assessment List for the County of Ulster, 1716/17, Hurley http://www.co.ulster.ny.us/archives/exhibits/burning/TaxAssessment.html 23
Pieter Pietersen of the Kingston Court Records (1665-1668)
The name Pieter Pietersen is mentioned a few times in the Kingston court records between 1665 and 1668, where he most often appeared as a defendant in a law suit for non-payment of debts, suggesting he had financial difficulties on a number of occasions. For example, he was first sued by a woman for failing to pay her for washing. However, it raises the possibility that this individual could have been the cadet who somehow survived the 1663 massacre, and perhaps only his wife was slain. Even though there is no mention of the wife’s death the possibility of the cadet’s survival suggests a plausible reason why there is no reference to three orphaned children in the Kingston court records.
It is not known what became of this Pieter Pietersen as the last mention of him in the Kingston court records was 1668. It is conceivable that as a result of his repeated failure to pay his debts he may have worn out his welcome in Ulster County and moved elsewhere or perhaps he died. Whatever the case, he was identified by at least two researchers as Pieter Pietersen, bpt. 7 January 1642 in Amsterdam and he was the son of Pieter Claesz and Annetje Pieters.14
In 1998, Kurt Brown (an Ostrander descendant and past President of the OFA, 2006-08) visited the Gemeente Archief Amsterdam (Archives in Amsterdam, Holland) and it was here where Kurt discovered a notarized record confirming his identity and showing how and why the Pieter Pietersen, bpt. 7 January 1642 came to New Netherland in 1658 as an apprentice farmer, as follows:
1 April 1658 – before Amsterdam Notary Jacobus Hellerus Jan Jacobs, a bombazinewerker (textile worker), in the name of his son Jacob Jabs, who lives in Groot Esopus in New Nethreland takes for him into service, Pieter Pieterss, 17 years old, in order to work in agriculture there. This for 5 years, with free board, room and transportation there.
Salary: The first two years 50 guilders per year. The 3rd year 60 guilders per year. The 4th year 70 guilders per year. The 5th year 80 guilders per year.
The Jacob Jans living at Groot Esopus was Jacob Jansen Stol who was an early landowner in Esopus having signed the village charter in 1658, but he died in 1661. It seems likely that young Pieter Pietersen the apprentice would have served out his agreement under Stol’s widow. In any event, at the end of the contract we begin to see a period of financial troubles for this Pieter Pietersen who was often sued by different individuals between 1665 and 1668 for non-payment of debt and then he seems to have simply faded out of the picture.
There is no genealogical connection between this Pieter Pietersen (the s/o Pieter Claesz), who arrived in Ulster County c1658 and the
Dutch cadet who came to New Netherland on De Bonte Koe in 1660; and Pieter Pietersen who married Rebecca Traphagen in 1679.
14 Amsterdam Doopregisters, Bron 42, page 290, kind (child) - Pieter; vader (father) - Pieter Claesz; moeder (mother) – Annetje Pieters; 7 januari 1642; Nieuwe kerk 24 Kingston 1670
List of Kingston Inhabitants – May 12, 1670 History of Ulster County by Nathaniel Sylvester. Volume 1, page 68
Adriaensen, Jacob Gerretsen, Jan Mattysen, Mattys Aertsy, Hendrick Gillesen, Peter (guard) Paeldin, Capt. Biggerstaf, Robert Hall, George Pond, Jan Blanshan, Mathew Hendricksen, Derck Schepmoes, Dirck Jansen Brodhead, Mrs. Anna Hendrix, Harmen Swartwout, Roelof Broersen, Jan Hendrix, Roelof Teunisy, Sweer Chambers, Thomas (Capt., J.P.) Widow of Aert Jacobsen Tynhoudt, Cornelis Clasen, Claes Jansen, Albert Orphaned children of Gysbert Cornelissen, Jan Jochems, Hendrick van Imborch (see note 2 below) Widow of David Craflordt Keyser, Dirck Jansen Vernooy, Cornelis de Modt, Michael Koeck, Anthony Westphael, J Delba, Anthony Lamberts, Gerret Whitaker, Edward De Booys [De Bois], Lowies Lootman, Jan Willensen, Jan Du Mon, Wellerand Martensen, Aert Wynkoop, Cornelis Elmandorf, Jacob Martens, A.
