The Birth Date is a rough estimate. See the text for details.
Biography
Barent J. Goes Jr. is listed as a head of family in Kinderhook, New York in 1800. Included in the household were 2 males aged 16 to under 26 and 1 female in the same age range and 1 female from 26 to under 45 age range.
↑ "United States Census, 1800," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHRZ-35S : accessed 2 July 2020), Barent J Goes Jr, Kinderhook, Columbia, New York, United States; citing p. 1167, NARA microfilm publication M32, (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.), roll 22; FHL microfilm 193,710.
Acknowledgments
Goes-53 was created by Richard Hayes through the import of Van Burens.ged on Aug 18, 2015.
Prior to import, this record was last changed 04 OCT 2009 .
Goes-56 was created by Richard Hayes through the import of Van Burens.ged on Aug 19, 2015.
Prior to import, this record was last changed 04 OCT 2009 .
Kevin Sands, Entered by Kevin Sands, Dec 2, 2012. Click the Changes tab for the details of edits by Kevin and others.
Is Barent your ancestor? Please don't go away! Login to collaborate or comment, or ask our community of genealogists a question.
Hi Kevin, the other manager Richard Hayes is contending that "The name of this family is Goes, not Hoes. My source is the Kinderhook Baptism Book. All of the Goes family members listed have spelled their name that way."
You do not have sources listed, and only children of this profile. No later descendants, to prove than any later descendats on this branch were named Hoes.
I am thinking that you may have recoded this branch as Hoes rather than Goes because of the Van Buren ancestor being Hoes.
So can you confirm a source for Hoes, or do we need to change all of this descendant branch to Goes?
Goes-53 and Hoes-14 appear to represent the same person because: The marriage is the exact same, and so presumably this newly created unsourced Goes Jr. is just an error, and so should merge into the previously extablished Hoes. No tree conflicts. Thanks!
You do not have sources listed, and only children of this profile. No later descendants, to prove than any later descendats on this branch were named Hoes.
I am thinking that you may have recoded this branch as Hoes rather than Goes because of the Van Buren ancestor being Hoes.
So can you confirm a source for Hoes, or do we need to change all of this descendant branch to Goes?