What's the best LNAB for Abraham Pieterszen van Deursen and who were his parents [closed]

Question

RESOLVED. I'm going to close this thread. We found his origins. He was bapt 5 Jul 1599 in Haarlem, son of Pieter Jans "van Deursen in Brabant", and Paulina Vincke of Rensselaer, Holland. Technically his last name at birth should be Pieterszen.

This profiles has two separate but related issues:

1. What was Abraham's Last Name at Birth (LNAB)?
2. Who were his parents?

A 1912 genealogy, which for its time, did a pretty good job of original-record analysis

[UPDATE: This genealogy did a better analysis of colonial records than of Dutch records. A 1934 article points out huge holes in the conclusions drawn from the Dutch records.] 

points out that in New Netherland, he-- as well as his children (at least until 1667) used their patronymic name as a surname. Specifically, Abraham, in the records, was called Abraham Pietersen (in some cases Pieterszen). He was never-- in records contemporary to his life time-- referred to as Abraham van/Van Deursen (or Deusen). The 1912 author writes:

"The Family were known by the patronymics of Pietersen and Abrahamsen until 1667, when the English influences caused them to use their surname of Van Deursen [or Van Deusen]; Pieter Abrahamsen Van Deursen being the first to do so.

 

"Van Deursen is still retained by some of his decendants, but Van Deusen has also been used and in the various records the name has appeared in every imaginable spelling."

 

Following this, technically, his LNAB should be Pieterszen or at least Pietersen with "van Deursen" (that spelling and capitalization) in Other Last Names due to subsequent records and genealogies referring to him that way.

 

Regarding his parents:

 

One Abraham Pietersen van Deursen[1] was baptized 11 NOV 1607 at the Dutch Reformed Church, Haarlem, Noord-Holland, The Netherlands.

 

"November 11, 1607. Parents: Pieter Lucasz of Haarlem, Maria Jans. Child: Abraham." (1912 genealogy citing Haarlem, Holland church records)

 

Marriage is described here.

 

The 1912 Van Deursen genealogy claims this was the immigrant. The 1912 Van Deursen genealogy adds:

 

"Three other records from the same Registers of the Reformed Church at Haarlem, given the father's birthplace as Brabant. "Baptized: May 8, 1605. Parents Pieter Joosten of Helmond in Brabant, Lysbeth Jans. Child: Abraham." "Id. January 23, 1603. Parents Peter Jans of Woensel in Brabant, Aelthen Fasen. Child: Abraham." "Id. March 2, 1604. Parents Pieter Dirckes of Helmond in Brabant, Heilken Wouters. Child: Abraham."

 

IF we are going with the 1912 genealogy as the final word, then Abraham's mother should be Mary Jans.

 

HOWEVER, the 1912 author does not explain how he determined WHICH of the above Abrahams, all sons of a Pieter, was immigrant to New Netherlands. Each of the Pieters in the above records appear to be a different man, And each wife is also different. And no where is the mother listed as Pauline Vincke (who, at this writing, is identified as the mother of Abraham on his wikitree profile).

 

NOTE: A 1953 article argues against the 1607 baptism being that of the New Netherlands immigrant Abraham Pieterszen van Deursen, saying that the latter was identified as 31 years of age in 1632, calculating back to a 1601 (not 1607) birth.

 

"If further proof was needed to show that the van Deursen genealogy is wrong with regard to the parent of the settler [See NYRec, 1934:62 ff.], there is also a notarial paper of 25 Jan. 1632 [Not. A.J. Engel, Amsterdam], stating that the following persons who had been since 1627 in New Netherland at Manhattan to build windmills there had disputes with regard to this with Pieter Minuit. These persons were: Gillis Jans, huistimmerman [house-carpenter], 41 years old; Abraham Pieters [van Deursen], miller, 31 years old, therefore born about 1601 and not in 1607 as the genealogy states; and Francois Vesaert, millwright." ("Settlers of Dutch Descent," in The American Genealogist 29(1953);76)

 

UPDATE: And a 1934 article in the NYGBR sounds trounces the conclusions the 1912 author reached about Abraham's origins.

 

Elsewhere, I've seen a specific 1598 baptism for him with the parents as currently listed on the profile, but I cannot find the original that they are pulling from.