NOTES:
1. Albert Heymans was also mentioned as a Kingston property owner but he resided in Hurley, where he first settled in 1662/63.
2. Note the reference of the “orphaned children of Gysbert van Imborch.” Ulster County court records indicate that Gysbert van Imborch was predeceased by his wife and he died in 1665. It was Dutch law and custom that dictated that the Court appoint guardians for his underage children, which it did.
The Orphaned Children of Gysbert Van Imborch of Kingston
In the “History of Ulster County,” the author (Nathaniel Bartlett Sylvester) makes mention of a similar but far less traumatic set of circumstances that occurred in Wiltwyck in 1665, whereby the second of the parents died (Gysbert Van Imborch). A Jacob Kip and William de la Montagne were appointed guardians of the deceased parents’ three infant children (page 48). On 9 September 1665, in Wiltwyck, the orphaned children’s guardians auctioned off the deceased father’s possessions and among the numerous purchasers were found a number of familiar names such as Hendrick Albertsen [Ploeg], Thomas Chambers, Arent Teunissen [Pier], Albert Heymans and Roelof Swartwout.
The proceeds of the 1665 auction are recorded on three full pages (26-28) of the Ulster County, NY, Probate Records translated and transcribed by Gustav Anjou and provide an excellent example of what would have happened had the children of Pieter Pietersen, the Dutch cadet from Amsterdam, and his wife been killed in Ulster County and left three underage orphaned children in either Wiltwyck or Hurley. There is no such record in the Ulster County records. 25 Nathaniel Jacob Ostrander’s Manuscript, Notes and Correspondence
In May 2008, Peter J. Ostrander visited the New York Genealogical and Biographical Society’s library to review Nathaniel J. Ostrander’s handwritten manuscript (the first comprehensive Ostrander family history), notes and correspondence directly related to the 1st and 2nd generations. The library was closed in June and its inventory was turned over to the Genealogy Department of the New York Public Library and it may be a year or two before this material is once again available for reference.
The following is summary of the results Peter J. Ostrander’s visit.
SYNOPSIS
The focus was on information that made reference to Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet and his:
wife reported by first name only as Tryntje, Catrina or Catherine; son Pieter(2) Pietersen; daughter Tryntje(2) Pieters[en]; and third child, a daughter variously reported as GEERTJE (Gertrude) or as GEESTJE.
Nathaniel’s penmanship was excellent and very easy to read. The materials consisted of:
a manuscript of about 1,200 hand written pages on 5” x 8” sheets of paper written on one side bound into 3 books with slip cases; and three large folders that contained notes and letters to and from Nathaniel Ostrander and many of his “cousins”.
The folders contained a few hundred letters, notes and correspondence. The bottom line was that Peter J. Ostrander found nothing that was not already known and nothing outside of what the OFA had incorporated into the Big Book. There was little in the way of records with documented source citations, but there was some interesting correspondence between Nathaniel and other’s doing research at the same time. The common thread of knowledge was of Pieter(2) Pietersen and Rebecca Traphagen and there were a few variations on his possible parents. Unfortunately many of the notes were those sent to Nathaniel and not his reply. But by subsequent letters to Nathaniel from the same person one could see that he always pointed them in the direction of the traditional story of Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet and Tryntje (Catrina) but without any substantiated facts or references.
During his visit Peter J. Ostrander made photo copies of the pages or parts thereof that show Nathaniel’s relevant findings, assumptions and conclusions which were incorporated into the final version of his history of Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet and later generations. Of particular interest were notes from Dr. George A. Ostrander of Brooklyn and notes that matched those of Emmett Ostrander when he conducted an earlier review of Nathaniel’s materials at the NYG&BS library while compiling and writing the OFA Big Book.
