Most Frequent Errors and Incorrect or Unproven Lines of
Descent from Anneke Jans
"Undoubtedly, the most controversial aspect of this book will be the identification of the myths, common errors and invalid lines of descent that have been perpetuated for perhaps 200 years or more and, unfortunately, which have been accepted and published by a vast number of family historians. The circumstances surrounding the origin of these unsupported vagaries of American genealogy will never be precisely known but there is no question that the many suits by the "heirs" of Anneke Jans against Trinity Church, fostered by the greed of some to defraud others and of many to be identified as a potential "heir", was a predominant motivating factor. Even today, in 1996, there are some people who still firmly believe that they or their descendants may yet become wealthy from the results of a favourable outcome of yet another suit against Trinity Church. As incredible as it might sound, I am still periodically requested to provide supporting information in preparation for such another suit on behalf of the "heirs" of Anneke Jans. Needless to say, I have not provided any support at all and I have emphatically discouraged anyone else's participation in such a futile undertaking. Indeed, should individuals now proceed with such an action, I feel certain they would eventually be convicted of fraud. For information on past suits against Trinity Church, I highly recommend the outstanding articles by William J. Parry that were published in the New York Genealogical and Biographical Record, Vol. 125, April and July 1994 issues, titled "The 'Heirs of Anneke Jans Bogardus' versus Trinity Church: A Chronicle of New York's Most Prolonged Legal Dispute"; and Vol. 126, April 1995, titled "A Family Feud: The Anneke Jans Claimants in 1831".
The Myth about Anneke Jans
The most frequent error, or myth, concerns Anneke Jans herself. In this regard, I have elsewhere included in this book my version of "The Anneke Jans Bogardus Story" which attempts to dispel the myth that she was descended from William the Silent (1533-1584), Prince of Orange and founder of the Dutch Republic. I invite your attention to the outstanding references in the "Bibliography and Notes" section of this book pertaining to Chart No. 1, namely, sources nos. 10 and 11 by George Olin Zabriskie, and no. 12, by John 0. Evjen.
Briefly, Anneke's maiden name was not Webber; she was not the granddaughter of William the Silent; she was not born in the royal mansion at The Hague, as some accounts have stated; and she was not born in Amsterdam. She was born in 1605 in Flekkeroy (in Vest Adger, Norway), a village on an island of the same name, four miles south of the city of Kristiansand-this information first discovered and authored by G. 0. Zabriskie.
Anna Maria Jans, wife of Cornelius Janszen Van Hoorn, was not related to Anneke Jans, the subject of this book
It is unfortunate that a number of previous authors have published their erroneous versions of other "Jans" family relationships to the family of Anneke Jans. Far too often, interested descendants have accepted these versions of their family's relationship to Anneke Jans without realizing (or refusing to accept) that there was no proof whatsoever to support these alleged family connections.
Three examples of the incorrect relationship of Anna Maria Jans, wife of Cornelius Janszen Van Hoorn, can be found in the New York Genealogical and Biographical Record: "Anneke Jans-Bogardus (1599-1663) and Her Possible Blood Connection with the Sybrant, Selyns and Webber Families in New Netherland", by John Reynolds Totten, Vol. 57, January 1926, pp. 26-27; "The Van Horn Family History", by Francis M. Marvin, 1929, pp. 44 and 93; and "Anneke Jans Bogardus and her New Amsterdam Estate-Past and Present", by Thomas Bentley Wikoff, 1924, pp. 50-51 and 64. Each of these accounts differ slightly from each other but none are supported with factual proof.
An excellent explanation of these errors, and of Ariaentje Jans, another non-daughter of Tryntje Jonas, can be found in George Olin Zabriskie's five-part article, "The Founding Families of New Netherland, Nos. 5 & 6. The Roelofs and Bogardus Families", de Halve Maen, Vol. 48, No. 3, October 1973, p. 14. Other excellent references, also by G. 0. Zabriskie, which briefly address the error of Anna Maria Jans' relationship to Anneke Jans, can be found in his outstanding articles in The American Genealogist, "Christian Barentsen Van Horn and Some of His Earlier Descendants", Vols. 43-45, October 1967 through January 1969; and "The Jan Cornelisen Van Horn/ Van Horne Family of New York and New Jersey," Vols. 46-47, January 1970 through January 1971.
Incorrect Details about Domine Everardus Bogardus
Domine (Reverend) Bogardus has sometimes been referred to as a widower when he married Anneke Jans in 1638. No primary source has ever been cited for this detail so, until such evidence of a prior marriage is found, the speculation that he was a widower has no foundation at all.
