| Catherine van der Poel was a New Netherland Descendant 1674-1776. Join: New Netherland Settlers Project Discuss: new_netherland |
Contents |
Catherine was baptized on 30 June 1725 in the Reformed Dutch Church of New York, recorded as Catarina, the child of Wijnant Vander Poel and Catharina de Hoge.[1] She was the daughter of Wynant Vanderpool and Catherine DeHooges.
She passed away in 1806. [2]
LNAB is van der Poel, the last name recorded for her father at her baptism, with spacing and capitalization revised to conform with Dutch conventions. Smith-62120 19:33, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
If she used a middle name of Margaret (found on the Vanderpoole-1 profile), she must have acquired it later in life. It is not on her baptism record. Also, there are no records mentioned here that call her See, so that is in Other Last Names for now. Smith-62120 01:17, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
I have encountered two trains of thought when it comes to the parentage of Catherine Vanderpool. There is one that says that she was the daughter of Wynant Vanderpool and Catherine de Hooges. I have not found any evidence for this idea. I have acquired a reprint of a book entitled "Van der Poel" which was reprinted by the Higginson Book Company of Salem, Massachusetts; and is a research of the family origins and descendants. This book names the children of Wynant and Catherine; but, there is no daughter named Catherine. The last child was born in 1722 and named Maria. She was the youngest of eight surviving children. One child was baptized who did not survive infancy, named David, and another of the same name was born within the next two years. While it is true that there may have been more, there is no proof that there was indeed any more.
The second train of thought, presented by Irene See Brasel in her book, "A Chronicle of the See Family and their Kindred", is that Catherine was probably the daughter of Abraham Vanderpool who came to Pennsylvania in 1738 and traveled to Virginia and Western Virginia to the same places which the See Family also traveled. I have found nothing to support this scenario either. There is nothing to even suggest the age of Abraham Vanderpool in the murky records of the time, so that he could just as easily be a brother or a cousin. I note that Wynant and Catherine Vanderpool had a documented son named Abraham born 1709. It follows that if Catherine were truly their daughter, he would then be her brother. Abraham Vanderpool and wife, Rebecca, sold to George Yokum, lot 10 which was held by patent of Lord Fairfax, South Fork of Warraconee or Great5 South Branch of Potomac, 430 acres, in May of 1751 (Chalkley 3, pg. 293).
Captured by Shawnee At Muddy Creek Massacre 1-15-1763 Became the fifth wife of her captor Chief Cornstalk,also captured were her children ,Margaret, Lois, Catherine E.,John, and Mary[3]
Depending on which family history one reads, there are a number of maiden names attributed to Catherine the wife of Frederick Zeh/See--including Vanderpoole, LeCompte, etc. and various birth dates and locations. She is said to have had 3 husbands-John Sharpe, Frederick See, and John Hardy. And said to have died in Ohio living with or near two or three of her daughters. None of the above except marriages to Frederick See and John Hardy have any documentation and appear to be based on assumptions.
That Frederick had a (2nd) wife named Catherine is generally accepted based on the correspondence of Rev. Michael See, a great-grandson of Frederick and Catherine See who writes in 1887 "I remember hearing my Grandfather (John SEE) say that his mother married a man named Hardy; it may be that her name was Katy." Others refer to "Aunt Kitty Hardy." In reviewing the records of Greenbrier County, we find John Hardy living on Muddy Creek (the site of Frederick See's original survey and subsequent death at the hands of the Shawnee) from 1771-1788. The Mathews Trading Post Account Books (located on the Greenbrier River) lists Michael Sea (son of Frederick and Catherine) as the agent of John Hardy between 1771-75. As yet, none of the Greenbrier records give John Hardy's wife's name but there certainly is a high probability that Frederick See's widow remarried John Hardy.
Catherine See is listed as a released captive on the Bouquet Prisoner lists in 1764-65. Whether or not this was the mother or a daughter by the same name is not known as no age is given. But again, Rev. Michael See relates many stories of his grandfather's capture by Indians and refers to the mother being captured along with the rest of the family.
Most See and a few Vanderpool charts have accepted Frederick's wife to be Catherine Vanderpool, the daughter of Abraham Vanderpool who was neighbor to George See on the South Fork in the South Branch Valley of WV, though there is no evidence for either first or last name as she is never mentioned in any records. In the 1960s there was another theory going around that his wife was Catherine LeCompte. "In a letter written in 1961 by Inez (See-Hartman) to her granddaughter, Elizabeth DeLuca Haley, she claimed that Fredrick See had married Catherine LeCompte."