It is not known when or who first looked into the records of the Dutch West India Company that were used to compile passenger lists for their ships from Holland to New Netherland, but it 26 seems the recovery of the entry in a ledger related to the April-June voyage of the ship De Bonte Koe in 1660 was seen as a major breakthrough.
From this discovery it is apparent that the early Ostrander descendant-researchers presumed that the cadet was somehow the father of the Pieter Pietersen that married Rebecca Traphagen in Kingston in 1679 and over time the original hypothesis became generally accepted as de facto.
The Mysterious Geertje or Geestje Pieters[en]
According to Nathaniel’s materials, there was obviously much agonizing and speculation over the identity of the third child and it is here that we see suggestions that the early Ostrander descendant-researchers attempted to find and fit data into a pre-established theory.
Pieter J. Ostrander found a single page, typewritten note circa 1910 among Nathaniel’s papers. The author is unknown and there is no clue as to the origin of the information, but it was noted that Nathaniel communicated and exchanged information with his cousin Dr. George A. Ostrander, M.D. of Brooklyn, and some of the data matches George’s older biography, which was published in 1890 and indicated the third daughter, Geertje Pieters married Jan Pier.15 Whatever the case the old note reads (verbatim):
FIRST GENERATION IN AMERICA
Pieter Ostrander and his wife Tryntje (Catrina) came to America in the vessel called the Bontecoe (spotted cow) April 16, 1660 with their three children. He was a cadet in the army of the King of Holland and was a native of Amsterdam. After his arrival here he settled in Kingston, Ulster County, New York. Their children were –
Pieter Pietersen, born 1650 married January 19, 1679 at Kingston, N.Y., Rebecca Traphagen Tryntje Pietersen, born 1652, married at Kingston, N.Y., Albertse Ploeg and had ten children (see notes below) Geertje Pietersen, born 1654 married at Kingston, N.Y. John Pier and had ten children
It will be noted that the years of birth for the children don’t match later accounts, such as the ship’s log. In addition, Tryntje’s husband was reported as Albertse Ploeg rather than Hendrick Albertse[n] or Hendrick Albertse Ploeg as recorded by Nathaniel (and others).
The bottom line is that there is no record of a Jan Pier or any documented evidence of a family of Jan Pier and Geertje (or Geestje) Pieters in Ulster County, New York between 1660 and 1700. Since there was no reference for the source of this information, Geertje (or Geestje) Pieters remains a mystery and several attempts in the past decade have failed to substantiate her existence or the existence of her alleged marriage and/or her many children.
15 American Ancestry: giving the name and descent, in the male line, of Americans whose ancestors settled in the United States previous to the Declaration of Independence, A.D. 1776. (Joel Munsell's Sons, Publishers), American Ancestry, Volume 5, 1890, pages 95-96: - OSTRANDER, George A. 27
Perhaps a similar unsuccessful search led the compilers/authors of the OFA Big Book to revise the number of children from ten to “several children,” but there is no explanation as to why they finally opted for GEESTJE as the name of the third daughter versus the older traditional reports that she was named GEERTJE (Gertrude).
AMSTERDAM RESEARCH 1993
In 1993, the OFA arranged with a Dr. J. A. J. Krijnen of Leiden, Holland to seek whatever might be found of Pieter Pietersen with a wife named Tryntje (Catrina) and three children - a son named Pieter and daughters baptized Tryntje and Geestje, in the records in Holland.
The Big Book (page 2) reports that an intensive search of documents in Amsterdam, Leiden and The Hague revealed first the birth of a son Pieter of Pieter Pieterzen in Amsterdam on 11 May 1653 and the name of the mother, Tryntje van de Lande [see note 1 below]. From this lead, a further search in the Amsterdam Municipal Archives brought to light the announcement of banns on 26 October 1652 for the marriage of Pieter Pieterzen and Tryntje van de Lande [see note 2 below]. The announcement of banns usually preceded the wedding ceremony by a few weeks.
Note 1 – According to the Amsterdam Doopregisters (Baptism Registers) the son “Pieter” was baptized in the Nieuwe kerk (New Church) in Amsterdam on 11 May 1653. The father was recorded as “Pieter Pietersz” and the mother was reported as “Trijntje van de Lande.”
Note 2 – According to the more detailed record of the Amsterdam Marriage Intentions (Aangiften van Trouwen) the intended bride and groom were reported as “Pieter Pieterss” and “Trÿntie vande Lande.”
Dr. Krijnen reported that he sought all variations of the spelling of a Pieter Pietersen (e.g., Pieters, Pietersz, Pieterszen, etc.) who married a woman named Tryntje16 between 1648 and 1658 and this produced some surprising results. Specifically:
A total of 25 men named Pieter Pietersen married a woman named Tryntje during this ten year period, but out of these 25 marriages only ONE COUPLE presented a son Pieter for baptism in Amsterdam and that was on 11 May 1653 and the parents were the Pieter Pieterss and Trÿntie van de Lande who had married 6 months earlier in November 1652; and None of the 25 married couples, including Pieter Pieterss and Trÿntie van de Lande, presented a daughter named Tryntje or a daughter named Geestje for baptism.
As a result, Dr. Krijnen presumed that the Pieter Pieterss who married Trÿntie vande Lande in November 1652 and presented a son Pieter for baptism in May 1653 was the only candidate that offered a potential match to the family of the Dutch cadet Pieter Pietersen that boarded De Bonte Koe in April 1660. Unable to find baptism records for the cadet’s two daughters, Dr. Krijnen also suggested the family may have left Amsterdam after the birth of the first child, but subsequently sailed from Amsterdam in 1660. In any event, it is obvious that he was aware of the Ostrander family tradition of Pieter Pietersen, the Dutch cadet and De Bonte Koe. 16 Four page letter/report, dated May 28, 1993 from Dr. Krijnen to Mr. C.B. Ostrander of South Glen Falls, NY. 28
THE 2ND HYPOTHESIS (1993)
Based on the two records recovered by Dr. Krijnen, he theorized that
1. The groom Pieter Pieterss who married Trÿntie vande Lande in November 1652 was the same individual as Pieter Pietersen the passenger listed as a cadet among the group of 18 soldiers who were to sail on De Bonte Koe eight years later; 2. Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet and Trÿntie van de Lande were the progenitors of the Ostrander family in colonial America; and 3. It was their son Pieter, bpt. 11 May 1653, who married Rebecca Traphagen in Kingston in 1679.
The revelations from this research were evidently seen as a second major breakthrough and triggered revisions to the traditional rendition of the first generation of the family tree as reflected on page 2 of the OFA Big Book:
1. PIETER PIETERZEN1 m. Amsterdam, banns posted 26 Oct 1652, Tryntje van de Lande. Children: 2. Pieter(2), b. 11 May 1653 (Correction note – should read bpt. 11 May 1653). 3. Tryntje(2) Pieterzen, b. c1656, Holland, m. Kingston, Ulster County, NY, Hendrik Albertse Ploeg and had 10 children. 4. Geestje(2) Pieterzen, b. c1658, Holland, m. Jan Pier and had several children.
As a result, the genealogy presented in the OFA Big Book is based on the
1. Original hypothesis of the early Ostrander descendant-researchers, which presumed that the Pieter Pietersen who married Rebecca Traphagen in 1679 was the son of the Dutch cadet from Amsterdam who was listed among the soldiers who were to sail on De Bonte Koe in 1660; and
2. Dr. Krijnen’s 1993 hypothesis that presumed that the Pieter Pietersen who married Tryntje van de Lande in Amsterdam in November 1652 was the same person as the Dutch cadet named Pieter Pietersen listed as a passenger on De Bonte Koe in 1660 and it was his son Pieter, bpt. 11 May 1653 in Amsterdam, who married Rebecca Traphagen in 1679.
