The baptism of Aryaantie, daughter of Teunis Oosterhout and Aryaantie Roos, was recorded in the Reformed Dutch Church of Kingston, New York, on 29 September 1706. Witnesses were Hans Kierstede and Engeltie Roos.[1]
The marriage of "Harmen Roosekrans, j.m., and Ariaantjen Oosterhout, j.d,, both parties born and resid. in Raysester (Rochester)," was recorded in the Reformed Dutch Church of Kingston, New York, on 29 April 1725. Banns were registered on April 11.[2]
Oosterhout-70 was created by Alex Terwilliger through the import of Terwilliger-Boyce Combined Tree_2015-05-29.ged on May 29, 2015.
Genealogical Notes worked up by Elizabeth "Betty" Yvonne (Rosecranz) Straughan. (Passed on to Jill Lee in the early 1980s.)
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com
DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with Ariaantje by comparing test results with other carriers of her mitochondrial DNA.
Mitochondrial DNA test-takers in the direct maternal line:
Three profiles for daughter Arreantie: I have just proposed that the profiles Arreantie (Roosa) Rosenkrans and Arrentie Oosterhout be merged together, and then I found this third one. So I guess those two profiles should be merged into this protected profile. NOTE: the reason that one profile lists her LNAB as Roosa was that she was being confused with her mother whose LNAB was Roosa.
Roosa-463 and Oosterhout-115 appear to represent the same person because: Same birth date; same father; same marriage date; same husband. NOTE: Arrentie Roosa was not her name; that was actually her mother's name. Oosterhout is the correct last name at birth.
Instead of referring to the Roosa, Roose, Rose family, here "Roosa" may just have been meant as an abbreviated form of the name Roosakrans or some other of its spelling variations. That's assuming it wasn't found as her father's name in a baptismal record, but since her father's an Oosterhout that shouldn't be an issue.
Oosterhout-108 and Oosterhout-12 appear to represent the same person because: Same name, same baptism, same spouse name. No conflicts. I see no reason to delay a merge.
edited by Pauline Layton
Great job !