Pete can probably give a more thorough answer for both issues, but ships were not always well recorded, or the records may not have survived intact. In addition, cargo - that is soldiers - was not recorded as well as paying passengers, since they didn't pay passage... Also, records may have been recorded in several places - among possibly others, Dutch West India Co. in Amsterdam, port authority records in Amsterdam, port records in New Amsterdam, company records in New Amsterdam - and modern researches may not have translated, transcribed and peiced together all of them as of yet. These were not the passenger lists for immigration like latter years, but manifests by Dutch West Co. They couldn't have been married onboard without a preist (of the Dutch Reformed Church), and even then, it would not have been appropriate. The concept of a ship captain marrying people is somewhat a myth. Marriages were the domain of the church. To have been married, they needed to announce their intentions. I'm not real clear on the why, but I would conjecture that it allowed allowed time for anyone with reason for them not to be married to come forward (past spouces, debt holders, indenture holders, apprentishship masters, etc.). It may have also been necissary to allow time for record searches, should someone require it. I think posting marriage banns was similiar to advertising probate court cases, like is still done today with disposal of estate or repossessions. Whatever the reason, it was a requirement for any marriage. A two month waiting period was, I think, basically the minimim amount of time. According to the marriage record, she was not a widow, but was a "young daughter bride". ("Jongedochter bruid: J" - "Ja" is "Yes"; according to Google, "no" is "geen") If any of this is incorrect, hopefully Pete will set me straight. BTW, "January Dircksz" was Google getting aggressive in translation. The actual text is "Jan Dirckszen". On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Susan Claggett <claimtofame@claggett6.com>wrote: > I don't think Jan Dircksen (January Dircksz) was on that ship with Sara > Theunisz. The records seem complete and numbered for passenger count. > Unless a soldier escorting the ship is not listed on the manifest like > other > staff. > > If he were traveling with her and got her pregnant why would they wait to > get to NY to get married? Could they have married on board the ship? If > she did get pregnant on board why did they wait over a month to get married > once in NY? Sara must have already been pregnant and possible a young > widow. Maybe there was a delay in baptizing Dirkjt after she was born. > > Susan > > -----Original Message----- > From: jroguetech@gmail.com [mailto:jroguetech@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 11:57 PM > To: vannorman@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [VANNORMAN] Jan Dircksen (Sara Teunis, Pieter Teunisz, Jan > Dircksen, Jan Dircksz from Bremen) > > Sorry, translation of marriage record: > Source Type: Wedding Book > Congregation: Collegiate Church of New York > Proclamation: 06/28/1664 > Belief: NDG > Hometown: New Amsterdam-New York > Groom: January Dircksz > Hometown groom: Arnhem > Bride: Sara Theunisz > Hometown wedding: Rotterdam > Young Daughter bride: J > Previous partner groom: > Previous partner bride > Further information: The groom is a soldier > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:55 PM, <jroguetech@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Jan Dirksz Van Arnhem means son of Dirk from Arnhem. In turn, Dirk would > > have a patroym (what we today use as last name) would be the same as his > > father's first name. Particulairly confusing, since they tended to use > the > > same names generation after generation, creating an effect of > flip-flopping > > names. It's possible (completely speculative), but Dirk's father could > have > > been Jan, and thus be Dirk Jansz, etc. > > > > They were married Jun 28 1664: > > Soort bron: Trouwboek > > Kerkgemeente: Collegiate Church of New York > > Proclamatie: 28-06-1664 > > Gezindte: NDG > > Plaats: Nieuw Amsterdam-New York > > Bruidegom: Jan Dirckszen > > Geboorteplaats bruidegom: Arnhem > > Bruid: Sara Theuniszen > > Geboorteplaats bruid: Rotterdam > > Jongedochter bruid: J > > Vorige partner bruidegom: > > Vorige partner bruid: > > Nadere informatie: De bruidegom is soldaat > > > > De Trouw with Sara Theunis aboard arrived in Apr 1664. As Pete and I have > > argued over, despite being in basic agreement, he would have had to have > > been aboard the same ship for her to concieve so quickly after (or > during) > > the voyage. To assume otherwise would be to assume Dirkjte is not his > > daughter, but moreover is needless speculation (as he and I have been > > speculating over). > > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:42 PM, Susan Claggett < > > claimtofame@claggett6.com> wrote: > > > >> Nevermind on my question below because I just realized the ages won't > work > >> if our Jan Dircksen was born around 1640. He could not have had 3 > >> children > >> 15, 8 and 10 months in 1659. So Jan Dircksen from Alckmaer is obviously > a > >> different person. > >> > >> But our Jan Dircksen who married Sara Teunis could be at least age wise > >> the > >> son of Jan Dircksen of Bremen . > >> > >> My previous question: > >> Could our Jan Dircksen be the son of Jan Dircksz from Bremen? Did our > Jan > >> Dircksen arrive aboard the De Trouw 1659 with his wife and 3 children? > >> Did > >> his first wife pass away and Jan Dircksen than became engaged to Sara > >> Teunis > >> and he sent for her and she arrived in 1664 on the De Trouw??? > >> > >> > >> > >> DE TROUW (THE FAITH) 1659 > >> > >> 57 Jan Dircksen (Dircxsen), from Alckmaer > >> 58 Mrs. Dircksen (wife) > >> 59 - 61 three children Dircksen, ages 3/4, 8 and 15 years > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

John, You make a lot of really good points. I will try to get back on track. Okay maybe he was on the same boat with her as a paid soldier. I did not notice on the wedding record that it said she was a young woman (not previously married) until you pointed it out. I wonder if the year is wrong on the baptismal record and should be Dec 31, 1665? Where is page 77? It goes from 76 to 78 (See below). There are several years before their next child Magdalena in 1669. I don't know, LOL. Thanks again! Susan 1664 Dec 14; Johan, Rachel Dircks; Christina; Jacques Casjou, Christina 1664 Dec 21; Pieter Suncam, Debora Jans; Agnietie; Claes Thyssen, Barentje Jans - page 76 1664 Dec 31; Jan Dirckszen, Sara Theunis; Dirckje; Tryntie Grevenraedt 1664 Dec 31; Claes Dudloos, Aeltje Samsons; Catharyn; Rutgert Willemszen, Juffr. Ver Brack 1665 Jan 12; Jean Dupre, Janneken Dupre; Francyntie; Anthony Dircks, Jacomyntie du Wel 1665 Jan 14; Jan Brouwer, Jannetie Jans; Hendrick; Albert Leenartszen, Ariaentie 1665 Jan 14; Jan Adamszen, Geertie Dircks; Maria; Steven Courtszen, Agniet Lodovyckszen 1665 Jan 18; Cornelis Matthyszen, Barentje Dircks; Matthys; Jan Adamszen - page 78 1665 Jan 28; David de Voor, Jannetje Frans; Adriaen; Adriaen Dirckszen, Marie Dopzen 1665 Jan 28; Jacob Stoffelszen, Tryntie Jacobs; Jacobus; Nicolaes Verleth, El -----Original Message----- From: jroguetech@gmail.com [mailto:jroguetech@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 2:35 AM To: vannorman@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [VANNORMAN] Jan Dircksen (Sara Teunis, Pieter Teunisz, Jan Dircksen, Jan Dircksz from Bremen) Pete can probably give a more thorough answer for both issues, but ships were not always well recorded, or the records may not have survived intact. In addition, cargo - that is soldiers - was not recorded as well as paying passengers, since they didn't pay passage... Also, records may have been recorded in several places - among possibly others, Dutch West India Co. in Amsterdam, port authority records in Amsterdam, port records in New Amsterdam, company records in New Amsterdam - and modern researches may not have translated, transcribed and peiced together all of them as of yet. These were not the passenger lists for immigration like latter years, but manifests by Dutch West Co. They couldn't have been married onboard without a preist (of the Dutch Reformed Church), and even then, it would not have been appropriate. The concept of a ship captain marrying people is somewhat a myth. Marriages were the domain of the church. To have been married, they needed to announce their intentions. I'm not real clear on the why, but I would conjecture that it allowed allowed time for anyone with reason for them not to be married to come forward (past spouces, debt holders, indenture holders, apprentishship masters, etc.). It may have also been necissary to allow time for record searches, should someone require it. I think posting marriage banns was similiar to advertising probate court cases, like is still done today with disposal of estate or repossessions. Whatever the reason, it was a requirement for any marriage. A two month waiting period was, I think, basically the minimim amount of time. According to the marriage record, she was not a widow, but was a "young daughter bride". ("Jongedochter bruid: J" - "Ja" is "Yes"; according to Google, "no" is "geen") If any of this is incorrect, hopefully Pete will set me straight. BTW, "January Dircksz" was Google getting aggressive in translation. The actual text is "Jan Dirckszen". On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Susan Claggett <claimtofame@claggett6.com>wrote: > I don't think Jan Dircksen (January Dircksz) was on that ship with Sara > Theunisz. The records seem complete and numbered for passenger count. > Unless a soldier escorting the ship is not listed on the manifest like > other > staff. > > If he were traveling with her