THE OSTRANDER FAMILY LEGEND
The first and second generations of the Ostrander family as presented in the OFA Big Book are based on several individual documented records, all of which have been verified, including:
two records from the Amsterdam Archives – the announcement of banns in 1652 for the marriage of a Pieter Pietersen and a Tryntje van de Lande and the baptism of their son Pieter in 1653; an entry in a Dutch ship’s log in 1660, which lists a cadet named Pieter Pietersen from Amsterdam as a passenger accompanied by his unnamed wife and three unnamed children of 8, 4 and 2 years of unknown gender; 29
the marriage of a Pieter Pietersen of Amsterdam and Rebecca Traphagen in Kingston in 1679; and multiple baptismal records from the registers of the Kingston church, which confirm that:
Pieter Pietersen, the groom of 1679, had a sister named Tryntje; Tryntje Pieters married c1672/73, Hendrick Albertse[n] and they had several children who all adopted the surname PLOEG around the end of the 17th century; and Pieter Pietersen, the groom of 1679 adopted the surname OSTRANDER in the early 18th century (as did his eight sons).
The names and chronology obviously suggested that a father-son kinship was quite conceivable, but unfortunately there was (and still is) no evidence to substantiate a biological connection. At least none that meet the Genealogical Proof Standard established by the American Society of Genealogists, which created the Board for Certification of Genealogists as a professional accrediting body for genealogists in 1964.
The Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS)
Genealogical research is a complex process that uses historical records to establish biological, genetic, or familial kinship. The validity and reliability of conclusions are based on the quality of sources, ideally original records; the information within those sources, ideally primary or firsthand information; and the evidence that can be drawn, directly or indirectly, from that information. Genealogists insist that any and all assertions (genealogical or historical claims) must have a precise source citation before they can be accepted. However, genealogists must often assemble indirect or circumstantial evidence to build a case for identity and kinship and in those instances of uncertainty they must provide a rationale for each uncertain identification or assumption.
Amsterdam Research (1997 – 2008)
A few years after the results of the research conducted in Amsterdam in 1993 became public, it was thought by some that the new information seemed to be limited and, perhaps, inconclusive. This precipitated a verification of the new revelations by three interested parties with links to the Ostrander, Pier and Traphagen families (who are all inextricably genealogically connected).
Between 1997 and 2000, the following three individuals ventured into the records of the various archives of Amsterdam:
Chris Brooks, a descendant of Willem Jansen Traphagen (the father of our maternal progenitor, Rebecca Traphagen); Kurt Brown, a descendant of Pieter(2) Pietersen Ostrander and Rebecca Traphagen; and Lorine McGinnis Schulze a descendant of the Pier family of Holland and colonial America (and creator/administrator of the Olive Tree Genealogy website at: http://www.olivetreegenealogy.com/index.shtml). 30 It was the uncertainty of the supposition that the groom of 1652 in Amsterdam (Pieter Pieterss) was also the Dutch cadet (Pieter Pietersen) who was reported on the passenger list of De Bonte Koe in 1660, that led Chris Brooks (who was then researching his Willem Jansen Traphagen ancestry) to undertake his own independent investigation in 1997 with the belief that:
“ … if correct, the 1993 findings “could be substantiated at least in part by the baptismal and marriage records” of Amsterdam.
The various forays into the records of the Amsterdam Archives have shed significantly more light on the family of Pieter Pieterss and Trÿntie van de Lande. They included Chris Brooks’ 1997 quest and an investigation of the records of the Amsterdam Archives conducted by Kurt Brown in 1998. Kurt also arranged for the Amsterdam Municipal Archives [Gemeentearchief Amsterdam] to undertake some research on his behalf. More recently, I ventured into the Amsterdam Archives’ baptism registers (in 2007/08), which are now accessible on-line via the Internet. The combined information collected by the separate searches over the past decade showed that the 1993 Amsterdam research was restricted, incomplete, inconclusive and in the final analysis, seriously flawed.
The total pool of data now consists of five Amsterdam records that clearly show that the Pieter Pieterss who married Trÿntie vande Lande in 1652 was a bontwerker (fur worker or furrier by trade), lived among Amsterdam’s middle class, was a widower and father of a daughter at the time of his second marriage and he was born in Amsterdam in 1625, as summarized below (in chronological sequence).