As for the Vanderpool name, there are two trains of thought. One claims that she was the daughter of Wynant Vanderpool and Catherine de Hooges. No evidence has been cited for this relationship. A reprint of a book entitled "Van der Poel" (reprinted by the Higginson Book Company of Salem, Massachusetts- a research of the family origins and descendants), names the children of Wynant and Catherine; but, there is no daughter named Catherine. The last child was born in 1722 and named Maria. She was the youngest of eight children. While it is true that there may have been more, there is no proof that there was indeed any more.
The second claim, presented by Irene See Brasel in her book, "A Chronicle of the See Family and their Kindred", and in other charts is that Catherine was probably the daughter of Abraham Vanderpool who came to Pennsylvania in 1738 and traveled to Virginia and Western Virginia to the same places which the See Family also traveled, though he appears to be too young to have a daughter her age.
The 1913 TJJ See mss. claims that Frederick and Catherine ("Kitty"-no surname given) were married prior to coming to America in 1734 from Silesia, Prussia (since disproven.) Nugen ms. and many other SEE family histories list Catherine Vanderpool, the daughter of Wynant Vanderpool, as Frederick's wife, claiming they were married in 1744 in Wallpack, NJ.
The Vanderpool name appears to be possible since Abraham Vanderpoole from NJ ended up on South Branch at the same time as George Zeh. Note: Wallpack Center NJ is today in Sussex Co., on Delaware River not far from Minisink region of NY where Westfalls, Bogards who also went to the South Branch were from. Tulpehocken/Swatara region of PA (location of George See and Michael Harness) is not even close to NJ. Thus the question is how Frederick See and a Vanderpool daughter would have met and married. If a Vanderpool, it would have been more likely that Catherine Vanderpool would have been a second wife and they met in the South Branch. Again, however there is no evidence for any of this! There is nothing to even suggest the age of Abraham Vanderpool in the murky records of the time, so that he could just as easily be a brother or a cousin. I note that Wynant and Catherine Vanderpool had a documented son named Abraham born 1709. It follows that if Catherine were truly their daughter, he would then be her brother. Others claim that a Catherine Vanderpool married George Yoakum, who bought Abraham Vanderpool's Lot #10 of the South Fork in 1751. (Chalkley 3, pg. 293).
Correspondence with several serious Vanderpool researches also denies that Catherine was a Vanderpoole. Thus it seems best to list Catherine as Unknown, until such time as evidence to the contrary should come to light.
Family legend in Brasel's book tells the following story (without documentation.)
Catherine See and Children in Indian Captivity: After the Muddy Creek Massacre, the destination of the Shawnees was Old Town near the old city of Chilicothe, Ohio, on the banks of the Scioto River. The captives were forced along at the tireless pace of the Indians. They tried valiantly to keep up, for well they knew that it was a matter of life or death; anyone falling behind, any crying babe was ruthlessly killed. The distance ahead was long, a distance of 165 miles as the crow flies, over some of the most rugged terrain east of the Mississippi River. Two mountain ranges lay ahead, the Blue Ridge and the Allegheny, not to mention streams and rivers to cross.
Catherine See, keenly aware that her younger children would soon be exhausted, resolved with a courage born of desperation to save them from an inevitable fate. One of the warriors rode along the trudging line made up of about 150 women, young boys and children, many burdened with the loot that the Indians had collected. His mount was a horse, the property of Frederick See.
It was perhaps the third day on the trail that Catherine requested that he give up the horse that her children might ride. This the Indian angrily refused to do. Seizing a pine knot from the ground, Catherine knocked him off the horse. He sprang up brandishing his tomahawk and would have killed her then & there, but for the interference of the other Indians who admired her fearlessness and called her "The Fighting Squaw". Catherine was permitted to keep the horse and use it for her family.
One ceremony which provided the Indians with entertainment was an ordeal to which nearly every prisoner was subjected, it was to run "The Gauntlet". A large number of squaws and boys armed with clubs and switches lined up in two rows facing each other, then the prisoners were compelled to run between the lines while the Indians struck them with their sticks and threw dirt or rubbish in their faces.
Catherine was now about 48 years old and had spent the last 25 years of her life on the frontier, where to remain alive was to become physically tough and mentally alert. Doubtlessly, the story of her triumph in getting the horse had spread through the village and the Indians were eager to see the "fighting squaw" undergo this test. They were not to be disappointed, for to their astonishment, Catherine suddenly seized the club of the nearest Indian, and swinging it lustily right and left, soon overcame and scattered the Indians.