At this point, I would like to refer to the three-part article by P. H. Bogaard that was published in de Halve Maen, the esteemed quarterly journal of The Holland Society of New York, Vol. 46, July and October 1971, January 1972, titled "Dutch Ancestry of Domine Everardus Bogardus". While this article is well written and seemingly based on sound research, it has quite recently been proven to be in error. A new biography on Evert Willemsz., later known as Evert Bogaert and Everardus Bogardus, principally centering upon a miraculous spiritual experience he had at about age 15, now quite authoritatively identifies his known family relationships. The book, published in The Netherlands in 1995 in the Dutch language, is titled Wegen Evert Willemsz. Een Hollands weeskind op zoek naar zichelf (1607-1647) [translated as The Paths of Evert Willemsz. A Dutch Orphan in Search of Himself (1607-1647)]. It is the culmination of extensive research in The Netherlands and the United States by Willem Th. M. Frijhoff, Professor of Cultural History, Erasmus
University Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Prof. Frijhoff has also advised that because of the interest expressed by several hundred members of our Descendants Association he intends to have the book published in English.
Additional information about Domine Bogardus, including a brief summary of Prof. Frijhoff's newfound information about the parents and siblings, is included in "The Domine Everardus Bogardus Story" by permission of Prof. Frijhoff.
Jan Roelofszen, the only son of Anneke Jans and Roelof Jansen, was not the Jan Roeloffsen De Goyer who died in the 1690 Schenectady Massacre
It is frequently stated that Jan Roelofszen, Anneke's son, was possibly married to Aefje Pieters and that they both died in the Schenectady Massacre of 8 February 1690. Even in The Iconography of Manhattan Island, 1498-1909 by Isaac Newton Phelps Stokes, published between 1915-1928, the author, referring to Anneke's son, states in Vol. VI, p. 149, that "Jan (who was not married when his mother died. He is supposed to have been killed in 1690)."
In The Documentary History of the State of New York by E. B. O'Callaghan, 1849, Vol. I, pp. 304-305, there is a 'List of Ye People Kild and Destroyed by Ye French of Canida and there Indians at Skinnechtady Twenty Miles to Ye Westward of Albany Between Saturday and Sunday ye 9th Day of February 1689/1690" (spelling as then given). Included in this list is "Jan Roeloffse de goyer burnt in ye house - - 1"
Recognizing that the respected historian, Prof. Jonathan Pearson, had erroneously identified Anneke's son in some of his published items as Jan Roeloffsen De Goyer, a notation by A. J. F. Van Laer was included in Early Records of the City and County of Albany and Colony of Rensselaerswyck, Vol.3 (Notarial Papers 1 and 2, 1660-1696), 1918, p. 262, which is quoted as follows:
Thus, there is no evidence of a marriage of Anneke's son, Jan Roelofszen, to anyone at all and it is apparent that he was not only still single at the time of his mother's death in 1663 but also in 1670 when he was living in Beverwyck as a surveyor of lots.
The Unproven Van Giesen Connection
The genealogy of the Kierstede family (sometimes also spelled Kierstead in later generations) has been very well researched, especially in the early generations, and yet the name of a daughter of Surgeon Hans Kierstede and Sara Roelofs, 'Justrina' or sometimes called 'Gertrude', has frequently been identified as a principal point of connection to a line of descent from Anneke Jans.
In this instance, 'Justrina' is shown in The Chancery Record, December 1925, Vol. 1, No. 12, p.5, as having been born 10 October 1649. In the January 1926 issue (Vol. 2, No. 1, p. 2), 'Justrina' is alleged to have married in 1664 Jans. Van Giesen, with two children, Catherine and Abram born to this couple. No sources for this information are given. In the Walter Beach Plume manuscript collection on file at the New Jersey Historical Society, his records on the early descendants of Anneke Jans includes 'Jouistrina' as having been baptized in November 1658 and then married in 1673 in New York to Jan Van Giesen. Jan is shown as being the son of Jan Peterson Van Giesen, bp. in 1643 at New York. Children born to 'Jouistrina' and Jan Van Giesen are shown as: Abraham, Jacob, Rachel and Tunis (these allegedly baptized at the New Amsterdam/New York Reformed Dutch Church on 20 August 1690) and Rynier, Magdalena (bp. 1692), Isaac (bp. 1697) and George (bp. 1700). (See Family History Library microfilm No. 0946633.) It should be noted that this family is not included in the excellent genealogy of the Van Giesen family found in History of the City of Paterson and the County of Passiac, New Jersey by William Nelson, 1901, pp. 264-272.