 

In any case it looks like we should change his birth date to about 1599.

 

Thoughts?

 

Comments

I'd like to see the original of this 1632 document. Note that it claims Abraham Pietersen was in New Netherlands as early as 1627. If accurate, then he was not the Abraham Pietersen who married in Haarlem, Netherlands in 1629! Unless a miller was likely to cross the ocean more than once? (Do we have precedent that these folks sailed back to Holland for marriage or other reasons ?)  

We do know that subsequent New Netherlands records refer to his wife by her maiden name and that name does match the 1629 Haarlem marriage record. Were there more than one Abraham Pietersen's (both millers) in NN? One who arrived by 1627; the other shortly after his 1629 Haarlem marriage?

---

I can't comment on whether this guy might have crossed the ocean more than once. However, in my limited experience with the personal histories of New Netherland "Settlers," I've seen a number of instances of people who crossed the ocean rather often. This was particularly true of the men who were employed by the Dutch West India Company. (They were primarily traders, not settlers.)

---

Good to know, Ellen. So he could have come over in 1627, back in 1629 to marry, then back again (permanently) with wife.

Answer 1

The 1978/9 book "Immigrants to the Middle Colonies", which is a compilation of older papers from the NYGBR, has an article by Joel N. Eno about origins of many New Netherland surnames, enttiled "New York 'Knickerbocker' Familes; Origin and Settlement."  I found this quite by accident, on Ancestry.com. I can't tell when it was originally published:

Regarding this name, Eno stated:

Van Deursen (Deusen, Duursen), Abraham, from Holland to New Amsterdam, thence to Fort Orange or Beverwyck, where was Peter Abrahamsen, in 1657, m. at N.Y. 1666; (Deursen is a hamlet in N. Brabant).

Answer 2

Louis Hasbrouck Von Sahler, "Early Generations of the Van Deusen Family in America," in NY Genealogical & Biographical Record, 30(1899):47-48: [In the original the following is all in one paragraph; I have broken it up for easier online reading. JSS]

"The earliest record that I have been able to find in this country [USA] about him, is in the New York Colonil Documents, which state that Abraham Pietersen, of Haerlem (Netherlands [sic]), took possession, in 1636, for the Dutch West India Company, of the Island of Quentensis in front of Sloops Bay. In another place it is described as the Island of Queteurs, in front of Sloop Bay and Pequator's River, and in 1664 they speak of the special possession of Abrham Pietersen, of Haerlem, still living, on the Island of Quetenesse, in Narricanese Bay, near Rhode Island, and also of another island near the Pequot River, called by the English: "The Dutchman's Island." In the latter instance he is spoken of, as of Haerlem, owing to his having lived there when he became interest in the first-mentioned island.

In 1638 he was spoken of as the first miller in New Amsterdam; an in important and lucrative position in those days, and he is sometimes mentioned in the records as Abraham Pietersen, Molenaer, or Miller.

In 1641, on August 29th, he was one of the "Twelve Men" whom the commonalty chose and empowered to resolve on everything with the Director-General and Council, and in 1643, on November 3d, he was one of the "Eight Men" who sent a memorial to the States GEneral of Holland, setting forth the distressed state of the colony on account of the Indian outbreaks, and begging for assistance. The "Twelve Men" and the "Eight Men" were the first assemblies on Manhattan Island.

In 1655, owing to the dangerous condition of the times, it was thought best to strengthen the defence of the city, and on October 12th he contributed towards that purpose, and in 1664, on April 19th, he was assessed for soldiers. At this time he lived on the east side of Heeren Street, now Broadway; the third place south of Wall Street, opposit Trinity Church.

In 1657, on April 14th, he was granted the burgher right, and was Lance Corporate of Company Second of the Burgher Corps.

In October, 1664, he and his son, Isaac Abrahamsen (Van Deursen), swore allegiance to the (Dutch) King of England, William the Third. Evidently his education and wealth were equal to his prominence.

