| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Files spread between Dropbox, Google Drive, Gmail, Slack, and more? Dokkio, a new product from the PBworks team, integrates and organizes them for you. Try it for free today.

View
 

Nieuw-Amstels Hoop, the Orphan

Page history last edited by Liz Johnson 2 years, 5 months ago

 

NIEUW-AMSTELS HOOP, SON OF JAN BARENTS AND GRIETJE ELDERS

by Elizabeth A. Johnson © 2010, 2013

 

In his Register... of the Early Settlers of Kings County, Long Island, New York, author Teunis Bergen made an entry for a man he called "Jan Amstelhoop," who was noted as having been "interested" in 1679, in the sale of a property near New York, belonging to Rutgert Alberts of Flatbush.

 

Amstelhoop, Jan. Catharine Cronenbergh and Richard Paynten bought Aug. 27, 1679, of Rutgert Albertse his house, orchard, etc., in Flh for 3000 gl., in which purchase he appears to have been interested, as per p. 54 of Lib. AA of Flh rec. Apl. 12, 1683, he bought of R. Albertse a house and lot in Flh, as per p. 29 of Lib. D of Flh rec. Made his mark to documents. [Teunis G. Bergen, Register... of the Early Settlers of Kings County, Long Island, New York, p. 154]

 

Although this man was the son of a man called Jan, Bergen was mistaken in assigning that first name to him. Jan was his patronym (father's name). As 'Niew Amstel Hoop,' he was living at Midwout by July 2, 1682, when he married Catharina Van Marken at Flatbush. He bought Rutgert Alberts' house and lot in Flatbush in 1683*, but he died before May 18, 1684, when his widow remarried Barent Barentz.

 

[1682 02 Jul; Niew Amstel Hoop, ym of Amsterdam; Catharina VanMarken, yd of Albany both liv Midwood. [need record from Flatbush]].

 

1684 18 May; Barend Barendsz, ym of Amsterdam; Cathrina VanMarken, wid, Nieuw-Amstel Hoop both liv Midwood [need record from Flatbush].

 

Niew Amstels Hoop was born in the city of Amsterdam in December 1656. On 23 April, 1660, in one of his periodic reports to Peter Stuyvesant, Willem Beekman, vice-director at Ft Altena, refers to a child “born at the departure of Mr. Alrichs in the ship Prins Maurits and was at the request of the Lords-Burgomasters christened Amsteloop." [PA Arch 2, Vol. VII “Papers Relating to the Dutch and Swedish Settlements on the Delaware River” p. 634]. The voyage of the "Prins Maurits" on which Alrichs sailed departed from Texel on December 25, 1656, bound for the South (Delaware) River in New Netherland. [Jaap Jacobs “Scheepvaart en Handel...” (1989)] The "Prins Maurits" brought 112 colonists who were to settle in New Amstel, a colony newly founded by the city of Amsterdam, along with Jacob Alrichs, director-to-be of this settlement. Two accompanying ships brought about 55 additional settlers. Beeckman' s report, plus the known departure date of the "Prins Maurits", allowed the baptism of the child called Niew Amstels Hoop to be located in the Amsterdam doopregister index:

 

[15 December 1656]
[parents] Jan Barentsz, Grietje Elders

[witnesses] Geertje Jans, Aryantje Aris

[child] Amstels-hoop

[Stadsarchief Amsterdam: DTB 9, p. 166]

 

The voyage of the "Prins Maurits" ended prematurely on March 8, 1657, when on approach for a scheduled first stop at New Amsterdam, she ran aground off Long Island. Most of the cargo was successfully offloaded to other ships, and the settlers bound for New Amstel were brought to the Delaware by other transport.

 

Jan Barentsz and Grietje Elders, parents of Amstels-hoop, must have signed up to settle at New Amstel, thus must have been staying at Amsterdam when, almost on the eve of departure, their son was born. He was baptized in the Oude Kerk on Dec. 15, 1656 and was given his auspicious name by order of the Lords-Burgomasters of Amsterdam, the new proprietors of the New Amstel colony. His name in English means 'New Amstel's Hope,' reflecting the Lords-Burgomasters' desires for success in their new colony, which they had recently taken over from the financially-overstretched Dutch West Indies Company.