Variations of this information, but all without supporting references, have been submitted by a number of alleged descendants-this line continuing though the Speer, Von Tock, Showers and Van Every families, among others. In my own research of the Kierstede family I have found no record whatsoever of a child of Hans Kierstede and Sara Roelofs by the name of 'Justrina'; no record of a marriage of a Jan Van Giesen to any Kierstede daughter of that time period; nor of the baptisms of any of the alleged children of 'Justrina' Kierstede and Jan Van Giesen. The Walter Beach Plume manuscript of the descendants of Anneke Jans is replete with numerous instances of unsupported marriages and children, many of which can be readily disproven.
Mr. Plume, born 22 September 1847 and died 25 May 1911, was then considered a competent genealogist. It is known that he acquired much of his material on old Bergen County and western Essex County (New Jersey) families during the late 1800s and thus may have had access to records that are no longer available. Thus, some of his work may be of significant research value even though his notes contain few, if any, citations of authority. In this instance, however, unless further evidence from primary sources can be found to support the birth or baptism of such a child as 'Justrina' within the family of Hans Kierstede and Sara Roelofs, this line of descent must be considered highly improbable. The Walter Beach Plume manuscript material, therefore, must only be used as a guide, requiring the researcher to apply today's standard of acceptable proof to Mr. Plume's data.
It was not a 'Martha' Kierstede (sometimes referred to as 'Casted', 'Kested' or 'Kersted') who married John Corby
Old family notes and legends about being descended from Anneke Jans were once again responsible for another erroneous line of descent from a Kierstede daughter though several generations of Corby families in New Jersey, as well as connections to such families as King, Chitterling, Egberts, Bowden, Hale, Riker, Van Blarcom, Bedford and many others.
The alleged lineage is correct from Anneke's daughter, Sara Roelofs and her husband, Surgeon Hans Kierstede; though their son Lucas Kierstede, bp. 23 September 1657, and his wife, Rachel Kip; and though their son, Jacob Kierstede,
bp. 20 March 1692, who first married Sarah Nerbery. But then it is in error through an alleged daughter 'Martha' who was shown to have married John Corby. There was no such daughter 'Martha' born to this couple but a child named 'Gideon' was shown as an alleged son of Martha Kierstede and John Corby.
Searching for the marriage of John and Martha and for their children, the variant spellings of Corby were found as Heirbeig, Caerbi and Karby, and Martha's name was shown as Corsteng, Corstang and Karstang. This conclusively proved that it was not a Martha Kierstede who married John Corby but Martha Carstang. The marriage of Johannes Heirbeig (spelled by the recorder as he probably heard the name 'Corby') and Martha Carstang took place on 5 September 1738 at the New Amsterdam/New York Reformed Dutch Church; a daughter, Jannetje, was baptized there on 11 November 1747; and a daughter, Elsje, was baptized on 29 April 1750 at the Second River (Belleville) Dutch Reformed Church in New Jersey.
This information thus led to the excellent article by John Clapperton Kerr, "Gideon Carstang (168-?-1759) and Some of His Descendants", published in the New York Genealogical and Biographical Record, Vol. 58, July 1927, pp. 22 1-242; page 227 pertains specifically to Martha Carstang, wife of John Corby. This line of descent through the Corby family is thus not descended from Anneke Jans. It is also another erroneous line of descent that is included in the Walter Beach Plume manuscripts on file at the New Jersey Historical Society which have been mentioned previously.
The Benjamin Kip who married Dorothy Davenport was not a Descendant of Anneke Jans
There is no doubt at all that the granddaughter of Anneke Jans, Catharyn Kierstede, bp. 4 January 1660, daughter of Sara Roelofs and Surgeon Hans Kierstede, married on 4 September 1681, Johannes Kip. A frequent error that allegedly continues a line of descent via their son, Benjamin Kip, bp. 21 March 1703 with his twin sister Blandina, shows that this Benjamin married Dorothy Davenport and had a number of children, the daughters marrying into the Powell, Weeks and Runnells families.
This alleged line of descent is erroneously shown and continued in the two works by Robert Bolton, A History of the County of Westchester, From Its First Settlement to the Present Time, 1848, Vol. 2, Appendix A, pp. 526-528; and The History of the Several Towns, Manors and Patents of the County of Westchester, From Its First Settlement to the Present Time, 1881, Vol. 2, Appendix A, pp. 741-742. The correct information, however, can be found in the excellent History of the Kip Family in America, by Frederic Ellsworth Kip, published in 1928, pp. 384 and 392-395.