The names of himself and wife, Tryntje Melchior Abrahams (Van Deursen), frequently appear in the records of the old Dutch Church in the Fort at New Amsterdam-- the first time in 1640 and the last in 1667, and their names also appear in the list of members for 1649. Their marriage and the births of their elder children either occurred in the Netherlands, or before the church records commenced. [Their marriage record was subsequently found in Haarlem, Netherlands. JSS]

The family were known by the patronymics of Pietersen and Abrahamsen until 1667, when English influences caused them to use their surname [sic] of Van Deursen; Pieter Abrahamsen Van Deursen being the first to do so. Van Deursen is still retained by some of the descendants, but Van Deusen has been the most used, while Van Dusen has also been used, and in the various records the name has appeared in every imaginable spelling.

There is some reason to belive that Abraham Pietersen Van Deursen had two brothers in New Amsterdam --

Cornelius Pietersen, a cadet in the Second Burgher Corps, who married Tryntje Hendricks; she married, secondly, Frederick Lubbertsen, one of the "Twelve Men." 

And Hendrick Pietersen, also called Hendrick Pietersen 1,000 bergen, Hendrick Van Duisberg, alias 1,000 berg, and Hendrick Van Dussenburg, Master of the Masons in 1638, who married Geertje Everts, daughter of Evert Pietersen Keteltas. 

Possibly Willem Pietersen, who was Lance Corporal in the First Burgher Corps, was another brother.

Abraham and Tryntje were sponsors at the baptism of Cornelius Pieters' son, Hendrick, October 7, 1640, and Endrick Pieters' son, Evert, May 16, 1644. 

Their descendants must have retained their patronymics as surnames, and been lost in the crowd of Cornelisens and Hendricksens, for they cannot be traced as Van Deusens. 

Adrian Pietersen, of Aitzema, in the Netherlands, who was a director in the Dutch West India Company, in 1632, is thought to have been another brother.

...

 

Answer 3

"Replies to Queries," in New Netherland Connections 1 (1996):36:

1996-22 [Descent of Pesident Martin Van Buren] Martin Van Buren is descended entirely from Netherland families, and counts among his ancestors... Abraham Pietersz [Van Deursen] (of Haarlem, baptized 3 September 1599)... A complete ancestor table and bibliography are included in Ancestors of American Presidents, which I published last year. Copies are available in many libraries. -- Carl Boyer, 3rd, PO Box 220333, Santa Clarita, CA 91322-0333 [phone # removed]

NOTE that this claimed 1599 baptism is different than what was published in the 1912 VD genealogy, suggesting different parentage. I'll keep looking...

Answer 4

Finally found it. That 1953 reference disputing Abraham's origins makes reference itself to a 1934 article: NYGBR 65:62-65 [My emphases added in bold]

William J. Hoffman, "An Armory of American Families of Dutch Descent"

"VAN DEURSEN-VAN DEUSEN

"The genealogical deductions of the supposed pre-American ancestry of the Van Deursen family as published in "A Founder Family of New Netherland and their Ancestry in Holland" in Vol. VII of the "Journal of American History" and by the same writer-- the late Catpain Albert Harrison Van Deusen, with the aid of a Dutch collaborator-- in Vol. I of the "Van Deursen Family" pages xv to xxix, must appear as a distinct surprise to any one even moderately familiar with Dutch genealogy.

Let us start on a solid foundation with American progenitor Abraham Pietersz. from Haarlem, Netherlands (he did not use his surname van Deursen, nor did any of the family until 1667). His wife was Trijntje Melchiors. They came to America prior to 1636.

The marriage of this couple is registered in the Dutch Reformed church at Haarlem, Netherlands Dec. 9, 1629 (entered Nov. 25, 1629). He is designated as Abraham Pietersz. j.m. van Haarlem won. (living) in the Groote Houtstraat, and the bride as Trijntje Melchiors j.d. from Groningen, living in the Smedestraat. (page liii). No baptisms of any children have been recorded in Haarlem from 1630-35 according to a statement by the former archivist of Haarlem (page liii). All that we positively know about Abraham Pieteresz. is therefore that he was born in Haarlem (van Haarlem means that Haarlem was the place of his birth.*) and that he was a j.m., a bachelor, at the time of his marriage.

*This statement should be qualified. Strictly speaking, in the Dutch records, the meaning of "van Amsterdam" (or any other city or locality) after the name of a person in a marriage or proclamation record, means that this place was the entrant's last residence previous to being mentioned in th eplace where the marriage (procl.) is entered.

If persons were living in different cities at the time of their intended marriage, the marriage or proclamation entry is recorded in both cities.