 

Along with the other New Amstel settlers, Jan Barents and Grietje Elders and their son Amstels-hoop arrived in the Delaware around the beginning of April, 1657. Within a few years, after becoming dissatisfied with life in the colony as many others also did, they removed to Maryland, but did not long survive there. By April, 1660, Amstels-hoop had lost both parents. After a few colonists who had been in Maryland returned to Delaware, Amstels-hoop's aunt learned her nephew was orphaned, and brought his situation to Willem Beeckman's attention. On 23 April, 1660, Beekman, from his headquarters at Ft. Altena, made a written report to Peter Stuyvesant in New Amsterdam. Concerning Amstels-hoop, Beeckman writes,

 

"On the 16th inst. Sergeant Andries Lourens returned from Maryland, he has met only a few fugitives, who were still free; upon showing your Noble Worship's pass, he brought away only one Jan Tomissen with his wife and child, whose property came back in Karman's yacht and fell into the hands of Mr. D'Hinojossa, who had it valued and would not surrender it, before I have not receipted for it on behalf of your Noble Worship. The said carpenter Jan Tomissen will not go to the Manhattans without his tools and property, but would rather go back to the English, as he has had there the use of the tools of one Jan Barentsen, who was killed by the savages and whose wife died at Colonel Utie's or at my friend Jacop's. Their child was also brought hither by the Sergeant, on which account I wrote at the request of the sister of Jan Barens, the wife of a soldier here, expressly to Jacob Claesen (alias my friend). This child has yet due him there 821 pounds of tobacco and 200 lbs by the said Jan Tomissen; some trifles brought along by the Sergeant were entered upon the list and provisionally delivered together with the child to our soldier's wife. Jacob Claesen took over to Holland besides these, according to the letter of his partner, Frank Wryght, two silver key-chains and two or three silver knife-handles belonging to the child. This child was born at the departure of Mr. Alrichs in the ship Prins Maurits and was at the request of the Lords Burgomasters christened Amsteloop. [[sic]]* Your honor will please issue an order, whether it is to be turned over to the Orphan-Masters at N. Amstel or elsewhere." [PA Arch. 2, Vol. VII "Papers Relating to the Dutch and Swedish Settlements on the Delaware River" pp. 633-4 (italic mine). See also New York Historical Manuscripts, Dutch, Vols. XVIII-XIX: Delaware Papers (Dutch Period). Charles Gehring, trans. (1981), p. 205].

 

Notes on persons mentioned in Beeckman's report

 

"Jan Tomissen,” the carpenter named by Willem Beeckman in his April 1660 report (above), when he returned to the Delaware, bringing along the orphan, Amstels-Hoop, is probably the same as the carpenter, Jan Teunissen (also found as 'Tonisen'), known to have packed up his household and departed from New Amstel for Maryland in 1659, whence his wife shortly followed. ["Papers Relating to the Colonies on the Delaware, 1614-1682" in PA Arch. 2, Vol. V:, pp. 382-384]. His wife was Tryntje Croonenburg. Apparently they had one child, and also had been caring for Amstels-hoop in Maryland after the death of his parents. They probably owed money (for ship transport or for supplies, food drawn from the commissary, etc) to the city of Amsterdam, the proprietors of the New Amstel colony. See Jacob Alrichs' October 1659 comment on Jan Teunissen in Delaware Papers (Dutch), p. 173 (ibid).

 

Also worth noting in the above report, is Beeckman's "friend Jacop," the trading partner of Francis Wright, who he also called "Jacob Claesen (alias my friend)." This Jacob Claesen is not to be confused with Jacob Junge of Gotheburg, the former assistant commissary of New Sweden, who eloped with Catharina, the wife of the Swedish minister Lars Carlsson Lock, in 1661. The Jacob Claesen who was Willem Beeckman's 'friend' was a Dutchman, an Indian trader, who in 1666 inherited half of a Cecil County plantation "Clayfall" upon the death of his partner, Francis Wright. This Jacob Claesen had a 1,200+ acre grant at St. George's Creek in (now) New Castle County, Delaware, but he and Wright were probably living at the time on Wright's plantation in upper Cecil County, Maryland. This was located along the Chesapeake near the Susquehanna River, close to the Indian paths used by the Susquehannock Indians and by those who traded with them. Meanwhile, Jacob Classen Junge (Swedish), after eloping with the Swedish minister's wife, fled with her to the vicinity of Manhattan, returning several years later to the Delaware, and died at Philadelphia in 1686. This Jacob Junge never owned property either in Delaware or in Maryland.

