Laurence and all, > I was, though, of course very happy to find the marriage record of an ancestor in 1652 Holland firstly mistakenly thought to be marriage, but then quickly realised to in fact be banns and upon full reading to find a margin note to the effect ‘ these persons were married in …by… ‘.They had printed forms. Here again, was this the record of Banns, or was this a record of marriage intention? The intention (in Dutch, the ondertrouw) is not the banns. Banns were read on 3 consecutive Sundays in the church. Banns could be read only after the marriage intention was filed. In Amsterdam, they had three different marriage registrars, probably all at the city hall. One was the regular office, where a marrying couple, both members of the Dutch Reformed church, would record their marriage intention. After this, the banns would be read in the church. The second office, the Pui, recorded marriage intentions in their own book. In this situation, usually one or both parties were of a different religion, such as Lutheran. After recording the marriage intentions, a notice (banns) would be posted in a certain place outside of the city hall, where anyone in town could read them and raise an objection if necessary. I know of one case in which a woman did object --the marriage was not allowed to go forward. It turned out that the person who objected had mistaken the man wishing to be married with another already-married man who had the same name. After investigation, the legitimately-engaged couple were (of course) allowed to marry. The Extra-ordinaris intekenregister was the third office in which couples filed marriage intentions. Usually this office was consulted when one or both of the marrying persons lived out of town, or whose parents did. A parent or guardian's consent was needed, which would be sent for. Sometimes a certificate from the minister of the church they last attended was required. This took extra time, since letters neeeded tobe exchanged between different places, or a courier needed to be sent. Banns would be posted in the town(s) of residence after the consents or records of previous church membership (and eligibility to marry) were obtained. But the marriage intention, and not the banns, are what we find record of in Amsterdam. Sometimes the actual date of the marriage was written in a marginal note next to the record of marriage intention, but in my experience (hundreds of marriage records since they became available a year ago), not often. The actual marriage date was usually not the registrar's concern. This issue below: > I did write some years back about the wish of folks to get back beyond NN to discover their European ancestry which resulted in one reply and led me to believe that virtually no one on the list was interested, at least not enough to write on the matter. Perhaps if that is their goal they would be on another list!? Is there anyone out there hoping to research further beyond the shores of North America other than via DNA? Is that not the greater desire of the vast majority – to discover one’s line back to Methuselah? or at least the place / places of origin of one’s ancestors? Perhaps not. Yes. I am researching beyond the shores of North America, and I know several others here who are also working on their European forebears --and not by using DNA. I am not a member of any list researching persons in Europe. > Regardless of that, is anyone inclined to write on what they hope to achieve, what do they dream about in terms of their own personal genealogical ‘ nirvana ‘? I an not inclined to write about what I _hope_ to achieve. Writing about wishes and dreams would be a time-consuming and unnecessary middle step. Instead, I write about what I actually have achieved. Most people who know me, and I've been around here over 10 years now, know that one of my primary goals is to connect descendants of the New Netherlanders with their pre-immigration families. I have the best success with persons of Amsterdam (not necessarily born there), because the records in Amsterdam are so superior. They are well-preserved and the online presentation of the Stadsarchief Amsterdam makes it possible to obtain information from as early as 1564. Records of the Dutch church in Cologne are also very good from 1571 onward, and I have good success with these also. Recently, here on the list I wrote about the Dutch forebears of the Van Nuys family (some also Johnson or Okeson), which I was able to trace back another one or two generations. I wrote two articles about this group, which are on my website, and gave links to the pages where these articles can be found. Other articles concerning North Americans and their Dutch of Flemish forebears are also on this website. For an example of discovering the European ancestry of one extended family who lived in Cologne for a while, a series of about a dozen articles on the Varlet family, co-authored by Cor Snabel and me several years ago, is online on its own dedicated website. Liz J