and got her pregnant why would they wait to > get to NY to get married? Could they have married on board the ship? If > she did get pregnant on board why did they wait over a month to get married > once in NY? Sara must have already been pregnant and possible a young > widow. Maybe there was a delay in baptizing Dirkjt after she was born. > > Susan > > -----Original Message----- > From: jroguetech@gmail.com [mailto:jroguetech@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 11:57 PM > To: vannorman@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [VANNORMAN] Jan Dircksen (Sara Teunis, Pieter Teunisz, Jan > Dircksen, Jan Dircksz from Bremen) > > Sorry, translation of marriage record: > Source Type: Wedding Book > Congregation: Collegiate Church of New York > Proclamation: 06/28/1664 > Belief: NDG > Hometown: New Amsterdam-New York > Groom: January Dircksz > Hometown groom: Arnhem > Bride: Sara Theunisz > Hometown wedding: Rotterdam > Young Daughter bride: J > Previous partner groom: > Previous partner bride > Further information: The groom is a soldier > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:55 PM, <jroguetech@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Jan Dirksz Van Arnhem means son of Dirk from Arnhem. In turn, Dirk would > > have a patroym (what we today use as last name) would be the same as his > > father's first name. Particulairly confusing, since they tended to use > the > > same names generation after generation, creating an effect of > flip-flopping > > names. It's possible (completely speculative), but Dirk's father could > have > > been Jan, and thus be Dirk Jansz, etc. > > > > They were married Jun 28 1664: > > Soort bron: Trouwboek > > Kerkgemeente: Collegiate Church of New York > > Proclamatie: 28-06-1664 > > Gezindte: NDG > > Plaats: Nieuw Amsterdam-New York > > Bruidegom: Jan Dirckszen > > Geboorteplaats bruidegom: Arnhem > > Bruid: Sara Theuniszen > > Geboorteplaats bruid: Rotterdam > > Jongedochter bruid: J > > Vorige partner bruidegom: > > Vorige partner bruid: > > Nadere informatie: De bruidegom is soldaat > > > > De Trouw with Sara Theunis aboard arrived in Apr 1664. As Pete and I have > > argued over, despite being in basic agreement, he would have had to have > > been aboard the same ship for her to concieve so quickly after (or > during) > > the voyage. To assume otherwise would be to assume Dirkjte is not his > > daughter, but moreover is needless speculation (as he and I have been > > speculating over). > > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:42 PM, Susan Claggett < > > claimtofame@claggett6.com> wrote: > > > >> Nevermind on my question below because I just realized the ages won't > work > >> if our Jan Dircksen was born around 1640. He could not have had 3 > >> children > >> 15, 8 and 10 months in 1659. So Jan Dircksen from Alckmaer is obviously > a > >> different person. > >> > >> But our Jan Dircksen who married Sara Teunis could be at least age wise > >> the > >> son of Jan Dircksen of Bremen . > >> > >> My previous question: > >> Could our Jan Dircksen be the son of Jan Dircksz from Bremen? Did our > Jan > >> Dircksen arrive aboard the De Trouw 1659 with his wife and 3 children? > >> Did > >> his first wife pass away and Jan Dircksen than became engaged to Sara > >> Teunis > >> and he sent for her and she arrived in 1664 on the De Trouw??? > >> > >> > >> > >> DE TROUW (THE FAITH) 1659 > >> > >> 57 Jan Dircksen (Dircxsen), from Alckmaer > >> 58 Mrs. Dircksen (wife) > >> 59 - 61 three children Dircksen, ages 3/4, 8 and 15 years > >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Doesn't appear to be a gap in the dates; probably a blank page or something. These records were a simple ledger style, one line after the next with no filler. I don't think the years were actually recorded, but were in volumns. Any error in the recording of the year would be immediately apparant to the original transcriber(s). On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 3:49 AM, Susan Claggett <claimtofame@claggett6.com>wrote: > John, > > You make a lot of really good points. I will try to get back on track. > Okay maybe he was on the same boat with her as a paid soldier. I did not > notice on the wedding record that it said she was a young woman (not > previously married) until you pointed it out. > > I wonder if the year is wrong on the baptismal record and should be Dec 31, > 1665? Where is page 77? It goes from 76 to 78 (See below). There are > several years before their next child Magdalena in 1669. I don't know, > LOL. > Thanks again! > > Susan > > 1664 Dec 14; Johan, Rachel Dircks; Christina; Jacques Casjou, Christina > 1664 Dec 21; Pieter Suncam, Debora Jans; Agnietie; Claes Thyssen, Barentje > Jans > - page 76 > 1664 Dec 31; Jan Dirckszen, Sara Theunis; Dirckje; Tryntie Grevenraedt > 1664 Dec 31; Claes Dudloos, Aeltje Samsons; Catharyn; Rutgert Willemszen, > Juffr. Ver Brack > 1665 