In accordance with Indian custom, a general council decided the division of spoils and the fate of the prisoners. The older daughter, Elizabeth, was given to Chief Cornstalk's Son for his wife. This girl could hardly have been more than fourteen. How the older boys were placed is unknown and Catherine and the younger girl were taken into some family. All were under shelter except little John, who had to stay outside with the Indian dogs.
Housing was strained by the sudden addition of 150 prisoners. It so happened that one day when most of the tribe had left for some special purpose, Catherine was left behind in charge of an aged squaw. The old woman was subject to seizures, and having one, fell into the fire. Catherine calmly placed her foot on the old womans head and held it down until she died. When the Indians returned and heard her report of the happening (what she chose to tell) she received no blame as the old woman's condition was generally known. There was one less in the wigwam and John could then sleep inside. Later he was adopted by an Indian family.
Appeals for relief, at length were heard, and the British Government ordered Col. Henry Bouquet to make an expedition against the Indians to put an end to these raids and force the return of their captives. The Indians, impressed by the boldness of Col. Bouquet decided to make peace and give up their white prisoners. On November 9, 1764, the Indians delivered 206 prisoners at the stockade and on the 18th they were taken to Fort Pitt. The Shawnees had about 100 remaining prisoners which they promised to deliver in the Spring.
Among the list of prisoners sent by Capt. Lewis to Fort Pitt on November 15th were the following: the two See boys, and Mary See, which could be Mary Catherine See, the mother or the younger sister. The list reveals the physical condition of the children and the fact that some did not know their own names. When the day had come for the captives departure, scenes of grief and sadness prevailed for many Indians did not wish to give up their adopted children. Only a night or two after leaving, little John See stole away from the encampment and rejoined the Indians. Tradition tells that his Uncle Michael See gave a trader $100.00 to get him back and John See returned to Hampshire to live with his Uncle's family.
Catherine See had her burden of grief for her daughter, Elizabeth, did not return with the captives. Legend tells that she was the mother of an Indian babe and either remained with the Shawnees by choice or by restraint.
The See family returned to Hampshire County to live with their kindred. Catherine See may have married John Hardy, pioneer of Hardy County. Later they all returned to Greenbrier, where they appear in the county tax list of 1783-1786.
See also:
Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.
Catherine is 18 degrees from Zendaya Coleman, 27 degrees from Sting Sumner, 15 degrees from Josh Brolin, 20 degrees from Timothée Chalamet, 18 degrees from José Ferrer, 15 degrees from Frank Herbert, 13 degrees from Richard Jordan, 14 degrees from David Lynch, 17 degrees from Virginia Madsen, 17 degrees from Charlotte Rampling, 25 degrees from Patrick Stewart and 19 degrees from Denis Villeneuve on our single family tree. Login to find your connection.
V > van der Poel > Catarina van der Poel
Categories: New Netherland Descendants 1674-1776 | New Netherland Project-Managed | New Netherland Settlers Project Needs More Records
I have encountered two trains of thought when it comes to the parentage of Catherine Vanderpool. There is one that says that she was the daughter of Wynant Vanderpool and Catherine de Hooges. I have not found any evidence for this idea. I have acquired a reprint of a book entitled "Van der Poel" which was reprinted by the Higginson Book Company of Salem, Massachusetts; and is a research of the family origins and descendants. This book names the children of Wynant and Catherine; but, there is no daughter named Catherine. The last child was born in 1722 and named Maria. She was the youngest of eight children. While it is true that there may have been more, there is no proof that there was indeed any more.
The second train of thought, presented by Irene See Brasel in her book, "A Chronicle of the See Family and their Kindred", is that Catherine was probably the daughter of Abraham Vanderpool who came to Pennsylvania in 1738 and traveled to Virginia and Western Virginia to the same places which the See Family also traveled. I have found nothing to support this scenario either. There is nothing to even suggest the age of Abraham Vanderpool in the murky records of the time, so that he could just as easily be a brother or a cousin. I note that Wynant and Catherine Vanderpool had a documented son named Abraham born 1709. It follows that if Catherine were truly their daughter, he would then be her brother. Abraham Vanderpool and wife, Rebecca, sold to George Yokum, lot 10 which was held by patent of Lord Fairfax, South Fork of Warraconee or Great5 South Branch of Potomac, 430 acres, in May of 1751 (Chalkley 3, pg. 293).