Briefly stated, there is no record of any marriage or family of Benjamin Kip, bp. 21 March 1703, the son of Johannes Kip and Catharyn Kierstede, but it is the Benjamin Kip, bp. 24 May 1714 in Newtown, Long Island, NY, son of Jesse Kip and Maria Stevens, who married Dorothy Davenport and who had the children also identified in Boltons' histories as the alleged descendants of Anneke Jans. Thus, no descendants of Benjamin Kip, the son of Johannes Kip and Catharyn Kierstede have been identified.
An Erroneous Van Brugh-Spier (or Speer)-Edwards Connection
A similar error that may also have originated with the research and manuscripts of
Walter Beach Plume, is the alleged first marriage of Catharina Van Brugh, bp. 19
Apr 1665, the daughter of Trijntje Roelofs and Johannes Pieterszen Van Brugh, to
Hans Spier. Several variations of continued lines of descent, all without any primary
evidence, would then connect the Spier or Speer descendants with such families as
Edwards and Morrison. There was indeed a marriage of Hans Hendrickszen Spier to Tryntie Pieters on 1 August 1683 at the New Amsterdam/New York Reformed Dutch Church which indicated that both were from Bergen (New Jersey) and there are baptisms of some of their children at the Reformed Protestant Dutch Church, Bergen, N.J. This Tryntie Pieters from Bergen is certainly not the Catharina Van Brugh, identified as "j. d." (unmarried maiden), who was married to Hendrick Renselaer, a young man from Rensselaerswyck, on 19 March 1689 at the New Amsterdam/New York Reformed Dutch Church. Thus, there was no marriage of Catharina Van Brugh, granddaughter of Anneke Jans, to Hans Hendrickszen Spier. Two excellent sources for coverage of early Spier/Speer genealogical data are, History of Paterson and its Environs: The Silk City, by William Nelson and Charles A. Shriner, 1920, Vol. 2, pp. 28-36; and "The Early Spier Family," by Janet T. Riemer, Genealogical Magazine of New Jersey, Vol. 55, January, May and September 1980, pp. 1-10, 65-70 and 127-132, respectively.
An Unproven Bogardus-Van Ness-Vandercook Line of Descent
Another legendary connection to a line of descent from Anneke Jans begins with the alleged second marriage of Blandina Bogardus, bp. 13 September 1680, granddaughter of Anneke Jans by her son, Willem Bogardus and his second wife, Walburga De Sille Kregier, to Henry Van Ness in February 1708. This legend was included by John Reynolds Totten in his "Editor's Correspondence", being "Letters to the Editor Concerning the Article on Anneke Jans which Appeared in the July 1925 Issue of 'The Record' ", then published in the New York Genealogical and Biographical Record, Vol. 57, January 1926, pp. 86-87. Mr. Totten did not discount it but instead stated: "I am inclined to place credence in the family history and would suggest that steps be taken to prove the divorce of Blandina Bogardus from Theophilus Elswaert and to get documentary evidence of the marriage of Blandina (Bogardus) Elswaert to Henry Van Ness." The precise origin of this legend is unknown, of course, but was similarly included in a series of approximately 73 blueprint style family charts prepared by Wesley Vandercook between 1914 and 1929. A daughter of Blandina and Henry Van Ness, Cornelia, allegedly married Michael Vandercook and subsequent generations then married into the Overacker, Francisco, Weaver, Porter and Badger families, among others. There has been no proof found or offered with regard to a possible second marriage of Blandina (Bogardus) Elswaert, to Henry Van Ness; there is no proof of any children born to this couple; and the Cornelia Van Ness who married Michael Vandercook was the daughter of Simon Van Ness and his second wife, Hester Delamater. The excellent genealogy, The Ancestors and Descendants of Simon Van Ness and Hester Delamater, by David M. Riker, 1984, should be consulted for further information; and the Vandercook-Jans Genealogical Records in Holland and America, by Mrs. Emma Elisabeth (Teall) Dunn, 1926, and others of this nature should be disregarded as providing any evidence whatsoever on this line of descent from Anneke Jans.
Magdalena Brouwer was not the wife of John Drake
Perhaps the most widely accepted but unproven line of descent from Anneke Jans is the connection which begins with the alleged marriage of Magdalena Brouwer, bp. 8 Mar 1704, daughter of Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus, to John Drake. This error was first brought to the attention of interested genealogists in The American Genealogist, Vol. 30, July 1954, p. 176 and Vol. 31, January 1955, p. 54, being corrections and additions to William J. Hoffman's "Brouwer Beginnings - The First Three Generations of the Adam Brouwer Berchoven Family," published in The American Genealogist, Vols. 23 and 24, 1947-1948.
The alleged children of Magdalena and John Drake, namely Joseph, John,
Martha, Phoebe, Esther, Eleanor, William, Jacob, Samuel, Benjamin, Mary and
Zephaniah, were indeed John's children, most of whom are named in the will of John
Drake of Goshen Prect., Orange Co., New York, dated 6 February 1779 and proved
28 January 1780; it should be noted, however, that in his will John mentions his
wife's name as "Martha".
In the very professional article by Neil D. Thompson, "Auguste Grasset of La Rochelle, London, and New York City," National Genealogical Society Quarterly, Vol. 66, No. 1, March 1978, it is quite clearly shown that the wife of John Drake was Martha Oldfield, the daughter of Joseph Oldfield and Martha Grasset. As a point to also consider, some of the children of John Drake and Martha Oldfield are clearly named after members of Martha's family, i.e., Martha-for John's wife and mother-in-law, Martha Grasset; Esther and Mary-for Martha's Aunts, Esther and Marianne Grasset, and for her sisters, Hester and Mary Oldfield; Samuel-for Martha's uncle, Samuel Grasset.
A very conclusive fact of evidence that leaves no question as to the identity of John's wife is given by an old bible record of the Daines family of Chester, New York, which states that William Drake was the son of John Drake and identifies one of the sons of William as David Grasset Drake. An excellent unpublished account of the family of John Drake and Martha Oldfield and some of their descendants can be found in Drakes of Orange Co., New York, and Related Families, by Imogene H. Lane (Family History Library microfilm No. 0872801, item #4 on the film).
In addition to the above, it should be noted that on Chart No. 7A of this book the husband of Magdalena Brouwer has now been identified as William Van Note who died intestate in March 1772, naming his widow, "Magdalen Vannorte", and son, "Jacob Vannorte", both of Shrewsbury, Monmouth Co., New Jersey, as administrators of his estate. Fellow bondsmen are also identified as Jacob Brewer of Shrewsbury and John Van Clafe of Freehold, Monmouth County. An inventory of William's estate was also made by Jacob Laing and Elazerus Brewer on 10 April 1772.
This identification of William Van Note as the husband of Magdalena Brouwer is, of course, circumstantial but is also accompanied by the fact that two brothers of Magdalena, namely Willem, bp. 8 May 1687 and John, possibly b. 5 September 1692, married two sisters of William Van Note, i.e., Maria Hennion, nee Van Noordt, widow of Pieter Hennion; and Janneke Van Oort, respectively. It is obvious that the Brouwer and Van Note families were very close inasmuch as both Willem and John Brouwer and their wives appear as witnesses at the baptisms of the children of several Van Note sisters of Willem at the New Amsterdam/New York Reformed Dutch Church.
The Fraudulent Brower-Williams-Kinney Connection
This alleged line of descent from Anneke Jans is contained in a published "Ancestral Chart of the Anneke Jans, Bogardus and Webber Families" and has been notarized at the end with the following statement: "I, Chas. H. Steelman, of the City of Philadelphia, a Notary Public, duly commissioned and sworn. Do Hereby Certify, that the foregoing has been by me compiled from information furnished to me by Henry C. Kooken, of Lucas, Richland County, Ohio, and said to have been procured by him and others from Church and Family Bible Records, Tombstone Inscriptions, etc. Witness my hand and seal this sixteenth day of September, A.D. 1874."
I suspect that the information on this chart was once again compiled in connection with one of the suits against Trinity Church, primarily because one of the earlier ancestors of the many Kinney families that are included was named "Brower". The information given begins with the erroneous connection of Anneke Jans as a granddaughter of "King William the 4th". The line correctly continues through William Bogardus, the first son of Anneke Jans and Everardus Bogardus, and his wife Wyntje Sybrandts; their daughter "Anetjee", who married Jacobus Brower; and their son Sybrant Brower who married Sara Webber.
It is claimed at this point that Sybrant's and Sara's son, Jacob Brower, was born on 27 February 1707 and that he married Claesjie Bogart on 19 November 1727. Claesjie is shown to have been born on 27 February 1709, the daughter of Johanus Bogart and Claesjie Van Schayck, and died 19 December 1729. The lineage then continues with twin children of Jacob Brower and Claesjie Bogart, Johannus and Mary, born 1 October 1728 and with the marriage of Mary Brower to Johannus Williams on 10 January 1745. Of their four children, Mary Brower Williams was born 21 October 1745 and is shown to have married Louis Kinney on 5 January 1762."