1625 20th April, New Church, Amsterdam – Pieter son of Pieter Henrixsz and Maritje Martes was baptized (Amsterdam Doopregisters – Bron 40, pg. 300)17
1650 15th May, Amsterdam Marriage Intentions (per Kurt Brown) – Pieter Pieters from Amsterdam, bontwerker (fur worker), 25 years old, assisted by his mother, Marij Martes, living on the Prinsegracht (Prince Canal) and Luijtie Janss van Stapel, 28 years old, living on the Leidsekade, assisted by her mother, Griet Egbers. The inclusion of the name of the groom’s mother (Marij Martes) plus the groom’s age ties Pieter Pieters (the furrier) to his baptism record and confirms the name of his father.
1651 30th April, Old Church Amsterdam – “Lijntie the daughter of Pieter Pieters and Luijtie Jans” was baptized (Amsterdam Doopregisters – Bron 8, page 316). This baptism record connects the parents of the child to the bride and groom of 1650.
1652 26 October, Amsterdam Marriage Intentions18 - “Pieter Pieterss from Amsterdam, bontwerker (fur worker or furrier), widower of Luytie Jans, living on the Fluweelen Burgwal, and Trÿntie vande Lande from Amsterdam, living on the Bloedstraat, age 35 years, having no parents [living in Amsterdam], assisted by Jan vande Lande her brother.”
17 Amsterdam Doopregisters (Baptism Registers) 1564 – 1811 are now accessible online via the Internet at: https://stadsarchief.amsterdam.nl/archieven/archiefbank/indexen/doopregisters/zoek/index.nl.html 18 The New York Genealogical and Biographical Record, July 1999, pages 163-173, “PARENTAGE OF PIETER PIETERSEN OSTRANDER AND HIS SISTER TRYNTJE PIETERS,” by Chris Brooks, page 164. 31 [A note in the margin beside the record of the betrothal indicates] “He (Pieter Pieterss) satisfied the Orphan Court he has completed proof – 6 November 1652” (this refers to the child of his first marriage as he was required to appear before the Orphan Court and present an account of the child’s inheritance, if any, before he could remarry).
From this record we learn that the furrier’s first wife died some time before October 1652, she was only 29 or 30 when she passed away and the daughter from the first marriage was about 1 ½ years old when her father remarried. It seems likely the second marriage took place in the middle of November, say on or about the 16th of November.
1653 11th May, New Church Amsterdam – “Pieter the son of Pieter Pietersz and Trijntje van de Lande” was baptized (Amsterdam Doopregisters – Bron 43, page 248).
Note: Kurt Brown’s research also indicated that Pieter Pietersen, the furrier, enjoyed “Burgher” status in Amsterdam (a member of the middle class, typically a prosperous solid citizen) and that “burghers” usually conformed to the proper customs, including baptizing their children. Therefore, if the furrier had two daughters with Trijntje van de Lande, namely Tryntje and Geestje, one would expect they would have also been baptized as was the case of the daughter of his first marriage. No baptism records were recovered for any other children of Pieter Pieterss’ marriage to his second wife Trÿntie vande (van de) Lande during searches conducted in 1993, 1997, 1998, 2007 and 2008.
The Family of Pieter Pieterss, the furrier of Amsterdam (1660)
Based on the additional information, there is now a more complete profile on Pieter Pieterss, the furrier of Amsterdam who married Trÿntie vande Lande, which meets the Genealogical Proof Standard. Not only is there nothing to connect he and his family to the family on De Bonte Koe, but the likelihood of such a match is further diminished by the following two critical factors:
1. According to the OFA Big Book an ““Adelborst - in English, a cadet, was a title given a gentleman volunteer in the Army, usually a younger son who, barred by primogeniture from inheriting the family estate, entered the service of his country as a means of making his living.” The rank of cadet denotes a junior officer-in-training and suggests the Adelborst, Pieter Pietersen, was probably a younger man in his early to mid-twenties, but based on the age of the eldest child perhaps he was older, say 26 to 29.
2. Amsterdam in the mid-17th century was a major hub of industry and commerce and it did not seem reasonable that a 35 year old furrier and member of the city’s burgher class would abandon his career in the prosperous fur industry in Holland’s booming economy for the vast wilderness and uncertainty of New Netherland.