 

Nathaniel Utie, president of the Council of Maryland in 1659, involved in the controversy with the Dutch over jurisdiction of the Delaware, had by this time transported some 20 persons into Maryland, probably including several dissatisfied residents of the Dutch and former Swedish colonies in the Delaware. He owned an island called "Spesutia" on the west side of the upper Chesapeake, near (now) Annapolis, Maryland.

 

 

Nieuw-Amstels Hoop's later life

 

On his deliverance to Ft. Altena in 1660, Amstels-hoop was about three years and eight months old. Perhaps there were relatives somewhere in Holland, since Beeckman indicates that Jacob Claesen had delivered there a few personal items of Amstels-hoop's property. The child's personal worth at age three was some thousand pounds of tobacco, previously owed to his father, plus some silver items, and his father's tools, left behind in Maryland.

 

Amstels-hoop was living near New York by 1682, as indicated by his marriage record. Where was he between April 1660 and July 1682? Beeckman's report of April 1660 indicates that after being returned from Maryland in 1660, he was delivered to "the sister of Jan Barens, the wife of a soldier here" (meaning Ft. Altena). In his report, Beeckman asks Stuyvesant to decide what legal entity would have jurisdiction over the child, yet this case does not seem to appear in records of the Orphanmasters of New Amsterdam.

 

Jan Theuniszen and his wife, Tryntie Croonenburg, soon moved to New Amsterdam, where in June 1663, they appear as witnesses to a baptism in the New Amsterdam Dutch Reform Church.

 

[1663] Jun 13; Willem Simonszen, Jannetie Barents; Lysbeth; Jan Theuniszen, Tryntie Kroonenburg [[need NADRC record cit.]]

 

The entry for Jan Teunissen in Teunis Bergen's Early Settlers of Kings County describes him as a carpenter, and says his wife was Catharine Cronensburgh, the one who, with Richard Paynter, bought Rutgert Alberts' property in 1679 --a large property in which Amstels-hoop also had an interest:

 

(Teunissen) Jan, carpenter, m. Catharine Cronensburgh. Dec. 12, 1660, he sold to Gerret Lubbertse his plantation in Flh, lying on the W. side of the road, containing 27 morgens, with plain and meadow land thereto appertaining, as per p. 41 of Lib. B of Flh rec. Aug. 22, 1679, his w. bought of Rutgert Albertse his house and orchard in Flh for 200 gl., as per p. 54 of Lib. AA of Flh rec. Signed his name "Jan Teunesse." [Bergen, Early Settlers, p. 301]

 

Bergen must have obtained some of his information about Jan Teunissen's relationship to Tryntje Cronensburgh from court records found in the Delaware Papers. Jan and Tryntje were among many who had become unsatisfied with life in the Dutch settlements on the Delaware. A series of persons who attempted to leave New Amstel were summoned to court there in November 1659, where they were required to give testimony before Alexander d'Hinojossa, then acting in place of his superior, Jacob Alrichs, head of the New Amstel Colony, who was then deathly ill. At the time of the court appearance, Jan Teunissen apparently still owed money to the city of Amsterdam --whether for passage to New Amstel or for supplies drawn at the settlement is not mentioned here –but this debt was noted as the reason for d'Hinojossa's objection to his departure, and the seizure of Jan Teunissen's tools and their household goods.

 

THURSDAY, 20th November, 1659.

PRESENT—d'Hinojossa, G. van Sweringen, Jan Willemsen, Jan Crato.