"I had discussed this alleged line of descent a bit more in my book but recent information has now revealed that Mr. Kooken (mentioned above) had deliberately created this fake pedigree for a "fee". It is known that Claesjie BOGART was a figment of the Henry C. Kooken scam and that the wills of the two husbands of Claesjie VAN SCHAYCK, i.e., Johannes BOGART and Johananes DeGRAFF, clearly showed that they died without issue. Thus, there was no such marriage of a Claesjie BOGART to a Jacob BROWER; supporting bible records were apparently fraudulently created; and the twin children of Jacob BROWER and Claesjie BOGART never existed at all -- good reason then why they could never be found!. This line of descent from Anneke Jans is therefore without foundation and, furthermore, the Jacob BROWER who was the son of Sybrant BROWER is believed to have died young."
Adolphus Brouwer was not the son of Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus
A number of unsupported family records and some published genealogies have included as sons of Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus the names of Jan/John or Jonas and Adolph or Adolphus, the former allegedly born 5 September 1692 and the latter born 5 October 1693.
It would seem superfluous to repeat the excellent analysis of this matter that has already been written by the noted family historian, William J. Hoffman but, in brief, there is now no question that Adolphus Brouwer, born 5 October 1693, was the son of Nicolaes Brouwer and Jannetje Colyer-Nicolaes being the younger brother of Jacobus Brouwer. A complete discussion of this subject is contained in Mr. Hoffman's article, "Brouwer Beginnings-The First Three Generations of the Adam Brouwer Berchoven Family," identified as source no. 84 for Chart 7 in the "Bibliography and Notes" section of this book, more specifically covered in The American Genealogist, Vol. 24, January 1948, p. 23 and Vol. 24, July 1948, pp. 161-163. Another excellent discussion of this subject can be found in "Editor's Correspondence," New York Genealogical and Biographical Record, Vol. 57, No. 1, January 1926, pp. 81-84. This subject is a good example of the dangers in accepting as a matter of fact the firm beliefs of grandparents or great-grandparents, even if found in old letters and the like, that the family was descended from Anneke Jans. In this instance, a later descendant of Adolphus Brouwer, Nicholas Gesner, had been involved in one of the suits against Trinity Church and was convinced that this Brouwer ancestry was descended from Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus. His notes and papers were then subsequently used as a basis for the descendancy information included in the published genealogy, The Gesner Family of New York and Nova Scotia, by Anthon T. Gesner, published in 1912.
Other Erroneous and Unproven Lines of Descent from Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus
Probably the most frequent lines of descent that are referred to our Descendants Association are those which are alleged to be descended from Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus. The vast majority of these lines have the appearance of having been researched by someone to a known early Brouwer, Brower or Brewer ancestor and then, s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d by imagination and the use of approximate dates, etc., to reach a proven child or grandchild of Jacobus Brouwer. Some of these lines of descent have been identified with Jennie Kepler (discussed in the "Introduction" of this book) while others are no doubt the result of past and present amateur family historians attempting to prove their descent from Anneke Jans. Another source of unproven information-leading many to believe they are legitimate descendants of Anneke Jans through a Brouwer, Brower or Brewer connection-is The New Harlem Register, by Henry Pennington Toler, published in 1903. The identified children, spouses and lineages included in this source should only be used as a guide for further research and not as the authority to prove one's descent from Anneke Jans.
I suspect, however, that some of the unproven pedigrees that do show a descent from an early Brouwer, Brower or Brewer ancestor may, in fact, be true descendants of Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus, but these cannot be legitimately recognized as such until they have been proven. It should also be recognized that Jacobus Brouwer had six brothers, namely Pieter, Matthys, Willem, Adam, Abraham and Nicolaes, each of which had sons whose descendants have extended to the 20th century, and thus there is a high probability that many of the unknown connected pedigrees have descended from one of these. And, there were at least eight other known Brouwer, Brower or Brewer progenitors of these family names, unrelated to each other, that are logical candidates as the ancestors of the many individuals by these names that have been suspected to be descended from Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus. In this regard, the proven descendants of Anneke Jans through Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus will be relatively few in number because of the tremendous odds in favour of a family's Brouwer, Brower or Brewer ancestor being descended from another early family progenitor.
It would be impractical for me to identify the approximate 150 miscellaneous Brouwer-Brower-Brewer lineages and family connections that have been referred to our Descendants Association with the claim of descent from Anneke Jans. Many of these appear to be valid pedigrees back to approximately the 1780-1850 time period and, as discussed above, have been shown to be allegedly descended from Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus. Some of these have been proven to be descended from one of the brothers of Jacobus, although most remain an unproven connection to any known early Brouwer, Brower or Brewer family. The following examples of some of these alleged lines of descent from Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus are among those that have most frequently been accepted as valid-but which are not:
Abraham Brouwer and Elizabeth Ackerman did have a son John, bp. 11 Mar 1733
at the Dutch Reformed Church of Hackensack, N.J., but he is known to have married
Rachel Van Braakelen on 15 April 1754 at the Schraalenburg Dutch Reformed Church in New Jersey. His children have been clearly identified, being quite different than those of the John Brouwer and his two wives, Elsie Dunbar (or Lewis) and Sarah Howell; their families later settled in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
2. A daughter of Sybrant Brouwer and Sara Webber, Jannetje, bp. 29 January 1718 at the New Amsterdam/New York Reformed Dutch Church, has often been identified as the "Tannica" Brower of Middlesex, N.J. who married Cornelius Tunison on 29 April 1749, yet this same Jannetje Brouwer has also been identified as the wife of a Thomas Hill whom she is alleged to have married in about 1740. This Hill connection is then continued by the marriage of their daughter, Elinor, born in 1743, who married Rufus Gillet of Phillipstown, Putnam Co., N.Y. on 10 November 1783 and through their son Thomas Gillet, born 18 July 1786, who married Sophia Pratt on 27 June 1790. A daughter of Rufus and Elinor, Lydia Gillet, is also alleged to have married Absalom Denny.
There are other "Jannetje" Brouwer daughters during this same approximate time period who were descended from other brothers of Jacobus Brouwer so it is quite possible that the Jannetje Brower who married Cornelius Tunison and the Jannetje Brower who married Thomas Hill (who may also be one and the same person) might have been one of the "Jannetje" daughters of someone else-not being then descended from Anneke Jans. Thus, the above alleged lines of descent from Sybrant Brouwer's and Sara Webber's daughter, Jannetje, are still unproven.
3. Abraham Brouwer, bp. 6 February 1717 at the New Amsterdam/New York Reformed Dutch Church, son of Jacobus Brouwer and Petronella De La Montagne and grandson of Jacobus Brouwer and Anna Bogardus, is often shown to have first married Sarah Stephenson on 2 February 1736 and that their son, Elias, was born 22 March 1741 and married Phoebe Lucas on 3 January 1766. There is no evidence to support the assumption that this Abraham, bp. 6 February 1717, was the same Abraham who married Sarah Stephenson before his proven marriage to Aefje Van Gelder on 19 March 1743 at the New Amsterdam/New York Reformed Dutch Church; and his will, dated 7 July 1789, makes no reference to a son Elias or any children of a prior marriage.
There is No Record that a Phillip Arnold married a Daughter of Cornelis Bogardus and Rachel De Witt
An often repeated alleged line of descent from Anneke Jans and Everardus Bogardus identifies Janneken Bogardus, bp. 13 May 1694, a known and proven daughter of Cornelis Bogardus and Rachel De Witt, as the wife of Phillip Arnold (sometimes also identified as Benjamin Phillip Arnold).
A son of this alleged union is shown to be Benjamin Phillip Arnold, born 1712-1719 in Bedford Co., Virginia, who married Ann Hendrick about 1736 and died in Greenville, South Carolina in 1796. Continued generations are shown to be through the Hamilton, Duncan, Wallace and Baggett families. If such a Bogardus - Arnold union occurred at all, it could not have been by the marriage of Janneken Bogardus, daughter of Cornelis Bogardus and Rachel De Witt. This daughter was quite clearly the wife of Jacob Wynkoop, bp. 26 May 1691, whose son Cornelis Wynkoop was bp. 25 March 1711 at the Old Dutch Church of Kingston, New York. Janneken Bogardus Wynkoop is known to have continued to live in the Kingston area and was a witness at several baptisms up to 7 February 1762. This alleged line of descent is thus not correct, although it may yet be proven that another Bogardus daughter, from a different family, could be identified as a wife of Phillip Arnold.
Early Erroneous and Unproven Bogardus Connections
Besides those that have already been mentioned in this chapter and which have been corrected in the new genealogical charts contained herein, there have been relatively few alleged connections to a Bogardus individual in the first five generations that cannot be accounted for. The vast majority of unproven connections begin beyond the fifth generation when the Bogardus families were then more dispersed, throughout such states (other than New York) as: Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana and Iowa before later migrations to California, Oregon and Washington, for example. A few of the very early erroneous or unknown connections are thus now mentioned.