Let us consider two examples.

Amsterdam record: Married or procl. Mr. A. "van Amsterdam" and Miss B. living in Amsterdam "van Haarlem."

Mr. A lives in Amsterdam, his previous residence was Amsterdam, consequently he always lived there, and was born there. Miss B. lives now in Amsterdam but used to live in Haarlem, and may be born there. There is no entry in Haarlem as Miss B. does not live there any more.

In case the Amsterdam entry should have stated: Miss B. "van Haarlem" it would mean that Miss B. was living in Haarlem at the time of her proposed marriage to Mr. A. living in Amsterdam. Consequently her marriage or proclamation entry is also recorded in Haarlem (as a matter of fact she was in all probability married there). Now the entry in Haarlem may state for example: Mr A. "van Amsterdam" and Miss B. living in Haarlem, "van Arnheim." This would indicate, that before she was living in Haarlem she lived in Arnheim and may possibly be born there. But this additional information bout her would not hae been recorded in the Amsterdam entry, for as far as Amsterdam was concerned, Haarlem was her previous residence. In case of a marriage of two people living in different cities, it is advisable to obtain both recors, as these may supplement each other.

As people in the Old World in olden times did not change their place of residence as often as is a commen occurrence now, the place name in "van ......" is in the large majority of instances the birth place."

Any further statements in regard to Abraham in reference to his pre-American days must be based on mere assumptions unless at a later date they can be proven by facts stated in records which are unknown at present."

[continued in comment]

Comments

"From the fact that the family used since 1667 the surname of van Deursen, one may be led to believe that their ancestors came originally from Deursen in the Province of North-Brabant, Netherlands, either form the village Deursen or Deurzen to the N.W. of the town of Grave, or from Deurne(+) near Helmond, locally also known by the name of Deursen (older variations are Doirne, Dorne, Doerne, Doorsen and Doersen). There also is a small village by the name of Deurse or Duurse in Drenthe.

Originally the Dutch author of the first chapter entitled "The van Deursens in their Brabant Home" called the ancient home Deurne-les-Diest near Hasselt in Belgium, not withstanding that the further description of the place made it evident that he had in mind Deurne in the Province of North-Brabant, Netherlands! This was afterwards corrected by him by means of a special insert dated April 3, 1914.

In view of the fact that Abraham Pietersz. was stated in his marriage record to be born in Haarlem, the next step was to find if there was any Abraham son of a father called Pieter, baptized in Haarlem during the years which would make such a boy of a suitable age to get married in 1629. As was to be foreseen several such entries were found between the years 1603-1607 (page lii). Why the search was limited to this short period is not evidence.

As these baptismal entries do not give any indication which, if any, is the Abraham who married in 1629, we have no choice. For that matter Abraham may have been born (baptized) before 1603. (The baptismal records were started or have been preserved since 1578) in which case he would be none of the ones mentioned [in the 1912 VD genealogy]. 

Why Abraham baptized Nov. 11, 1607 was chosen as referring to the funder will remain a mystery.(++) This baptismal entry contradicts at once, by the fact that his (Abraham's) father was Pieter Lucasz (that is Pieter the son of Lucas), the assumpation that Abraham's father was Pieter Willemsz. who at one time was a magistrate of Haarlem from 1583-1618, which is one of the suppositions of the pre-American pedigree. The only proven fact about Abraham Pietersz. remains his marriage in 1629. His alleged connection with Pieter Williamsz. is without any evidence whatsoever: there is not even the slightest indication of such a possibility.

(++)If a choice had to be made, although unsupported by any evidence, then on the strength of the supposed origin of the family frmo Deursen or Deurne (Deursen) either one of the two following might be preferred: Abraham, bapt. May 8, 1604, father of Pieter Joostem from Helmond in Brabant, or Abraham, bapt. March 2, 1604, father Pieter Durcksz. from Helmond, Brabant, Durne (Deusen) is situated near Helmond.

The schepen and notarial archives of Haarlem might possibly give further clues. Knowing that either Abraham alone orhe and his parents livedin the Groote Houtstraat in 1629 (see marriage record), real estate transactions (that isif they owned the house), a settlement of an estate, a will or similar recordsmight givesome further evidence, but such a research is difficult and requires expert knowledge and time, but these are the only reliable sources to consult.