Jan Teunissen, carpenter, declares that he applied to Mr. van Ruyven for employment as a soldier, who answered him thereto: If you be a soldier, you must stand sentry, and therefore cannot earn much; you should prefer coming to the Manhattans as freeman, in order to be employed as carpenter by private persons or even by Mr. Stuyvesant, and as such had only to ask wages; whereunto he replied that he did not know what to ask; further, that Mr. van Ruyven had recommended him to draw his wife's pay, and when he came to the Manhattans he should not be sent back here again, thereunto taking down his promise, under oath, that he should not depart out of the Province of New Netherland before this Colonie or the city of Amsterdam were paid.

(Signed), JAN THEUNISSEN.

Beneath was: To my knowledge.

(Signed), CORNELIS VAN GESEL, Secretary.

[PA Arch 2, Vol v, p. 382-3].

 

Mr. van Ruyven was then in New Amstel offering an amnesty to the dissatisfied Dutch settlers and proposing they return to Manhattan rather than moving to the English province in Maryland. Jan Teunissen had been jailed over his defection, but soon escaped, probably back to Maryland. A few days later, his wife, Tryntien Croonenburg, came to court to testify about their attempted departure:

 

SATURDAY, 22nd November, 1659.

PRESENT—d'Hinojossa, G. van Sweringen.

Tryntien Croonenburg, wife of Jan Theunissen, being summoned and asking for her husband, who had broken out of jail at night, and how was she to have gone away with Karreman, and on what conditions, she hath declared that, on the Commissioners, Cornells van Ruyven and Martin Kryger, suggesting and insisting that she would be much better at the Manhattans, for there were such good opportunities there to make money and obtain bread, as was to every one of the Colonists also sufficiently well known, and that the entire people had listened to the aforesaid gentlemen, and taken into their heads to remove to the Manhattans; wherefore, that she likewise endeavored to go away in this manner with Karreman, declaring, further, that she does not know how or in what manner her husband hath agreed with Skipper Carreman, but, indeed, that Carreman's wife and servant have had knowledge of it who have helped to put her furniture on board, complaining, now that the aforesaid gentlemen were away, and she was left in trouble. Thus done in the presence of Jan Juysten and Jan de Barelle, as witnesses hereunto invited. She, Tryntie Croonenburg, further declares that whenever she spoke to Carreman about going away with him, he said and answered: Away! away; can't you come on board at night; you must do that. In presence, etc., signed with the mark of Trijntien Cronenburgh, wife of Jan Theunissen. Jan de Barrelle* and with the mark of Jan Jysten.

Beneath was: To my knowledge.

(Signed), CORNELIS VAN GEZEL.

[PA Arch 2, Vol v, pp. 383-4].

 

* Note "Jan de Barelle" here was Jean de Barette, brother-in-law of Gerret van Sweringen.

 

 

Amstels-hoop's family

 

Beyond the brief entry in Beeckman's report, I did not find evidence of the circumstances of Jan Barents's death. Jacob Claesen, aka Jacob de Jongh/Young, and his partner Francis Wright were Indian traders, earlier residents of the Delaware settlements. By 1660, they had relocated to Maryland, where they were closer to the towns of the Susquehannocks with whom they traded. Perhaps Jan Barents had become associated with Jacob Claesen in the Indian trade. If his wife Grietje died at "Colonel Utie's," then she died on Spesutia Island in the upper Chesapeake Bay, near (now) Annapolis, Maryland. It is not known where Jacob Claesen's house or camp was in 1661. He had a large tract along St. George's Creek in New Castle County, but his trading post was more likely based in (now) Cecil County, Maryland, near the head of the Susquehanna River as it empties into the Chesapeake Bay --a place much more convenient to the Indian trade.

 

Jan Theunissen, the Dutch fugitive who did return from Maryland, was reportedly a carpenter, deprived of his tools when D'Hinojossa confiscated his household goods from Michiel Karreman's yacht. He had stated to Beeckman that he wished to return to Maryland, where he had the use of Barents' tools. Was the debt in tobacco owed by Jan Theunissen to the child, Amstels-hoop, meant as a payment for Jan Barents' tools? Had Jan Barents also been a carpenter?

 

Who were Amstel-hoop's aunt and her husband? Lyntje Barents, wife of Hendrick Assuerus, was another person who appears in court in the same series of sessions in which Jan Teunissen and his wife, Tryntien Croonenburg, appeared. In fact, Lyntje Barents testified on the same day as Tryntien Croonenburg, one following immediately after the other, as the records indicate.

 

SATURDAY, 22nd November, 1659.

PRESENT d'Hinojossa, G. van Sweringen.

Lyntie Barens, wife of Hendrick Assuerus, declares that Michiel Karreman hath allowed and permitted her to accompany him to the Manhattans in his sloop; that she accordingly put her property on hoard, saying also, that when the Commissioners were here she had been with them, because she saw everybody running to them, and the current report was, that the Manhattans and this place were all one, and the Commissioners could and were empowered to do everything, and therefore 'twas the same thing whether people, if they wished to go to the Manhattans, went to the Commissioners or to these magistrates. Thus executed in presence of Christiaen Libart and Claes Antonis, invited as witnesses. In testimony, signed with the mark made by Lyntie Barents, wife of Hendrick Assuerus, Claes Antonis and Christiaen Libart, as witnesses.

Beneath was:

To my knowledge. (Signed) CORNELIS VAN GEZEL, Secretary.

[PA Arch 2, vol. 5:363; also in DHNY II:105]

 

Lyntje Barents and Hendrick Assuerus** also came to New Amsterdam, or at least, Lyntje Barents did, where she remarried Adriaen Van Laer in 1672.

[NYDRC 1672 28 Apr; Adriaen Van Laer, Wedr. Van Abigal Verplancken, en Luytie Schonen, Wede. Van Hendrick Assuerus] [[need NADRC record cit.]]

[**This Hendrick Assuerus is not the same as the one who married Marretie Jans, lived at New Amersfoort, and had two children with her in 1678 and 1680].

 

Were Lyntje Barents and Hendrick Assuerus the aunt and uncle of Amstels-hoop?

 

Amstels-Hoop married Catharina van Marcken of Albany on 2 July 1862 at Flatbush, New York, but died less than two years later. Catharina van Marcken married (2) Barent Barentsen, on 18 May, 1684, at Flatbush.  These dates may be dates of the banns. 

 

Nieuw Amstels-hoop, who died so soon after his marriage, seems to have left no descendents. But he had family in the Netherlands and in the Dutch colonies in North America. it would be good to identify his family members. In part II, possibilities concerning Amstels-hoop's father, Jan Barents, and his sister, who in 1660 was the wife of a Dutch soldier serving in the Delaware, will be further explored.

 

 

Part II

 

Almost from the beginning, the Dutch settlements in the Delaware were steadily losing settlers, who migrated elsewhere. Life in the Delaware colonies was difficult due to several factors, not least of which were constant food shortages and recurring epidemics of dysentery-like or malaria-like fevers. Some residents departed for the nearby English province of Maryland, in which they saw opportunity for a better life. Earlier settlers from the previous New Sweden colony, first under Swedish rule, then under the Dutch, were also relocating elsewhere. Peter Stuyvesant in New Amsterdam tried to stem the loss of settlers in the Delaware by issuing a “pass” wherein colonists, under certain conditions, could move to New Amsterdam. Some of the Dutch residents who left were breaking contracts they had signed before emigrating.

 

New Amsterdam Dutch Reform Church records contain this entry:

 

1663 Jun 13; Willem Simonszen, Jannetie Barents; Lysbeth; Jan Theuniszen, Tryntie Kroonenburg

 

Beyond the brief entry in Beeckman's report, I did not find evidence of the circumstances of Jan Barents's death. Jacob Claesen, aka Jacob Jongh/Young, and his partner Francis Wright were Indian traders, earlier residents of the Delaware settlements. By 1660, they had relocated to Maryland, where they were closer to the towns of the Susquehannocks with whom they traded. Perhaps Jan Barents had become associated with Jacob Claesen in the Indian trade. If Grietje died at "Colonel Utie's," then she died on Spesutia Island in the upper Chesapeake bay. It is not known where Jacob Claesen's house or camp was in 1661; he is known to have had property along St Georges Creek in New Castle County, but his trading post was more likely based in (now) Cecil County, Maryland, near the head of the Susquehanna River as it empties into the Chesapeake Bay.

 

Jan Theunissen, the one who did return from Maryland, was reportedly a carpenter, deprived of his tools when D'Hinojossa confiscated them. He had let Beeckman know he wished to return to Maryland, where he had the use of Barents' tools. Was the debt in tobacco owed by Jan Theunissen to the child, Amstels-hoop, means as a payment for Jan Barents' tools? Had Jan Barents also been a carpenter?

 

One Jan Barents, deceased, was mentioned in a report sent by Jacob Alrichs to Peter Stuyvesant, dated 10 October, 1658: "Jan Barents, late chief boatswain on board the Prins Maurits now deceased; I had given him a certificate that he was employed here, in order that he may receive his wages on his departure in de Waeg, but it was not my intention that he should receive such pay on board the ship. ...He was an industrious and diligent man, who endeavored to act faithfully by those he served." [PA Arch. 2, Vol. V "Papers Relating to the Dutch and Swedish Settlements on the Delaware River" p. 322].

 

Had this Jan Barents been transferred to some duty on land until the next sailing of “de Waeg”? Probably so, since Alrichs says he was employed here –meaning at New Amstel, as opposed to elsewhere (such as on a ship), and because “de Waeg” was not yet in New Amstel when Alrichs wrote that report, but freight for it was being readied. In this report, had Alrichs written the epitaph not only of the former “Prins Maurits” boatswain, but also of the Jan Barents who was killed by Indians? If Jan Barents the boatswain is the same Jan Barents who was Amstels-hoop's father, then he must have been employed on the Prins Maurits for the voyage over, but in 1656 made an agreement to settle at New Amstel at the end of the voyage. --Or would he?? The job of boatswain was relatively good-paying --could he and his wife have decided that she would settle and work at New Amstel, while he continued in his job as a boatswain –until his job was lost when the Prins Mauritz sank, and the plans had to change??

 

In August 1657, after having been in charge at New Amstel for only about four months, Jacob Alrichs, expressed to Stuyvesant a hope that he could freight “de Waeg” with timber to send back to Amsterdam. This timber was in process of being cut and dressed by New Amstel work crews in anticipation of shipment [PA Arch 2, Vol. V “Papers Relating to the Colonies on the Delaware, 1614-1682”, p. 312]. Had Jan Barents, the boatswain, employed "here" (at New Amstel) who would have had experience in supervision, been assigned to supervise the work crews who were preparing timber for shipment in “de Waeg'? Had Barents' tools, used by the carpenter Jan Tomissen in Maryland, been tools for ship carpentry or for cutting wood?

 

Whatever his job description had been, Jan Barents (Amstl's-Hoop's father) lasted less than three years in the colonies. Somehow he ran into trouble with Indians, resulting in his death. His wife didn't live much longer –in April 1660, Amstels-hoop was given, at least temporarily, to his father's sister to raise. According to Beeckman, her husband was a soldier stationed at Ft. Altena.

 

Who was this sister? In his report of April 1660, Beeckman asks Stuyvesant to decide what legal entity would have jurisdiction over the child. Do any Orphanmasters records of New Amstel (New Castle) survive for these years? Was this case ever presented to the Orphanmasters of New Amsterdam?

 

Where did Amstels-Hoop live between 1661 and 1679, when (as Bergen noted) he had some 'interest' in the sale of the Rutgert Alberts property?