Jan 12; Jean Dupre, Janneken Dupre; Francyntie; Anthony Dircks, > Jacomyntie du Wel > 1665 Jan 14; Jan Brouwer, Jannetie Jans; Hendrick; Albert Leenartszen, > Ariaentie > 1665 Jan 14; Jan Adamszen, Geertie Dircks; Maria; Steven Courtszen, Agniet > Lodovyckszen > 1665 Jan 18; Cornelis Matthyszen, Barentje Dircks; Matthys; Jan Adamszen > - page 78 > 1665 Jan 28; David de Voor, Jannetje Frans; Adriaen; Adriaen Dirckszen, > Marie Dopzen > 1665 Jan 28; Jacob Stoffelszen, Tryntie Jacobs; Jacobus; Nicolaes Verleth, > El > > > -----Original Message----- > From: jroguetech@gmail.com [mailto:jroguetech@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 2:35 AM > To: vannorman@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [VANNORMAN] Jan Dircksen (Sara Teunis, Pieter Teunisz, Jan > Dircksen, Jan Dircksz from Bremen) > > Pete can probably give a more thorough answer for both issues, but ships > were not always well recorded, or the records may not have survived intact. > In addition, cargo - that is soldiers - was not recorded as well as paying > passengers, since they didn't pay passage... Also, records may have been > recorded in several places - among possibly others, Dutch West India Co. in > Amsterdam, port authority records in Amsterdam, port records in New > Amsterdam, company records in New Amsterdam - and modern researches may not > have translated, transcribed and peiced together all of them as of yet. > These were not the passenger lists for immigration like latter years, but > manifests by Dutch West Co. > > They couldn't have been married onboard without a preist (of the Dutch > Reformed Church), and even then, it would not have been appropriate. The > concept of a ship captain marrying people is somewhat a myth. Marriages > were > the domain of the church. To have been married, they needed to announce > their intentions. I'm not real clear on the why, but I would conjecture > that > it allowed allowed time for anyone with reason for them not to be married > to > come forward (past spouces, debt holders, indenture holders, apprentishship > masters, etc.). It may have also been necissary to allow time for record > searches, should someone require it. I think posting marriage banns was > similiar to advertising probate court cases, like is still done today with > disposal of estate or repossessions. Whatever the reason, it was a > requirement for any marriage. A two month waiting period was, I think, > basically the minimim amount of time. According to the marriage record, she > was not a widow, but was a "young daughter bride". ("Jongedochter bruid: J" > - "Ja" is "Yes"; according to Google, "no" is "geen") > > If any of this is incorrect, hopefully Pete will set me straight. > > BTW, "January Dircksz" was Google getting aggressive in translation. The > actual text is "Jan Dirckszen". > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Susan Claggett > <claimtofame@claggett6.com>wrote: > > > I don't think Jan Dircksen (January Dircksz) was on that ship with Sara > > Theunisz. The records seem complete and numbered for passenger count. > > Unless a soldier escorting the ship is not listed on the manifest like > > other > > staff. > > > > If he were traveling with her and got her pregnant why would they wait to > > get to NY to get married? Could they have married on board the ship? If > > she did get pregnant on board why did they wait over a month to get > married > > once in NY? Sara must have already been pregnant and possible a young > > widow. Maybe there was a delay in baptizing Dirkjt after she was born. > > > > Susan > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: jroguetech@gmail.com [mailto:jroguetech@gmail.com] > > Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 11:57 PM > > To: vannorman@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [VANNORMAN] Jan Dircksen (Sara Teunis, Pieter Teunisz, Jan > > Dircksen, Jan Dircksz from Bremen) > > > > Sorry, translation of marriage record: > > Source Type: Wedding Book > > Congregation: Collegiate Church of New York > > Proclamation: 06/28/1664 > > Belief: NDG > > Hometown: New Amsterdam-New York > > Groom: January Dircksz > > Hometown groom: Arnhem > > Bride: Sara Theunisz > > Hometown wedding: Rotterdam > > Young Daughter bride: J > > Previous partner groom: > > Previous partner bride > > Further information: The groom is a soldier > > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:55 PM, <jroguetech@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Jan Dirksz Van Arnhem means son of Dirk from Arnhem. In turn, Dirk > would > > > have a patroym (what we today use as last name) would be the same as > his > > > father's first name. Particulairly confusing, since they tended to use > > the > > > same names generation after generation, creating an effect of > > flip-flopping > > > names. It's possible (completely speculative), but Dirk's father could > > have > > > been Jan, and