It might suffice to end here the discussion of the Van Deursen family ancestry and consequently toreject the arms as shown in the above mentioned publications. But the fact that the arms ascribed to this family, the black and gold checkered cross in a silver field, shown in colors on the cover of one of the issues of Vol. VII of the "Journal of American History" and as frontispiece of the Van Deursen Genealogy, do not even belong in the Netherlands to a van Deursen family, but to a a van Doorne family, makes it advisable to call further attention to the utter unreliability of the genealogical andherldic substance matter of that part of the Van Deursen Genealogy dealing with the supposed pre-Ameriacn ancestry of this family.

The following is a short summary (consult the chart). After mentioning a few bearers of the name van Doorsen, living in the Middle Ages, the writer switches to a family by the name of van Doorn, erroneously called by him van Deursen($$), of which the oldest known ancestor Jan van Doorn (not van Deursen) is said by him to be a grand-son or great-grandson of Govert van Doorsen, apparently without any foundation of fact.

($$) This pedigree has also been published on page 27 of "The van Doorn Family in Holland and America" by A. van Doren Honeyman, consequently with its right surname. See also Rec. 1933: 11.

He then takes up the pedigree of this van Doorn family (only names, no dates). He tells us how No. 7 Hendrick was drossaert of Asperen(*) and how his supposed grandson Pieter Williemsz (who never appears with a surname) was a magistrate at Haarlem 1583-1618. And the latter is considered to be the father of the American founder.

(*)Which he locates in Brabant instead of South-Holland.

Now first of all there exists no proof for the connection between the Asperen and Haarlem families. The so-called member of this family from Asperen appaering in Haarlem never used a surname. The writer[']s assertion rests on a bit of circumsntantial evidence which no reputable genealogist would even countenance, for the "evidence" is based solely on a similarity of the most common of patronymics, which as I will prove in the following paragraphs does not even exist."

Continued in next comment.

---

Pedigree According to  "Van Deursen Family"  P. xvi-xviii	Actually Proven Facts
Govert van Doorsen in Brabant, his grandson or great-grandson:	Govert van Doirne (Doorsen), belonging to the family of the lords of castle Deurne (Deursen, Doorsen, Doirne) near Helmond, provice of North Brabant. Belonged to an entirely different family than:
1. Jan van Deursen m. 1419 Aleid van Blomensweerde	1. Jan van Doorn (not van Deursen) m. 1419 Aleid van Bloemenweerde, landed near Doorn, province of Utrecht.
2. Jan m. Aleid van Domselaer	2. Jan van Doorn m. Aleid van Domselaer
3. Jan m. Wilhelmina van Zoudenbalg	3. Jan van Doorn m. Wilhelmina van Zoudenbalg
4. Nicholas m. Machteld Proeys	4. Nicholas van Doorn m. Machteld Proeys
5. Jan Willem m. a dau. of Gerrit van Heusden	5. Jan Willem van Doorn m. a daughter of Gerrit van Heusden.
6. Jan m. Elisabeth van Heusden. The last descendant of Govert who held the ancestral seat, the lands and castle of Duersen.	6. Jan van Doorn m. Elisabeth van Heusden. Was no descendant of Govern van Doorsen, and had no connection with castle Deursen in Brabant, as had none of his ancestors.
7. Hendrick, "drossaert" of Asperen, Brabant.	7. Hendrick van Doorn "drossaert" of Asperen and Arkel in South Holland in 1576. It has been proven that he is not the father of the following (Nederl. Leeuw 1923:81-83)
8. Willem m. Elisabeth Gijsbertsdr.	8. Willem Anthonisz. van Doorn (no son of 7) b. Gorcum, wheelright at Heukelom and Asperen, d. 1661; m. 1648 (Nederl. Leeuw 1925:29) Lijsbeth Gijsbertsdr. d 1673
9. Pieter Willemsz. (son of Willem Hendricksz.) who moved from Asperen to Haarlem and became a magistrate 1583-1618. (He never used the surname van Deursen, was not a native of Haarlem, but his place of origins is not mentioned in the records.)	9. Pieter Willems, son of Willem Hendricksz. Magisrtrate of Haarlem 1583-1618. He could not be a son of No. 8, for this is chronologically impossible, also by virtue of his father's name.
10. Abraham Pietersz, bapt. Haarlem Groote Kerk Nov. 11, 1607, founder of the family in America.	10. Abraham Pietersz. bapt. Haarlem Nov 11, 167, was a son of Pieter Lucasz, hence not a son of No. 9.