2. A daughter of Comelis Bogardus and Rachel DeWitt, "Lenora", is alleged to have been born 1 March 1702 and then married to Comelis Van Horn on 22 May 1729. There was no such daughter-in any Bogardus family at all-named "Lenora" and there is no record of such a marriage. This line of descent seems to be the type of fictitious pedigree distributed by Mrs. Jennie Kepler and others, as previously mentioned.
3. One of the daughters of Ephraim Bogardus and Agnietie De Garmo, Anna, bp. 6 October 1734, is alleged to have married William G. Sutphin in 1760. Family records have indicated that the following children were born to this couple:
William, b. 20 December 1761; Jacob, b. 2 February 1763; Isaiah, b. 9 July 1765; Degoria, b. 2 May 1769; and Nelly, b. 11 November 1771, who married on 12 June 1792 William Chamberlin, b. 17 Jul 1771 in Hunterdon Co., NJ. This line of descent then continues through the Kelly and Robbins families.
The fact that this information is from old family records would seem to authenticate this connection to a known and proven daughter of Ephraim Bogardus and Agnietie De Garmo but there seems little doubt that Anna Bogardus, bp. 6 October 1734, was the wife of Leonard Conyn. If an Anna Bogardus did marry William G. Sutphin, it is likely that her father's name may have been "Jacob" but she does not fit into a known family at this time. This line of descent from Anneke Jans must therefore be considered still unproven.
4. Refering to Chart 9M, gen. 4, many readers will be disappointed that Phoebe Margaret Bogardus, apparently born 10 August 1729 in Harlem, NY, was not included as the last daughter of Petrus Bogardus and Sarah Schoonmaker. Numerous Correspondents have provided information that Phoebe died 24 October 1793, was married 2 February 1748 to Thomas Halstead, born 9 December 1723 at Oyster Bay, NY, and died 31 October 1808. Unfortunately, there are just no items of verifiable or even circumstantial evidence to prove that Phoebe was in fact the daughter of Petrus and Sarah Bogardus. The fact that none of the sons of Thomas and Phoebe were named after their alleged maternal grandparents, i.e., Pieter Bogardus and Egbert Schoonmaker, is a very strong indication that Phoebe was the daughter of another, so far unknown, early Bogardus family. Based on a very old handwritten family record, this line of Descent from Phoebe Margaret Bogardus, daughter of Petrus Bogardus and Susan Schoonmaker is now considered valid and is being included in "Dear Cousin II"
5. Perhaps related to the above unknown Bogardus family is another Anneke Jans
Bogardus who allegedly married Aaron Halstead, both born approximately 1720-
1725. A daughter, Anna Halstead, was born 7 December 1749 at Saddle River, NJ,
and married Jonathan Taylor, born 30 January 1752. This connection to a line of
descent from Anneke Jans and Everardus Bogardus also remains to be identified."
6. Hester Van Deursen, bp. 17 Sep 1718, daughter of Abraham Van Deursen and Lucretia Bogardus. was not the wife of Aaron Van Schaick. (See chart 71) Based on recent research, it has now been determined that this Hester Van Deursen was a spinster. She is mentioned in the will of her neice, Lucretia (Brinkerhoff) Lefferts, dated 14 May 1800, as her "Aunt Hester Van Deursen", and in the will of her brother, Abraham , dated 8 Jan 1806. Hester Van Deursen was buried at the New York Dutch Church on 12 Aug 1807. The alleged line of descent through the Van Schaick, Buchanan and continuing families is thus disproven
These web pages are done with the written permission of William Bogardus and The Anneke Jans and Everardus Bogardus Descendants Association. Any questions or comments should be directed to:
Mr. William Bogardus
1211 Linhof Road
Wilmington, OH 45177-2917
All information on these web pages are protected by copyright! NO duplication of any kind may be done without the expressed written permission of the Anneke JANS and Everardus BOGARDUS Descendants Association, 1211 Linhof Road, Wilmington, OH 45177-2917.
This web site and its contents in the format presented, except where otherwise noted on the page, are copyrighted by Cindy Winkler , William Bogardus and The Anneke Jans Everardus Bogardus Descendants Association and may not be copied, altered, converted nor uploaded to any electronic system or BBS, nor linked from any "pay-for-view" site, linked in such a manner as to appear to be part of another site including "frame" capturing, nor included in any software collection or print collection of any type without the express written permission of the authors of this site, namely, Cindy Winkler, William Bogardus and The Anneke Jans Everardus Bogardus Descendants Association.
Page designed by Ghost Hunter