thus be Dirk Jansz, etc. > > > > > > They were married Jun 28 1664: > > > Soort bron: Trouwboek > > > Kerkgemeente: Collegiate Church of New York > > > Proclamatie: 28-06-1664 > > > Gezindte: NDG > > > Plaats: Nieuw Amsterdam-New York > > > Bruidegom: Jan Dirckszen > > > Geboorteplaats bruidegom: Arnhem > > > Bruid: Sara Theuniszen > > > Geboorteplaats bruid: Rotterdam > > > Jongedochter bruid: J > > > Vorige partner bruidegom: > > > Vorige partner bruid: > > > Nadere informatie: De bruidegom is soldaat > > > > > > De Trouw with Sara Theunis aboard arrived in Apr 1664. As Pete and I > have > > > argued over, despite being in basic agreement, he would have had to > have > > > been aboard the same ship for her to concieve so quickly after (or > > during) > > > the voyage. To assume otherwise would be to assume Dirkjte is not his > > > daughter, but moreover is needless speculation (as he and I have been > > > speculating over). > > > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:42 PM, Susan Claggett < > > > claimtofame@claggett6.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Nevermind on my question below because I just realized the ages won't > > work > > >> if our Jan Dircksen was born around 1640. He could not have had 3 > > >> children > > >> 15, 8 and 10 months in 1659. So Jan Dircksen from Alckmaer is > obviously > > a > > >> different person. > > >> > > >> But our Jan Dircksen who married Sara Teunis could be at least age > wise > > >> the > > >> son of Jan Dircksen of Bremen . > > >> > > >> My previous question: > > >> Could our Jan Dircksen be the son of Jan Dircksz from Bremen? Did our > > Jan > > >> Dircksen arrive aboard the De Trouw 1659 with his wife and 3 children? > > >> Did > > >> his first wife pass away and Jan Dircksen than became engaged to Sara > > >> Teunis > > >> and he sent for her and she arrived in 1664 on the De Trouw??? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> DE TROUW (THE FAITH) 1659 > > >> > > >> 57 Jan Dircksen (Dircxsen), from Alckmaer > > >> 58 Mrs. Dircksen (wife) > > >> 59 - 61 three children Dircksen, ages 3/4, 8 and 15 years > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > >> VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the > > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >> > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

There is, indeed an empty spot between daughter Dirkje and Magdalena where one would expect there to be another child. (There's a tendency toward kids every two years which is about long enough to bear and suckle a child to weaning at which point suppressor hormones diminish and allowing another pregnancy.) There are two possiblities: One is miscarriage, stillbirth or infant death. The other is that there was, indeed, another child. In fact, Jan Dircks and Sara Theunis clearly had a daughter named Helena (on account of she appears at some of her siblings' children's baptisms) and there's no record other than the baptismal one of daughter Magdalena. Furthermore the name Magdalena never appears in the family again although Helena does quite often. Both names shorten to "Lentje" ("little Lena"), by the way. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence," but I think it's a good indicator in this case since Jan and Sara seem otherwise to have been pretty scrupulous about baptising their offspring. My best guess is that the space between Dirckje and Magdalena represents a nonviable child. It's also my guess that "Magdalena" never existed and was, in fact, Helena. It seems too complex but the two questions are, in fact, independent of each other. --pete ----- Original Message ----- From: "Susan Claggett" <claimtofame@claggett6.com> To: <vannorman@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 3:49 AM Subject: Re: [VANNORMAN] Jan Dircksen (Sara Teunis, Pieter Teunisz,Jan Dircksen, Jan Dircksz from Bremen) > John, > > You make a lot of really good points. I will try to get back on track. > Okay maybe he was on the same boat with her as a paid soldier. I did not > notice on the wedding record that it said she was a young woman (not > previously married) until you pointed it out. > > I wonder if the year is wrong on the baptismal record and should be Dec > 31, > 1665? Where is page 77? It goes from 76 to 78 (See below). There are > several years before their next child Magdalena in 1669. I don't know, > LOL. > Thanks again! > > Susan > > 1664 Dec 14; Johan, Rachel Dircks; Christina; Jacques Casjou, Christina > 1664 Dec 21; Pieter Suncam, Debora Jans; Agnietie; Claes Thyssen, Barentje > Jans > - page 76 > 1664 Dec 31; Jan Dirckszen, Sara Theunis; Dirckje; Tryntie Grevenraedt > 1664 Dec 31; Claes Dudloos, Aeltje Samsons; Catharyn; Rutgert Willemszen, > Juffr. Ver Brack > 1665 Jan 12; Jean Dupre, Janneken Dupre; Francyntie; Anthony Dircks, > Jacomyntie du Wel > 1665 Jan 14; Jan Brouwer, Jannetie Jans; Hendrick; Albert Leenartszen, > Ariaentie > 1665 Jan 14; Jan Adamszen, Geertie Dircks; Maria; Steven Courtszen, Agniet > Lodovyckszen > 1665 Jan 18; Cornelis Matthyszen, Barentje Dircks; Matthys; Jan Adamszen > - page 78 > 1665 Jan 28; David de Voor, Jannetje Frans; Adriaen; Adriaen Dirckszen, > Marie Dopzen > 1665 Jan 28; Jacob Stoffelszen, Tryntie Jacobs; Jacobus; Nicolaes Verleth, > El > > > -----Original Message----- > From: jroguetech@gmail.com [mailto:jroguetech@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 2:35 AM > To: vannorman@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [VANNORMAN] Jan Dircksen (Sara Teunis, Pieter Teunisz, Jan > Dircksen, Jan Dircksz from Bremen) > > Pete can probably give a more thorough answer for both issues, but ships > were not always well recorded, or the records may not have survived > intact. > In addition, cargo - that is soldiers - was not recorded as well as paying > passengers, since they didn't pay passage... Also, records may have been > recorded in several places - among possibly others, Dutch West India Co. > in > Amsterdam, port authority records in Amsterdam, port records in New > Amsterdam, company records in New Amsterdam - and modern researches may > not > have translated, transcribed and peiced together all of them as of yet. > These were not the passenger lists for immigration like latter years, but > manifests by Dutch West Co. > > They couldn't have been married onboard without a preist (of the Dutch > Reformed Church), and even then, it would not have been appropriate. The > concept of a ship captain marrying people is somewhat a myth. Marriages > were > the domain of the church. To have been married, they needed to announce > their intentions. I'm not real clear on the why, but I would conjecture > that > it allowed allowed time for anyone with reason for them not to be married > to > come forward (past spouces, debt holders, indenture holders, > apprentishship > masters, etc.). It may have also been necissary to allow time for record > searches, should someone require it. I think posting marriage banns was > similiar to advertising probate court cases, like is still done today with > disposal of estate or repossessions. Whatever the reason, it was a > requirement for any marriage. A two month waiting period was, I think, > basically the minimim amount of time. According to the marriage record, > she > was not a widow, but was a "young daughter bride". ("Jongedochter bruid: > J" > - "Ja" is "Yes"; according to Google, "no" is "geen") > > If any of this is incorrect, hopefully Pete will set me straight. > > BTW, "January Dircksz" was Google getting aggressive in translation. The > actual text is "Jan Dirckszen". > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Susan Claggett > <claimtofame@claggett6.com>wrote: > >> I don't think Jan Dircksen (January Dircksz) was on that ship with Sara >> Theunisz. The records seem complete and numbered for passenger count. >> Unless a soldier escorting the ship is not listed on the manifest like >> other >> staff. >> >> If he were traveling with her and got her pregnant why would they wait to >> get to NY to get married? Could they have married on board the ship? If >> she did get pregnant on board why did they wait over a month to get > married >> once in NY? Sara must have already been pregnant and possible a young >> widow. Maybe there was a delay in baptizing Dirkjt after she was born. >> >> Susan >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: jroguetech@gmail.com [mailto:jroguetech@gmail.com] >> Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 11:57 PM >> To: vannorman@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: [VANNORMAN] Jan Dircksen (Sara Teunis, Pieter Teunisz, Jan >> Dircksen, Jan Dircksz from Bremen) >> >> Sorry, translation of marriage record: >> Source Type: Wedding Book >> Congregation: Collegiate Church of New York >> Proclamation: 06/28/1664 >> Belief: NDG >> Hometown: New Amsterdam-New York >> Groom: January Dircksz >> Hometown groom: Arnhem >> Bride: Sara Theunisz >> Hometown wedding: Rotterdam >> Young Daughter bride: J >> Previous partner groom: >> Previous partner bride >> Further information: The groom is a soldier >> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:55 PM, <jroguetech@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Jan Dirksz Van Arnhem means son of Dirk from Arnhem. In turn, Dirk >> > would >> > have a patroym (what we today use as last name) would be the same as >> > his >> > father's first name. Particulairly confusing, since they tended to use >> the >> > same names generation after generation, creating an effect of >> flip-flopping >> > names. It's possible (completely speculative), but Dirk's father could >> have >> > been Jan, and thus be Dirk Jansz, etc. >> > >> > They were married Jun 28 1664: >> > Soort bron: Trouwboek >> > Kerkgemeente: Collegiate Church of New York >> > Proclamatie: 28-06-1664 >> > Gezindte: NDG >> > Plaats: Nieuw Amsterdam-New York >> > Bruidegom: Jan Dirckszen >> > Geboorteplaats bruidegom: Arnhem >> > Bruid: Sara Theuniszen >> > Geboorteplaats bruid: Rotterdam >> > Jongedochter bruid: J >> > Vorige partner bruidegom: >> > Vorige partner bruid: >> > Nadere informatie: De bruidegom is soldaat >> > >> > De Trouw with Sara Theunis aboard arrived in Apr 1664. As Pete and I > have >> > argued over, despite being in basic agreement, he would have had to >> > have >> > been aboard the same ship for her to concieve so quickly after (or >> during) >> > the voyage. To assume otherwise would be to assume Dirkjte is not his >> > daughter, but moreover is needless speculation (as he and I have been >> > speculating over). >> > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:42 PM, Susan Claggett < >> > claimtofame@claggett6.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Nevermind on my question below because I just realized the ages won't >> work >> >> if our Jan Dircksen was born around 1640. He could not have had 3 >> >> children >> >> 15, 8 and 10 months in 1659. So Jan Dircksen from Alckmaer is > obviously >> a >> >> different person. >> >> >> >> But our Jan Dircksen who married Sara Teunis could be at least age >> >> wise >> >> the >> >> son of Jan Dircksen of Bremen . >> >> >> >> My previous question: >> >> Could our Jan Dircksen be the son of Jan Dircksz from Bremen? Did our >> Jan >> >> Dircksen arrive aboard the De Trouw 1659 with his wife and 3 children? >> >> Did >> >> his first wife pass away and Jan Dircksen than became engaged to Sara >> >> Teunis >> >> and he sent for her and she arrived in 1664 on the De Trouw??? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> DE TROUW (THE FAITH) 1659 >> >> >> >> 57 Jan Dircksen (Dircxsen), from Alckmaer >> >> 58 Mrs. Dircksen (wife) >> >> 59 - 61 three children Dircksen, ages 3/4, 8 and 15 years >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> >> VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> > >> > >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Regarding "ship's passenger lists". The ones you see on the Internet aren't actually that. What they are is compiled lists (taken from the ships' account books) of passengers on each voyage whose passage was not paid before sailing. I'm still not sure why a squareheaded Dutch ship captain would take a flier on transporting someone without cash in hand. My best guess is to avoid deadheading. Without a passenger at least on spec the risk of loss on an empty space was 100 percent while the risk of loss selling the debt for the passage on the other end was logically something less than that. Regarding marriage: Banns, public notices of intent to marry, were posted at the local church for three successive weeks. If no one raised an objection (previous betrothal, already existing marriage, whatever) the wedding took place at the end of the fourth. Jongedochter, often abbreviated as JD, technically meant "never-married." Literally, of course, it is "young daughter" but that's because that's what most unmarried women were. I don't think I've seen a word for "spinster" in Dutch although Babelfish comes up with "oude vrijster". --pete ----- Original Message ----- From: <jroguetech@gmail.com> To: <vannorman@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 2:34 AM Subject: Re: [VANNORMAN] Jan Dircksen (Sara Teunis, Pieter Teunisz, Jan Dircksen, Jan Dircksz from Bremen) > Pete can probably give a more thorough answer for both issues, but ships > were not always well recorded, or the records may not have survived > intact. > In addition, cargo - that is soldiers - was not recorded as well as paying > passengers, since they didn't pay passage... Also, records may have been > recorded in several places - among possibly others, Dutch West India Co. > in > Amsterdam, port authority records in Amsterdam, port records in New > Amsterdam, company records in New Amsterdam - and modern researches may > not > have translated, transcribed and peiced together all of them as of yet. > These were not the passenger lists for immigration like latter years, but > manifests by Dutch West Co. > > They couldn't have been married onboard without a preist (of the Dutch > Reformed Church), and even then, it would not have been appropriate. The > concept of a ship captain marrying people is somewhat a myth. Marriages > were > the domain of the church. To have been married, they needed to announce > their intentions. I'm not real clear on the why, but I would conjecture > that > it allowed allowed time for anyone with reason for them not to be married > to > come forward (past spouces, debt holders, indenture holders, > apprentishship > masters, etc.). It may have also been necissary to allow time for record > searches, should someone require it. I think posting marriage banns was > similiar to advertising probate court cases, like is still done today with > disposal of estate or repossessions. Whatever the reason, it was a > requirement for any marriage. A two month waiting period was, I think, > basically the minimim amount of time. According to the marriage record, > she > was not a widow, but was a "young daughter bride". ("Jongedochter bruid: > J" > - "Ja" is "Yes"; according to Google, "no" is "geen") > > If any of this is incorrect, hopefully Pete will set me straight. > > BTW, "January Dircksz" was Google getting aggressive in translation. The > actual text is "Jan Dirckszen". > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Susan Claggett > <claimtofame@claggett6.com>wrote: > >> I don't think Jan Dircksen (January Dircksz) was on that ship with Sara >> Theunisz. The records seem complete and numbered for passenger count. >> Unless a soldier escorting the ship is not listed on the manifest like >> other >> staff. >> >> If he were traveling with her and got her pregnant why would they wait to >> get to NY to get married? Could they have married on board the ship? If >> she did get pregnant on board why did they wait over a month to get >> married >> once in NY? Sara must have already been pregnant and possible a young >> widow. Maybe there was a delay in baptizing Dirkjt after she was born. >> >> Susan >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: jroguetech@gmail.com [mailto:jroguetech@gmail.com] >> Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 11:57 PM >> To: vannorman@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: [VANNORMAN] Jan Dircksen (Sara Teunis, Pieter Teunisz, Jan >> Dircksen, Jan Dircksz from Bremen) >> >> Sorry, translation of marriage record: >> Source Type: Wedding Book >> Congregation: Collegiate Church of New York >> Proclamation: 06/28/1664 >> Belief: NDG >> Hometown: New Amsterdam-New York >> Groom: January Dircksz >> Hometown groom: Arnhem >> Bride: Sara Theunisz >> Hometown wedding: Rotterdam >> Young Daughter bride: J >> Previous partner groom: >> Previous partner bride >> Further information: The groom is a soldier >> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:55 PM, <jroguetech@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Jan Dirksz Van Arnhem means son of Dirk from Arnhem. In turn, Dirk >> > would >> > have a patroym (what we today use as last name) would be the same as >> > his >> > father's first name. Particulairly confusing, since they tended to use >> the >> > same names generation after generation, creating an effect of >> flip-flopping >> > names. It's possible (completely speculative), but Dirk's father could >> have >> > been Jan, and thus be Dirk Jansz, etc. >> > >> > They were married Jun 28 1664: >> > Soort bron: Trouwboek >> > Kerkgemeente: Collegiate Church of New York >> > Proclamatie: 28-06-1664 >> > Gezindte: NDG >> > Plaats: Nieuw Amsterdam-New York >> > Bruidegom: Jan Dirckszen >> > Geboorteplaats bruidegom: Arnhem >> > Bruid: Sara Theuniszen >> > Geboorteplaats bruid: Rotterdam >> > Jongedochter bruid: J >> > Vorige partner bruidegom: >> > Vorige partner bruid: >> > Nadere informatie: De bruidegom is soldaat >> > >> > De Trouw with Sara Theunis aboard arrived in Apr 1664. As Pete and I >> > have >> > argued over, despite being in basic agreement, he would have had to >> > have >> > been aboard the same ship for her to concieve so quickly after (or >> during) >> > the voyage. To assume otherwise would be to assume Dirkjte is not his >> > daughter, but moreover is needless speculation (as he and I have been >> > speculating over). >> > On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:42 PM, Susan Claggett < >> > claimtofame@claggett6.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Nevermind on my question below because I just realized the ages won't >> work >> >> if our Jan Dircksen was born around 1640. He could not have had 3 >> >> children >> >> 15, 8 and 10 months in 1659. So Jan Dircksen from Alckmaer is >> >> obviously >> a >> >> different person. >> >> >> >> But our Jan Dircksen who married Sara Teunis could be at least age >> >> wise >> >> the >> >> son of Jan Dircksen of Bremen . >> >> >> >> My previous question: >> >> Could our Jan Dircksen be the son of Jan Dircksz from Bremen? Did our >> Jan >> >> Dircksen arrive aboard the De Trouw 1659 with his wife and 3 children? >> >> Did >> >> his first wife pass away and Jan Dircksen than became engaged to Sara >> >> Teunis >> >> and he sent for her and she arrived in 1664 on the De Trouw??? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> DE TROUW (THE FAITH) 1659 >> >> >> >> 57 Jan Dircksen (Dircxsen), from Alckmaer >> >> 58 Mrs. Dircksen (wife) >> >> 59 - 61 three children Dircksen, ages 3/4, 8 and 15 years >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> >> VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> > >> > >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > VANNORMAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >