1679 Mar 16 Huibert Lambertsen, j.m., of Wageinghen, in Gelderlandt, and Hendrickje Swartwout, j.d., from Nieu Albanien, both resid. in Horley, and married in Horley. First publication of Banns, 21 Feb. [3]
Research notes
LNAB
Swartwout is the name that first appears in records for Hendrickje. Quackenbush-118 22:15, 10 January 2017 (EST)
Misc.
38.Hendrickje 4Swartwout (Roeloff 3, Tomys 2, Rolef 1) was born 1665 in New York, U.S.A.. She married HuybertLambertsenBrink March 16, 1678/79 in Hurley, Ulster, New York, U.S.A., son of Lammert Huybertsen and Hendrickje Cornelisse. He was born Abt. July 1655 in Wageningen, Gerlerland, Holland, and died 1719 in Hurley, Ulster, New York, U.S.A..
Children of Hendrickje Swartwout and Huybert Brink are:[4]
71 i. Lambert Lambertsen 5 Brink, born Abt. 1680 in Hurley, New York, U.S.A..
72 ii. Thomas Lambertsen Brink, born December 6, 1685 in Kingston, New York, U.S.A.; died 1761 in Montague, New Jersey, U.S.A..
73 iii. Hendrick Lambertsen Brink, born 1687. He married Grietjen Osterhout May 19, 1719.
74 iv. Eva Lambertsen Brink, born May 25, 1690 in Hurley, New York, U.S.A.; died 1735 in Rariton, Somerset, New Jersey, U.S.A..
75 v. Henricus Lambertsen Brink, born 1694.
76 vi. Ralph Brink, born Abt. 1696.
77 vii. Hendrica Lambetsen Brink, born 1696.
Sources
↑ Source: #S525 Cites: RootsWeb: WorldConnect; Anderson Estes Family, by Otis Anderson; History of the Swartwout Family, by Carl N Van Auken (1995) page 1 of 10, Descendants of Albert and Arent Andriessen Bradt, by Cynthia B Biasca, 929.273 B729bc, Supplement, page 1
↑ Roswell Randall Hoes. Baptismal and Marriage Registers of the Old Dutch Church of Kingston, Ulster County, New York: (formerly Named Wiltwyck, and Often Familiarly Called Esopus or 'Sopus), for One Hundred and Fifty Years from Their Commencement in 1660. New York: De Vinne Press, 1891.
Source: S1026 Abbreviation: The Updated Swartwout Chronicles Title: The Updated Swartwout Chronicles, compiled by Kathy A. Hoeldke <kathyhoeldke@sympatico.ca> online [1], accessed 9/10/2006 TMPLT TID 0 FIELD Name: Footnote VALUE The Updated Swartwout Chronicles, compiled by Kathy A. Hoeldke <kathyhoeldke@sympatico.ca> online [2], accessed 9/10/2006 FIELD Name: ShortFootnote FIELD Name: Bibliography TMPLT FIELD Name: Page
Source: S-1851061474 Repository: #R-1851062275 Title: Ancestry Family Trees Publication: Online publication - Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com. Original data: Family Tree files submitted by Ancestry members. Note: This information comes from 1 or more individual Ancestry Family Tree files. This source citation points you to a current version of those files. Note: The owners of these tree files may have removed or changed information since this source citation was created. Page: Ancestry Family Trees Note: Data: Repository: R-1851062275 Name: Ancestry.com Address: http://www.Ancestry.com Note: Text: https://www.ancestry.com/family-tree/tree/31037573/family Text: https://www.ancestry.com/family-tree/tree/31037573/family
WikiTree profile Swartwout-258 created through the import of Jason Allington family tree.ged on Jan 10, 2012 by Jason a. See the Changes page for the details of edits by Jason and others.
WikiTree profile Swartwout-263 created through the import of Jason Allington family tree.ged on Jan 10, 2012 by Jason a. See the Changes page for the details of edits by Jason and others.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com
DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with Hendrickje by comparing test results with other carriers of her mitochondrial DNA.
Mitochondrial DNA test-takers in the direct maternal line:
Swartwout-258 and Swartwout-44 appear to represent the same person because: This one had been a rejected match, probably on one of the imports. But from what I see, there is no good reason to not simply merge it down. No tree conflicts. Thanks!
Swartwout-263 and Swartwout-258 appear to represent the same person because: I really don't think this deserves to be a rejected match. There is not enough here to support the preservation of two separate profiles. I suspect that the 1665 birth makes more sense, and that the February 21, 1679 birth in the other match is probably instead a death date. So in either case she died young, and the current death dates of 1662 and 1779 are both completely ridiculous. So I would merge it, as died young, born 1665, died February 21, 1679. Thanks!