 

 

Connections

 

Teunis Bergen has an entry for one supposed to be Catharina van Marken's father:

 

VAN MARCKEN, JAN GERRITSE, probably from Marken, an island in the Zuider Zee in the Netherlands, came over in the ship St. Jacob in 1654, m. Geestje Huybertse in Europe; was a free merchant and resident of New Amstel on the Delaware in 1657 and '61; farmer of the excise at Fort Orange (Albany) in 1661 and '62; schout or sheriff of Schenectady in 1673 ; and from 1679 to '82 clerk and schoolmaster of Flh, where he owned land. Issue: (sup.) Catharine, who m. 1st, July 2, 1682, Nieuw Amstel Hoop of Amsterdam, and m. 2d, May 18, 1684, Barend Barendsz of Amsterdam both residents of Flh. Signed his name "J G Van Marcken." [Bergen, Register... of the Early Settlers of Kings County]

 

So Amstel-Hoop's wife was another with a connection to New Amstel: her father was a free merchant there.

 

Was there issue of Amstelhoop's marriage with Catharina van Marken? She did have at least one child with Barend Barentsz, baptized at Flatbush in 1685. Did this Barend Barentsz leave a will which mentioned Amstelhoop? Did anyone?

 

Was Barend Barentsz, second husband of Catharina van Marken, related to the Jan Barents who had immigrated to New Amstel? 'Barent' was a popular name in those days --there are very many in the New Amsterdam church records, and there is evidence of several in the Delaware settlements.

 

Who was Amstelhoop's aunt, the sister of Jan Barents, who, according to Willem Beeckman's letter, was married to a soldier at Ft. Altena? Who was that soldier? Since he was a soldier in 1660, he probably lived in the fort, probably not one of those who had received a land grant by that time.

 

There was one Lyntje Barents, wife of Hendrick Ahasuerus [Assuerus], who appeared in a court case before D'Hinojossa on 22 December 1659 at New Amstel, concerning her irregular departure for the Manhattans: “Lyntie Barens, wife of Hendrick Assuerus, declares that Michiel Karreman hath allowed and permitted her to accompany him to the Manhattans in his sloop...” [PA Arch 2, Vol v, p. 384]. This man was dead before before 28 April 1672, when his widow married Adriaen van Laer. I am not certain who this Lyntje Barents was –could she be the sister of Jan Barents, the aunt of Amstels-hoop?

 

Another Hendrick Assuerus had a residence in Amersfort NY, by 1675. His wife was Maritie Jans. One of the sponsors at the baptism of their daughter Lysbet in 1680 was “Barent Janszen Snyder.” There were so many men called 'Barent' --is this a coincidence?

 

Back in Delaware, there was a Pieterje Barents, married to Dirck Alberts, who was in New Amstel by 1658. Dirck Alberts witnessed Foppe Jans Outhout's purchase of land in southern NJ from Indians in 1665, and by 1669 had acquired a 469-acre plantation on the eastern shore of the Delaware at the place which became Penn's Neck, Salem County, NJ, [Thomas Shourds, 1878, History of Fenwick's Colony 504-5], where he operated a ferry to New Castle. He had a patent for a lot in New Castle (formerly New Amstel) dated August 11, 1670 [Original Land Titles in Delaware Commonly Known as the Duke of York Record... p. 145]. He was a justice of the court at New Castle by 1671; died 1676 in Delaware (execs/guardians Edmund Cantwell and Johannes De Haes), leaving a son Cornelis Dircksen who married a daughter of Marten Roosemont of New Castle, and a daughter Hillegond (bapt. 15 Oct. 1662 New Amsterdam) who later married Abraham Pieters Enloes of Penn's Neck, Salem County NJ. Was Pieterje Barents Amstels-hoop's aunt? Did Dirck Alberts have a relative, Rutgert Alberts, whose property was sold in 1679, in which, as Teunis bergen said, Jan Amsterhoop had “?

 

Many questions remain concerning Amstel-hoop's family. Who were his aunt and uncle? Where was he between 1660 and 1679? How is it that by 1679, at age 22, Amstels-hoop, aka Nieuw-Amstel Hoop, son of Jan Barents and Grietje Elders, had an interest in the Flatbush property of Rutgert Albertse? In 1679, 3,000 guilders was a handsome sum. What part of that was his? Future research is needed in order to discover the rest of the story of Amstel-hoop.

 

© 2010 Elizabeth A. Johnson. Free use can be made of the above for personal genealogical research, but commercial or for-profit use is strictly prohibited.

   Contact the author for further informatiuon iris.gatesATgmail.com

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.