 

---

"For there is more.

If the writer had taken the trouble to add a few dates to his pedigree, he would have become aware of the chronological impossibility of his assertions. No. 8 page xvii, Willem who married Elisabeth Gijsberts, died in reality in 1661, his wife in 1673, they were married in 1648 (all proven dates, see references on chart). They can hardly have been the parents of Pieter Willemsz. 1583-1607, 41 years before their own marriage!

This Willem Anthonisz. (not Hendricksz.) van Doorn(+) and Elisabeth Gijsberts. are the ancestors of the so-called Utrecth-van Doorn family of which at present a branch belongs to the Dutch nobility. They are the ones who bear the arms with the checkered cross ascribed to the American van Deursen family, but bear same augmented with the "wheel of Heusden" (see page xxviii) in a base.

(*)He was not a son of Hendrick the drossaert of Asperen asis now definitely proven (see references on chart), but in the older unreliable pedigrees is indeed mostly shown as such. But the dates referring to Willem were known, and irrespective of his father's name, he did notfitchrnologically in the published genealogy.

The van Doorn family descending from No. I - Jan van Doorn also bore the checkered cross (no wheel). This checkered cross is to the well informed Dutch heraldrist a sure sign of a descent from the neighborhood of Doorne, province of Utrecht. Many families who can trace their origin to this neighborhood bear these arms, which however does not prove their consanguinity.

Recapitulating. We have no proof of a connection of Govert van Doorsen with the old Utrecht van Doorn family descending from Jan van Doorn (a connection never did exist). That this latter family is not the same as the van Doorn family which appears in Asperen and whose oldest ancestor is Willem Anthonisz. van Doorn is proven by the records (at least if there existed a connection that is not as shown in the van Deursen pedigree). The connection of this Willem with Pieter Willemsz. in Haarlem is chronologically impossible. And finally that the child Abraham bapt. Haarlem Nov. 11, 1607 is a child of the latter cannot be as his father's name was Pieter Lucasz. That the American founder really was a son of this Pieter Wileems the Haarlem magistrate, but in that event baptized on another date, is without foundation and hardly possible.

Indeed a splendid example of a pedigree.

But the most astonishing fact of all is that neither of these van Doorn families had any connection with castle Durne (Deursen) or the town of Deurne (Deursen). In order to prove the supposed connection of the American family with the castle of Deursen (Duerne) in North Brabant and to estalish their supposed descent form the lords of the castle and the lands, the Van Deursen genealogist got hold of the wrong families, whose origin is to be found in the neighborhood of Doorn in the Province of Utrecht. He consequently ascribed to the Amerian family also the wrong arms, namely of the Utrecht family and not of the ancient lords of Deurne (Deursen) (Azure, three (2-1) fers-d-mline, Or; a typical coat belonging to the district of the mayorate of Bois-le-Duc in which Deurne is situated) to which arms the American fmily of course has equally no claim.

The whole article is an eample of one of the worst genealogical concoctions which has come to my notice. The quoted references are blinds to the uninitiated: they look imposing, but do not prove anything.

If Genealogy is to take its rightful place among the sciences, it is imperative that publications along these lines should be based on facts and facts alone, and on logical deductions from such facts.

Publications on the pre-American ancestors of many American families of Dutch descent certainly need a thorough revision.

Prior to the publication of the "Van Deursen Family" by Captain Van Deursen, Charles B. Benson published in 1902: "Abraham van Deusen and Many of his Descendants." On the title page is shown an entirely different coat of arms than the checkered cross, and at that time these arms must have been regarded as the van Deusen coat. Their description is: Quarterly: 1 and 4: Or three sprigs of roses ppr. in fess; 2 nd 3; Azure, semee of billets or a lion rampant Argent. Crest: three sprigs of rosesproper. Motto: Vir timede, Vir temere."

[continued in next comment]

---

"No furtherreference to these arms is made in any part of the publication, and I presume that they aremeant to represent the Van Deusen arms.

Quarterings 2 and 3 are undoubtedly meant to be the arms of the Van Brunt family as sown in Matthew's "Armory," II:281, though the coloring is different. THe arms showing the three sprigs of roses are unknown in Holland and if indeed borne by the Van Deusen family, have undoubtedly been assumed since sittling in New Netherlands."

[the article supposedly continues in a subsequent volume.]

---

Phew! This kind of thing confirms my innate suspicion of genealogical publications for American famlies that feature coats of arms for the purported European ancestors. Nice work, Jillaine!

It looks like you've firmly established that Abraham's LNAB should be a patronymic (spelling something like Pietersz or Pieterszen). Given the information that the "van" name was adopted after 1667, I think Van_Deursen belongs on the profile as Current Last Name.

His birthdate needs to be changed, and I don't see a basis for attaching him to any parents.

Just for the record, I found a web-posted version of the 1953 article (I searched for it becuase I was looking for an author's name). The complete citation is reported to be:

Hoffman, William J., "Random Notes Concerning Settlers of Dutch Descent," The American Genealogist, Whole Number 114, Volume 29, Number: 2 (April 1953), pp. 65-76.

This was the first installment of a two-part article. The web source that I found also has the text for the second installment, which doesn't discuss this family.

Answer 5

I renewed my membership in NYGB Society so that I can get at the "newer" issues of the Record. (My NEHGS membership gives me access to only the oldest issues.)

The 1978 issue of the Record has what is probably the proof for his parentage. I'm just waiting for my login information.

Comments

K.R. Brown, "Van Deursen Family," in NYGBR, vol. 109, No. 4, Oct 1979, pp 215-

Reiterates some of what was in the 1934 Hoffman article, especially that "it is only known for certain that [the immigrant] Abraham was married in Haarlem, intention 25 Nov. 1629, to Tryntje Melchiors. According to their marriage intention record Abraham was from, or born in, Haarlem and lived on the Groote Houtstraat, and Tryntje Melchioes was born in Broningen and also living on the Groote Houtstraat."

Brown, the author of the 1978 article conducted his/her own research of the Haarlem records and found confirmation that Abraham was son of Pieter Jans "van Deursen in Brabant" and Pauline Vincke.

The author also found a baptism of one child recorded in Haarlem (contrary to the 1912 claim that no children were baptized there):

Johannes, bpt 1 January 1633 with Yetge Peters as witness. 

Yetge was a rare name; the author conducted a search for girls by that name with a father named Peter and found her Haarlem baptism on 17 Mar 1605, dau of Pieter Jans van Deursen and Paulina Vincke. Further research found additional baptisms of children by this couple including:

Abraham bapt 8 Jul 1598 [must have died young; see:]

Abraham bpt 3 Jul 1599

"Pieter Jans, van Deursen in Brabant, married in Haarlem, intention 15 January 1591, Paulina Vincke, young daughter (in other words single), from or born in Rensselaer. Pieter Jans was called young man, from or born in Doersen. This couple had at least eight children baptized in the Haarlem Dutch reformed church." They are:

1. Janneken, bpt 15 Dec 1591; wit: Gerrit Jans, Mayken Vincken
2. Mechelken, bpt 3 Apr 1594; wit: .... Jans (no first name mentioned) and Mayken Vincken
3. Johannes, bpt 21 Jan 1596; wit: Frans Huberts, Ammerentia Sarteels
4. Abraham, bpt 8 Jul 1598, wit: Jan Jans and Stynken Jans
5. Abraham, bpt 3 SEp 1599; wit: Jan Jans and Styntjen Jans
6. Isaac, bpt 1 Jan 1602; wit: the parents
7. Ideken, bpt 17 Mar 1605; wit: the parents
8. Sara, bpt 7 May 1608, no witnesses mentioned

The father is referred to throughout the records with a variety of spellings/references:

• van Deursen in Brabant
• van Doornen
• van Doersen
• van Buyl (in 1608)

Paulina's name is given variously as:

• Vincke
• Vink
• Vinkel

The author goes on to say that tracing the line further back than 1591 is doubtful. "The church records for Deursen in the province of North Brabant begin in 1614; this laeves only the possibility of searching any existing notarial records, but these are usually incomplete and therefore a search is often inconclusive."