The probability lessens further when you factor in the inherent dangers of a soldier’s duties, particularly one with a 42 year old wife, 9 year old daughter and 6 year old son. So when we convert the profile of the family of Pieter Pieterss the furrier to 1660 and compare it to the family of Pieter Pietersen, the Dutch cadet we get too many disparities as shown in the table on the following page. 32
De Bonte Koe - 1660 Passenger Manifest Pieter Pieterss, the furrier of Amsterdam Pieter Pietersen from Amsterdam, Adelborst, age 1660 - Pieter Pieterss, aged 35 years (born April unknown, perhaps aged 21 to 29 (born anywhere 1625), married twice: between 1630 and 1640), possibly m. c1651, - 1st in May 1650, to Luytje Jans and they had perhaps later (but there is no record of his one child marriage or existence in Amsterdam prior to - 2nd in November 1652, Trÿntie vande Lande April 1660) and apparently they only had one child Wife (unnamed, perhaps aged 26 to 29. Given Wife – Tryntje van de Lande, aged 42, b. c1617 the age of the eldest child it is conceivable that she may have been a widow with a child or children, who, perhaps, remarried between 1653 and 1659/60) Unnamed child aged 8 (gender not recorded), Lijntie Pieters, daughter of the first marriage, b. before April 1652 (probably) aged 9, b. April 1651, Amsterdam Unnamed child aged 4 (gender not recorded), Pieter Pieterss (Pietersz), son, aged 6, b. May b. c1656 1653, baptized 11 May 1653 in Amsterdam Unnamed child aged 2 (gender not recorded), b. c1658 No baptism records between 1654 and 1660 There is nothing to indicate that any of the were recovered for any other children of the children was a son named Pieter and no 2nd marriage. evidence that any of the three children were No other records were found for any one of male. the four family members (i.e., Pieter Sr., Tryntje van de Lande, Lijntie and Pieter Jr.)
It is evident that we have two distinctly different families and no record for the marriage of the Dutch cadet has ever been recovered. Similarly, no record of the name of his wife or the names and gender of any of his three children has ever been found and there is no record of the existence of Pieter Pietersen, the Dutch cadet and his family in:
Holland prior to April 15, 1660; and New Netherland after mid-June 1660.
The Dutch cadet and his family were only a brief, faint blip on the genealogical radar screen in 1660, that literally faded somewhere into the ether of New Netherland.
Pieter(2) Pietersen of Amsterdam and Hurley, Ulster County, New York
In September 1687, our ancestor Pieter(2) Pietersen was one of several residents of the small village of Hurley to take on oath of allegiance in Ulster County. The basic information reported at that time indicated the individual’s name, occupation, place of residence and age. From this record we learned that he reported that he was 29 years old in 1687 (i.e., he was born 1657/58), but as will be noted below that the wording of the colonial 17th century records is peculiar and unclear by today’s standards. 33 The following oath of allegiance records were found in the Earliest English Deeds of Ulster County, New York, Liber BB, Volume II, which were reviewed to ensure that the record for Pieter(2) Pietersen was interpreted correctly:
“ These are to Certifie that Pieter Petersen of hurley, ffarmer, 29 years Inhabitant, appeared before me Major Thomas Chambers of ffoxhall the 1st September and there did take the oath of allegiance. Signed December 2, 1687, Thomas Chambers.”
“These are to Certifie that Arien Roos of Hurley, ffarmer, 42 years Inhabitant appeared before me Major Thomas Chambers of Foxhall, 1st September, and there did take the oath of allegiance…. Signed 2 Dec. 1687, Thomas Chambers;”19 and
“ These are to Certify that Heyman Roos of Hurley, Shoemaker, 45 years Inhabitant appeared (as above) and did take the oath of allegiance.” (Signed, etc as above). 20
The latter two individuals Arien Roos [sic] and Heyman Roos [sic] were brothers and sons of Albert Heymans [ROOSA] who arrived with their father on De Bonte Koe in 1660 and first settled in Kingston before relocating to New Dorp (Hurley) in 1662/63. Therefore, we know that they were both inhabitants of Ulster County for a maximum of 27 years and the peculiar wording “42 years Inhabitant” and “45 years Inhabitant” actually meant that they were 42 years of age and 45 years of age respectfully and residents of Hurley. Therefore, we have among the inhabitants of Hurley in September 1687 who took the oath of allegiance:
Our ancestor and family progenitor Pieter(2) Pietersen, farmer, 29 years of age.
Thus, we have yet another piece of evidence showing that the son Pieter of Pieter Pietersz the furrier of Amsterdam and Trijntje van de Lande, who was baptized on 11 May 1653 in Amsterdam and would have been 34 in September 1687, was not the Pieter Pietersse who married Rebecca Traphagen. In contrast to the uncertainties of the traditional oral accounts and the limited results of Dr. Krijnen’s 1993 research in Holland is the convincing evidence presented in the GPS compliant genealogies of the:
Ostrander-Traphagen family21 and Ostrander-Pier family.22.
Both articles have been audited and all relevant records have been confirmed. Additional research completed between October 2007 and August 2008 recovered information that augments these published family histories and add further weight to the verified evidence that:
Our ancestor and family patriarch Pieter(2) Pietersen was the son of Pieter(1) Carstensen of Husum (or Nordstrand) and Geesje Jans of Norden and he came to colonial America on the Dutch ship De St. Jan Baptist with his mother, sister Tryntje(2) Pieters and stepfather Arent Teunissen in 1661; and 19 Earliest English Deeds of Ulster County, New York, Liber BB, Volume II, page 87 20 Ibid, page 88 21 “PARENTAGE OF PIETER PIETERSEN OSTRANDER AND HIS SISTER TRYNTJE PIETERS,” by Chris Brooks, The New York Genealogical and Biographical Record, July 1999, pages 163-173. 22 “ORIGINS OF THE PIER FAMILY IN NEW NETHERLAND AND AN UPDATE OF THEIR CONNECTION TO THE OSTRANDER FAMILY” - The New York Genealogical and Biographical Record, July 2000, pages 163-181. 34 The progenitors of the Ostrander family of colonial New York are Pieter (2) Pietersen and Rebecca Traphagen.
A detailed report entitled “THE VERIFIED ACCOUNT OF THE FIRST TWO GENERATIONS OF THE OSTRANDER FAMILY IN AMERICA” showing the corroborated GPS compliant genealogy is available on the OFA website at: www.ostrander.org
GENERAL SUMMARY
1. There is no connection between Pieter Pieterss the furrier who married Trÿntje van de Lande in Amsterdam in 1652 and Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet that presumably boarded De Bonte Koe with his family in April 1660.
2. There is no connection between Pieter Pieterss the furrier and Trÿntje van de Lande and the Ostrander family and by extension, there is no connection between their son Pieter Pietersz (who was baptized in Amsterdam in May 1653) and the Pieter(2) Pietersen of Amsterdam (born 1657/58) who married Rebecca Traphagen in Kingston in 1679.
3. Pieter Pieterss the furrier and Trÿntje van de Lande probably remained in Holland and were not the progenitors of the Ostrander family of Ulster County, NY.
4. There is no genealogical connection between Pieter Pietersen the Dutch cadet and the Ostrander family.
5. There is no historical connection between the Ostrander family and the Dutch ship De Bonte Koe.
The OFA Research Committee unanimously acknowledged and endorsed these conclusions at the end of June 2008. The OFA Board of Directors unanimously accepted and endorsed these conclusions at the end of July 2008.
IMPORTANT NOTES
1. The genealogical validity of the eight sons identified as children of our progenitors Pieter(2) Pietersen Ostrander and Rebecca Traphagen is indisputable.
2. The Ostrander surname originated in colonial Ulster County, New York in the early 18th century and is unique to the descendants of the family’s progenitors.
3. All Ostranders descended from Pieter(2) Pietersen Ostrander and Rebecca Traphagen are also descendants of Willem Jansen Traphagen (Rebecca’s father) of Lemgo, Lippe. 35