Hi Liz Thanks very much indeed for this and I will write again tomorrow more fully. One thing - as far as I know we cannot upload photographs or ' documents ' here but I just tested an email to myself which incuded a ' photo ' of the actual document I mentioned in the body of the email and it came though okay. Is it okay to include such in an email to the list so that you and any others interested may see the document in question? Laurence -----Original Message----- From: E Johnson <iris.gates@gmail.com> To: dutch-colonies <dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 18:04 Subject: Re: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Marriage "registration" vs. "banns" (vs. marriage) Laurence and all, > I was, though, of course very happy to find the marriage record of an ncestor in 1652 Holland firstly mistakenly thought to be marriage, but hen quickly realised to in fact be banns and upon full reading to find a argin note to the effect ‘ these persons were married in …by… ‘.They had rinted forms. Here again, was this the record of Banns, or was this a record of marriage ntention? The intention (in Dutch, the ondertrouw) is not the banns. Banns ere read on 3 consecutive Sundays in the church. Banns could be read only fter the marriage intention was filed. In Amsterdam, they had three different marriage registrars, probably all at he city hall. One was the regular office, where a marrying couple, both embers of the Dutch Reformed church, would record their marriage ntention. After this, the banns would be read in the church. The second office, the Pui, recorded marriage intentions in their own book. n this situation, usually one or both parties were of a different eligion, such as Lutheran. After recording the marriage intentions, a otice (banns) would be posted in a certain place outside of the city hall, here anyone in town could read them and raise an objection if necessary. I now of one case in which a woman did object --the marriage was not llowed to go forward. It turned out that the person who objected had istaken the man wishing to be married with another already-married man who ad the same name. After investigation, the legitimately-engaged couple ere (of course) allowed to marry. The Extra-ordinaris intekenregister was the third office in which couples iled marriage intentions. Usually this office was consulted when one or oth of the marrying persons lived out of town, or whose parents did. A arent or guardian's consent was needed, which would be sent for. Sometimes certificate from the minister of the church they last attended was equired. This took extra time, since letters neeeded tobe exchanged etween different places, or a courier needed to be sent. Banns would be osted in the town(s) of residence after the consents or records of revious church membership (and eligibility to marry) were obtained. But the marriage intention, and not the banns, are what we find record of n Amsterdam. Sometimes the actual date of the marriage was written in a arginal note next to the record of marriage intention, but in my xperience (hundreds of marriage records since they became available a year go), not often. The actual marriage date was usually not the registrar's oncern. This issue below: > I did write some years back about the wish of folks to get back beyond NN o discover their European ancestry which resulted in one reply and led me o believe that virtually no one on the list was interested, at least not nough to write on the matter. Perhaps if that is their goal they would be n another list!? Is there anyone out there hoping to research further eyond the shores of North America other than via DNA? Is that not the reater desire of the vast majority – to discover one’s line back to ethuselah? or at least the place / places of origin of one’s ancestors? erhaps not. Yes. I am researching beyond the shores of North America, and I know everal others here who are also working on their European forebears --and ot by using DNA. I am not a member of any list researching persons in urope. > Regardless of that, is anyone inclined to write on what they hope to chieve, what do they dream about in terms of their own personal enealogical ‘ nirvana ‘? I an not inclined to write about what I _hope_ to achieve. Writing about ishes and dreams would be a time-consuming and unnecessary middle step. nstead, I write about what I actually have achieved. Most people who know e, and I've been around here over 10 years now, know that one of my rimary goals is to connect descendants of the New Netherlanders with their re-immigration families. I have the best success with persons of Amsterdam not necessarily born there), because the records in Amsterdam are so uperior. They are well-preserved and the online presentation of the tadsarchief Amsterdam makes it possible to obtain information from as arly as 1564. Records of the Dutch church in Cologne are also very good rom 1571 onward, and I have good success with these also. Recently, here n the list I wrote about the Dutch forebears of the Van Nuys family (some lso Johnson or Okeson), which I was able to trace back another one or two enerations. I wrote two articles about this group, which are on my ebsite, and gave links to the pages where these articles can be found. ther articles concerning North Americans and their Dutch of Flemish orebears are also on this website. For an example of discovering the uropean ancestry of one extended family who lived in Cologne for a while, series of about a dozen articles on the Varlet family, co-authored by Cor nabel and me several years ago, is online on its own dedicated website. Liz J ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message

Hi Liz Just checked the other ' marriage ' records I have and virtually all entries have margin notes so perhaps you have been very unlucky? I have from Haarlem : 1614; 1625; 1631; 1636 and 1645 nearly all events being margin noted and I think mostly all getroud and Ouderkerk / Amsterdam 1647 where 1 of 2 on the page has a note [ my one! :-) ] . Laurence

I have about a thousand marriage records from Amsterdam, mostly for the period between 1574 and 1660. These are records of ondertrouw -- marriage intentions. Most are not annotated in the margin. Liz J On 11 January 2013 09:48, <llvk2@aol.com> wrote: > > Hi Liz > > Just checked the other ' marriage ' records I have and virtually all > entries have margin notes so perhaps you have been very unlucky? I have > from Haarlem : 1614; 1625; 1631; 1636 and 1645 nearly all events being > margin noted and I think mostly all getroud and Ouderkerk / Amsterdam 1647 > where 1 of 2 on the page has a note [ my one! :-) ] . > > Laurence > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >