Anneke Jans Bogardus

His name, Everardus Bogardus, is a Latinization of Evert Bogart (or Bogert, Bogaert, etc.). It was common for theological graduates to latinize their names at that time. His brother was known by the name of Cornelis Willemsen Bogaert. Everardus matriculated on 27 Jul 1627, age 20 years, at the University at Leydon, Holland, to pursue a course in Literature (Letters). He was appointed, on 9 Sep 1630, by the Consistory of Amsterdam, Holland, as Comforter (or Chaplain) to the sick at the Dutch West India Co.s station at Elmina on the Gold Coast, Guiana (which was then Brazil). He served there until 1632, then returned to Holland. He is said to have been a widower when he married Anneke Jans, so it is presumed that he married and was widowed during the period 1630-1632. The name of his first wife is not known. On 14 Jun 1632, he was ordained a minister of the Dutch Reformed Church by the Classis of Amsterdam, Holland, and was sent to New Netherland. He sailed to New Netherland aboard the “Zoutberg”, a war ship of 20 guns with 104 soldiers in addition to the crew, and in the company of the newly appointed Director General of New Netherland, Wouter Van Twiller, who was replacing Peter Minuit. Everardus arrived in New Amsterdam in April 1633, and remained there until 1647. He was selected as the second installed minister of the Dutch Church in New Amsterdam on 8 Jul 1638. He first ministered to his congregation in a primitive church edifice located then on what is now the north side of Pearl Street, between Whitehall and Broad Streets. There was a house and stable behind the church which was occupied by the Domine and his family. Because of it’s suseptibility to Indian attacks the church and residence were abandoned in about 1642 for a new church and residence built within the Fort. Subscriptions for the building of these structures within the Fort was taken up by Gov. Willem Kieft at the wedding of Sara Roeloffse to Hans Kierstede, “at a time after the fourth of fifth drink when the liberality of the guests was supposed to be highly stimulated by their deep potations.” His ministry has been described as a very turbulent one, “being a strict churchman, he found much to combat in the individuals of his congregation and in the atmosphere of this pioneer Dutch colony” (Totten). He was constantly in conflict with Van Tiller and then with his successor, the Director General Willem Kieft. He resigned his charge on 22 Jul 1647, for the purpose of returning to Holland to defend himself against charges pending there made by Keift. Everardus sailed from New Amsterdam on 19 Aug 1647, aboard “The Princess,” with Governor Keift sailing on the same ship. On 27 Sep 1647, the ship was wrecked in the channel off the coast of Wales, it’s Captain having apparently “missed” the English Channel, and both Everardus Bogardus and Willem Kieft were lost.

For a comprehensive account of the life of Dom. Everardus Bogardus, his wife Anneke Jans, her first husband Roelof Jans, their family, and of the state of affairs in New Netherland during the 1630’s and 40’s, see Fulfilling God’s Mission; The Two Worlds of Domine Everardus Bogardus, 1607-1647, by Willem Frijhoff (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2007).

Anneka was a prince’s daughter” but she eloped with a farmer. She chose the love of a peasant’s son even though it entailed a life of hardship in a wild, strange land. She gave up her home, her friends and her country. In the fury of his wrath at the willfulness of his youngest daughter, old Prince Wolfert swore that neither she nor her descendants unto the sixth generation should ever touch one guilder of it. That strange will is recalled today “for six generations of the descendants of Anneka and Roelof have passed and the seventh “who were to fall heir, to Prince Wolfert’s quixotic will may come into their inheritance, but not as the heirs of Prince Wolfert, but as the heirs of Anneka Jens, the girl who placed love above wealth and position and who endured a life of hardship in the Dutch colony of New Amsterdam.

Some of the buildings that stand on this property are the Woolworth building, the highest in the worlds” the Standard Oil offices, 26 Broadway; the Singer building, Wall Street; the Morgan office, the United States subtreasury and historic Trinity church. The ground alone is estimated to have a value of not less than $1,000,000,000. [picture: Looking south at the Jans Farm]

Does the ghost of Anneka Jans, “a little woman with merry eyes beneath her Dutch cap and a fondness for bright clothing,” according to her biographers, walk historic Duane street, once a lane through her farm, dreaming of the joke that she has played upon her wrathful father and his seventh generation will? For the seventh generation of Anneka’s descendants has arrived and some of them are seeking to prove their right to an estate of unestimated value while Prince Wolfert’s will is only vaguely remembered as the threat of an angry old man.

It is believed by 80 descendants of Anneka Jens and Peter Wikoff, banded together in “The Descendants’ Association” that the climax of the romantic story of the runaway princess and her 62 acre farm is about to be written.

The article goes on to say that there are hundreds of descendants, four that are known in Minneapolis and several in the Northwest (and this doesn’t even include us!) There was a convention in Indianapolis, IN for the Descendant’s Association. Also, a description of the farm, also called the King’s Farm, the Duke’s Farm and the Queen’s Farm, reads as such: “…it extended from Warren street along Christopher street. The Hudson river forming the base of a kind of unequal triangle. Wouter Van Twiller, the Dutch governor of New Amsterdam, granted this tract in 1636 to Roelef Jans, five years after his arrival in America.”

In the year 1630, when Pieter Minnuit was Governor or Director General of New Netherlands, under “the Right Honorable Prudent Lords, the Lords Directors of the United Provinces of the Netherlands,” there landed at New Amsterdam a sturdy Dutchman named Roeloff Jansen. He had been a man of some position, and even of official standing, in his native town of Maasland.

The spirit of adventure, however, was abroad. Emigrants of high and low degree were leaving old homes for new fields of enterprise and industry. Bold discoverers were revealing new wonders of the sea and land., and bringing to light the hidden mysteries of the geographical world. New maps were planned; new enterprises stimulated the curious or the avaricious…

…Roeloff Jansen caught the spirit of unrest. He had a strong young wife, willing to brave the seas, and a little family, and there was a future to make for them; so they bade farewell to the fatherland and sailed for the Dutchman’s new field of adventure and fortune, “Nieuw Nederland.”

Jansen procured a position as one of the superintendents at Rensselaerswyck, on the Hudson, the great territory granted as a patroonship to Kilian van Rensselaer, the rich diamond polisher of Amsterdam.

Jansen’s name was perpetuated there in that of the kill or creek called “Roeloff Jansen’s Kill,” which runs in the Hudson River between Red Hook and the present city of Hudson.

After a sojourn of a few years, filling the duties of his post under the patroon’s agents at Rensselaerswyck, Jansen seems to have moved with his family to New Amsterdam, having obtained from Director Van Twiller, in 1636, a ground brief or patent for the farm or Bouwery of about sixty-two acres which has been for nearly two hundred years a prominent bone of contention.

Roeloff Jansen did not long enjoy his new possessions; he was called to another world about the year 1637 or 1638, leaving behind him five sturdy little children, and a buxom, attractive widow, then and now widely known as Mrs. Annetje or Anneke Jans.

…and within a year of her bereavement the subject of our monograph could boast of being the wife of one of the most prominent and remarkable characters in the early history of our city. [Domine Everardus Bogardus]

Domine Evarardus Bogardus, the second husband of Mrs. Anneke Jans, came over from Holland in the year 1633 with Wouter Van Twiller, who succeeded Pieter Minuit as Director-General of the little Dutch colony. He was the second established clergyman in the settlement, and was a man of education and intellect, as well as one of a very determined and independent character. His position was an important and distinguished one. He held his trust directly from the directors of the Company in Holland and when he differed from the local government in matters either of a moral or political nature, he did not hesitate to assert his opinions and enforce his views openly and vigorously.

[There are several paragraphs describing his character and adventures which I have chosen to leave out for the sake of brevity]

…Domine Bogardus met with a sad ending. He bade farewell to his wife and children for a visit to the vaderland, and took passage in the ship Princess, in the year 1647…the vessel mistook the channel, and both Kieft [a rival] and the Domine perished by shipwreck on the rocks off the coast of Wales.

Not long after the Domine’s decease, Mrs. Bogardus determined to leave New Amsterdam and settle among her early friends on the Hudson. She accordingly took up her residence at Beverwyck, now the site of part of the present Albany, and sold her house in New Amsterdam. She was at this time, doubtless, a lady in very comfortable circumstances for those times. Besides her farm and her two houses, she was the proprietor of many acres of land near the present village of Newtown, on Long Island, and also at Hell Gate, where she owned eighty acres granted her in 1654. She acquired, also, land at Beverwyck, and from the provisions of her will we may conclude that she was quite well to do in the world.

She must have lived several years at Bverwyck, and died there in the year 1663, about thirty years after her arrival in the province. Her will was made at Beverwyck before Dirck Van Schelluyne, the notary, and two of her friends, Rutger Jacobs van Schoonderwert and Everet Wendell, as she lay, according to the recitals in the will, “on her bed in a state of sickness, but perfectly sensible and in the full possession of her mental powers, and capable to testate, and recommending her immortal soul the Almighty God, her Creator and Redeemer, and consigning her body to Christian burial.” Her remains were interred in the yard of the old Dutch church in Hudson Street in Albany, and there they still are.

The article continues to list her children, their marriages and what they were left by her will.

Continuing on page 54-

THE FARM

The farm called the Domine’s Bouwerey, which has been the subject of much contention, was granted by Governor Van Twiller to Roeloff Jansen and his wife in 1636. It was then in a very rough state, and had never been cultivated.

The grant was confirmed in 1654 by Director Stuyvesant, by a patent to Mrs. Annetje Jans, as widow of Everardus Bogardus.

The description in the patent from Stuyvesant is in two portions, bounded together northerly by the partition line of “old Jan’s land,” by the Cripple Bush and “the Kalckhoeck,” westerly by the river, and southerly by the posts and rails of the Company’s land.

On the 27th March, 1667, three years after the occupation by the English, Governor Nichols made a confirmatory patent to the heirs of Mrs. Bogardus, reciting the original grant form Van twiller. The boundaries in this his patent are of two pieces, one bounded on ‘old Jan’s land’ and the swamp on the north and east, the river on the west, and by a line drawn from the house by the strand side on the south. The other piece, adjoining and south of the former, is bounded south by the fence of the land belonging to the Company, and by the ‘Chalke Hookoe” on the east. The Kripplebosh, or swamp, above referred to, was one of the outlets of Fresh-water Pond, in the rear of the present City Hall; it covered the land now occupied by the lower part of Canal Street, and was afterward known as part of Lispenard’s meadows.

As transferred by the above patents, the farm is described as consisting of 32 morgens, or 62 acres.

The description given would comprehend a tract between a line drawn near the north side of Warren Street on the south, and Canal Street, or perhaps Desbrosses Street, on the north, on the west by the river, and on the east by a series of irregular lines west of Broadway.

The southern boundary was the Company’s. Duke’s or King’s or Queen’s farm, as it was variously termed, running from Fulton Street north to Warren Street, and bounded by the river and Broadway.

This term King’s or Queen’s farm in subsequent conveyances and patents was supposed to include, and it seems to have been conceded in most of the actions brought, the Domine’s Bouwery above described, although properly the latter was no part of the Company’s or King’s farm.

[Once again the book goes into great detail over various patents and boundaries. Three heirs had deeded over sixty-two acres to Colonel Francis Lovelace. This deed did not include the share of Cornelius Bogardus, who was deceased at the time]

It will be remembered that in 1673, two years after this deed was given by the heirs to Governor Lovelace, the Dutch recovered possession of New Amsterdam from the English by a sudden attack, and held it about a year. On its restoration to the English in 1674, under the Treaty of Westminster, Governor Andros, representing the Duke of York as proprietor, took possession of the farm in his behalf, and, as it is understood, seized and confiscated, in behalf of the Duke, Governor Lovelace’s estates, including this Bouwery.

The fact of this deed having been given by the heirs to Governor Lovelace seems to have been for a long time forgotten. In December, 1785, it was discovered by the Trinity Church trustees, and its contents communicated to some of the heirs as if it was a complete answer to their claims.

[various leases were made until]…In 1697 Governor Fletcher leased “the King’s Farm” to the corporation of Trinity Church, for a rent of sixty bushels of wheat, for seven years from August 1, 1698. …but Queen Ann, by an order in June, 1708, confirmed the vacating act of 1699, and not the act repealing it, and resumed possession of all the lands for the crown.

In 1700, Lord Cornbury, who was a zealous protector of the Established Church, leased the Queen’s farm to Trinity Church for as long a period as he should be Governor, and in 1704 Trinity church sublet it to one George Ryerse for five years, at a rent of £30.

We now come down to the grant in fee of the year 1705. We find the church in actual possession, under the lease from Lord Cornbury, of what they claim as not only the old Company’s or Duke’s farm, extending from Fulton Street north to Warren Street, but also of what was comprehended under the name of the Domine’s Bouwery, extending north to Canal Street.

In the year 1705 the grant was made to the church under which they claim to hold adversely and in hostility to all other interests. It was patent from the Colonial Governor, Cornbury, as acting for Queen Anne, to the corporation of Trinity church of the tract known as the Queen’s farm, as then in the occupation of George Ryerse, bounded easterly partly by Broadway and partly by the common and partly by the swamp, and westerly by the river. It will be observed that there are no boundaries given on the north or south. [picture: The church in the Fort]

Once again there are several paragraphs that I have omitted, please refer to the book if you would like more detail. There is another chapter just on the lawsuits. Basically it says that Trinity Church property was obtained from the crown by misrepresentation and deception; the dissenting citizens include Bogardus descendants. The city of New York put forward its claim and the State has not been idle in asserting its rights as owner paramount, succeeding to the rights of the British crown. Basically, what the heirs are claiming is that the ground called Domine’s Hook or the Bouwery was never part of the Duke’s or Queens farm, and therefore did not pass under the grant from Queen Anne, but that Trinity Church was merely an intruder on the Bogardus region and possession, except that in 1785 it bought out the right of Cornelius Bogardus in the property for £700, and then went into a regular unrestrained possession, but which possession was merely as tenant in common with the other heirs. It appeared in the evidence that the church had never put on record the above-mentioned deed from Cornelius, and had kept it somewhat secret. The claimants averred that the deed was concealed because the church feared that its legal effect would be to establish it as tenant in common with the other heirs.

Page 847-

Lately an old Dutch Bible, alleged to have belonged formerly to Mrs. Anneke Bogardus, has come to light in the hands of one Miss Harriet Van Atten, of Glenville, Schenectady County, a direct descendant of Pieter Bogardus, a son of the old lady, to whom it is stated to have been given by her. On the strength of this, and pair of gold earrings that once belonged to her venerable ancestor as personal property, application was recently made to the Surrogate of Albany for letters of administration upon the personality of Mrs. Anneke Bogardus.

The Surrogate of Albany County refused to entertain the application, and the matter is now on appeal to the General Term of the Supreme Court from his decision. If letters of administration are granted, the intention is to open the legal battle again, and to claim an accounting from Trinity Church.

This coveted tract of land has not only been the subject of forensic battle, but bone and sinew have been engaged in the contest; heads have been broken and shots have been fired in support of the claim of the redoubtable and indefatigable heirs.

ANNEKE JANSE

This famous character has been so long and so prominently before the public, it would hardly be expected that much of interest respecting her could be found at this day. But in delving among the public record, we continue to find new facts, which aid in developing her history. She was among the first immigrants that came to settle the manor of Rensselaerswyck and arrived in 1630, with her husband Roeloff Jansen Van Maesterlandt, who came out with his family as farmer to the patroon at a salary of seventy-two dollars a year. Five or six years afterwards the family was settled at New Amsterdam, now New York, where he received a patent from Governor Van Twiller in 1636, for 31 morgens, or 62 acres, of land, lying along the North river. About this time he died, and in 1637 or 1638, Anneke married the Rev. Everardus Bogardus, the first settled minister of the place. He died in 1647 and she returned to Albany, where her residence was on the east corner of State and James streets. She died in 1663, and was buried in the churchyard on Beaver and Hudson streets, now the site of the Second or Middle Dutch Church.

Anneke had eight children, four by each husband, of whom three daughters and three sons married and had families, and their descendants at this day are in truth a multitude. [then goes on to list the children]

The following genealogical record was drawn up by an attorney at the request of William Henry McGillivray to show the lineage from Anneke Jans Bogardus to John McGillivray and Mary Jane Hudson and their children:

GENEALOGICAL RECORD

William Henry McGillivray

May 1, 1941. Anneka Jans Bogardus[1]

Anneka Webber, daughter of Wolferd Webber, Fourth King of Holland, whose father was William, Prince of Orange, was born in the King’s mansion in Holland in 1605. She was married to Raelof Jans[2] in Holland in 1624. They emigrated to America in 1633. He died in Beneryek, New York, in 1637, and she married the Rev. Everardus Bogardus in New York, Jan. 29th, 1638. She died at her home in Albany, New York, in 1663, at the age of 53 years.

Anneka Webber was the grandmother[3] of the King of Holland, Prince of Orange, or William the Fourth. Her father’s name was Wolferd Webber and her mother’s name was Annetyie[4] Koch Webber.*

Anneka Webber Jans married Rev. Everardus Bogardus, Dominie Bogardus, Pastor of the First Reformed Church at New Amsterdam, arrived in N.Y. April, 1633, on the ship Southbury from Holland. He was married to Anneka Raelof Jans, Jan. 29, 1638. He sailed from N.Y. Aug. 18, 1647, on the ship Princess for the Fatherland.

Heinrich Koch, born May 28, 1510, in Holland. Made will 1599. Married Neisgen Selyns in 1584. Made will 1610.

– Issue –

Jans	baptized	1585
Annetgen	baptized	1587	Married Hans Lenard 1605
Annetgen[5]	baptized	1589	Married Wolferd Webber July 8, 1600
Lartzgen	baptized	1591	Married Justen De Bener 1612

Annetgen Koch baptized 1589. Married Wolferd Webber July 8, 1600. Left will 1605.**

– Issue –

Hendruk	baptized	July 3, 1601
Bartelmus	“	Nov. 19, 1602	Died in infancy
Wolfert, Jr.	“	Jan. 10, 1604	Married Anna Wallace April 7, 1631
Bartelmus	“	Nov. 20, 1605	Died in infancy
Neisken	“	May 30, 1607
Angzieta	“	June 15, 1708
Barbara	“	June 5, 1610	Died in infancy
Barbara	“	Aug. 30, 1612
Hester	“	Nov. 9, 1614
Bartelmus	“	Dec. 18, 1616
William	“	Dec. 17, 1617
Sara	“	Dec. 27, 1618
Johannes	“	1620

Anneka Webber, born in Holland, 1605, Married Raelof Jans, 1624.

– Issue –

Sarah Jans, born 1626, Married Hans Kierstede, June 29, 1642.

– Issue –

Catherine Kierstede, born 1660, Married Johannes Kip, June 29, 1681.

– Issue –

Jacobus Kip, born 1682, Married Catherine Dellact, Dec. 14, 1704.

– Issue –

Johannes Kip, born 1705, Married Margaret Vanetten, 1723.

– Issue –

Eva Kip, born 1728, Married Isaac Delmatree, Feb. 1, 1752.

– Issue –

Johannes Delmatree, born Feb. 26, Married Betsy Lester, July 17, 1793

– Issue –

Anne Mariah, born Mar. 15, 1795, Married Robert Hudson Feb. 4, 1814.

He was a major in war of 1812 in Canada. born Feb. 28, 1785, in one of these four cities or towns: Marlborough, Bolton, Northboro, or Worcester; probably Worcester is the right place. All are in Massachusetts. He died Feb. 1, 1875, in Saginaw, Michigan.

Children:

George Merit	born	Jan. 5, 1815	in	Henehenbrook	Canada
Eliza Maria	“	Sept. 9, 1817	“	“	“
Henry Smith	“	July 13, 1818	“	“	“
Susannah	“	Mar. 5, 1820	“	“	“
Joseph Albert	“	Mar. 9, 1822	“	“	“
John	“	Oct. 6, 1823	“	“	“
William	“	Aug. 11, 1825	“	“	“
Benjamin Lester	“	Sept. 13, 1829	“	“	“
Frederick Brick	“	June 14, 1831	“	“	“

– Issue –

Henry Smith Hudson[6] , born July 13, 1818 in Henehenbrook, Canada.

Married Ellen Fairbairn, (born June 22, 1821, Died April 25, 1902.) Mar. 9, 1842, in Ottawa City. He died Feb. 14, 1893 in Bristol, Canada.

Children:

Mary Jane Hudson	born	Dec. 16, 1842	in	Bristol	Canada
Joseph Albert Hudson	“	Feb. 2, 1845
Annie Hudson	“	Apr. 22, 1847
Eliza Hudson	“	June 2, 1850	Died	June 7, 1850
William Hudson	“	Dec. 23, 1851	in	Bristol	Canada
Robert Hudson	“	Dec. 23, 1851	“	Bristol	Canada
Benjamin Smith Hudson	“	Feb. 5, 1855
John Hudson	“	Sept. 2, 1857	Died	Oct. 8, 1857
Frances Alice Hudson	“	Sept. 23, 1860
John Henry Hudson	“	Sept. 19, 1865	Died June 27, 1926	Spokane	Washington

Mary Jane Hudson, born Dec. 16, 1842, Married John McGillivray, Dec. 5, 1864.

Married in Ottawa City. Died Aug. 23, 1933, at 5405 South K St., Tacoma, Washington.

John McGillivray, born Mar. 15, 1841 in Dalesville, Canada, and died Feb. 13, 1893, in Staples, Minnesota.

Children:

William Henry	born	Nov. 4, 1865	in	New Market	Canada
Edward James	“	Nov. 19, 1867	in	Thornbury	Canada
Edward James	“	Jan. 22, 1870	in	Port Arthur	Canada
Alexander	“	Jan. 28, 1874	“	“	“
Ellen Jane	“	Aug. 18, 1876	“	“	“
Benjamin	“	Aug. 26, 1879	“	Staples	Minnesota
George	“	Aug. 26, 1879	“	Do.	Do.
Mary Jane	“	Dec. 15, 1881	“	Do.	Do.

1 William Henry McGillivray, born Nov. 4, 1865, in New Market, Canada.

2 Married Minnie Maude Frary.

3 Records of John and Mary Jane McGillivray, parents of William Henry McGillivray.

4 John McGillivray, born March 15, 1841, at Dalesville, Prov. of Quebec. Mary Jane McGillivray (maiden name Hudson) born 1842 at Bristol, Prov. of Quebec. United in marriage at Bristol, Prov. of Quebec. John McGillivray died at Staples, Minnesota, February 13, 1893. Mary Jane Hudson McGillivray died August 23rd, 1933, at Tacoma, Washington. William Henry McGillivray son of above named deceased, born Nov. 4, 1865, at New Market, Canada, – now living. (Married to Minnie Maude Frary on May 1, 1889, at Mondova, Wisconsin) Minnie Maude was born Jan. 15, 1868, at Dane County, Wisconsin.

5 Heirs of William Henry and Minnie Maude McGillivray

6 Beulah Esther, born May 30, 1894, at Staples, Township, Todd County, Minnesota.

7 Joyce Hope, born August 21, 1911, at Minneapolis, Minnesota

*Editor’s Note: Anneke’s mother was Catherine Jonas. Possibly Annetje Koch was a second marriage for Wolfert. It is interesting though the great detail given to this marriage.

**Editor’s Note: This is impossible as she would have been only 11 at the time of her marriage.

The record above, though retyped, is in the exact words and format of the original that was prepared for William H. McGillivray. As you will note there are many errors, particularly in spelling. I have attempted to point them out through footnotes.

Compiled by Thomas Bentley Wikoff, Indianapolis, 1924, he seeks to clear up how exactly Anneke is related to the royal family. One thing he mentions is that Anneke’s daughter-in-law, Wintje Bogardus, did make a trip to Holland with her young family in 1666 for the purpose of settling the Webber estate which was valued at $10 million which would suggest legitimacy to this inheritance. She died there and it was never settled. Apparently, the money is still intact over there. For simplicity’s sake I have attached the last name of Webber to all descendants of William III though I am not sure that this is proper as they often took on place names.

William III of Holland’s (William of Orange) first wife was of Saxony and his second was Leipsic 1575. Their son was Count William of Nassau who married Countess Stallberg and had twelve children including 7 daughters and Adolph Webber, Louis Webber, John Webber, Henry Webber and William Webber “the Silent”.

William “the Silent” became Prince of Orange at 11 years of age. He married Anne of Egmont who was the daughter of Cunty De Buren. She died in 1558. They had two children:

• Phillip William Webber, 2nd Prince of Orange, William II
• Mary or Marie Webber who m: Count Hohenlohe

William “the Silent” married for a second time to Anne of Saxony who was the duagher of Maurice of Saxony. After three children they divorced:

• Maurice b: 1567
• Anna m: County William Louis
• Emilie m: Pretender to Throne of Portugal

William “the Silent” married June 12, 1525 to Charlotte de Bourbon whose father was Duc de Montpinsier and her brother was Francois de Bourbon. She died in May 1582. They had six children:

• Louisa Juliana Webber m: Frederick IV
• Elizabeth Webber
• Catherina Belgica Webber
• Flandrina Webber
• Charlotte Brobantica Webber
• Emilie Webber

William married for a fourth time to Louisa de Coligny and they had one son:

• Frederick Henry Webber, b: 1584 and d: age 25. He was known as William II of Holland, William VII of Orange and 4th Stadholder of the Dutch Republic. He had one son, William III

William the Silent by a fifth clandestine or secret marriage had two children:

• Sarah Webber b: 1580 m: Sybrant
• Wolfert Webber b: 1582 m: 1600 to Catherine Jonas and they had three children:

Wolfert II had one daughter, Rachel Webber b: 1623 who m: February 9, 1646 to John Van Horn.

Martje had one daughter, Anna Maria Jansen

Anneke had by her marriage to Roeloff Jans:

• Sarah Jansen m: Hans Kierstede a surgeon
• Catrina Jansen m: Johannes Pietersen Van Brugh
• Fytje Jansen m: Pieter Hartgers
• Jansen Jans killed by Indians
• Anntije Jansen (doubtful)

Anneke had by her second marriage to Everardus Bogardus

• Wilhelm (William) Bogardus m: Anna De Sillen
• Jonas Bogardus
• Cornelius Bogardus m: Helena Teller
• Pieter Bogardus m: Wyntje Cornelise Bosch

I recently corresponded with a gentleman in the Netherlands. He said that “Holland until the present day the Central Office for Genealogy uses a standard letter to make it clear to greedy dreamers that the story current in the US on the Orange decendance and the inheritance of Anneke Jans, and the spouse of Rev. Everardus Bogardus, is mere fantasy.” (I personally take exception with this statement! I am not interested in the inheritance, but rather the genealogy.) Here is what he learned about the House of Orange:

From the royal family tree you will see that William the Silent (1533-1584), Prince of Orange and Wolfert’s alleged father, was not a king, but a stadtholder, some sort of chief magistrate of the “federation” of provinces constituting the Dutch Republic. It is often thought that a prince always is a king’s son, but it often is the title of a ruler of a principality or a courteesy title held by members of certain noble families. William cannot have fathered a king seeing that the Netherlands were not a kingdom, but a republic.

William the Silent was succeeded as stadtholder and military commmander by his son Maurice, who in turn was followed by his brother Frederick Henry. These men governed in conjunction with the States-General, an assembly composed of representatives of each of the seven provinces but usually dominated by the largest and wealthiest province, Holland. The stadtholder’s power varied, depending on his personal qualities of leadership, and the office eventually became hereditary in the house of Orange.

Frederick Henry’s son, William II of Orange, became involved in a bitter quarrel with the province of Holland, and after his death no stadtholder was appointed in Holland and four other provinces for more than 20 years.

William III of Orange, who was stadtholder from 1672 until his death in 1702, was also King of England after 1689.

When William III died without heirs in 1702, a distant relative of his, John William Friso, successfully claimed the Orange title. In 1747 his son became stadtholder in all seven provinces as William IV.

In the late 18th century a struggle broke out between the party of the house of Orange, who had turned conservative, and the Patriot party, who desired democratic reforms. The Orangists enjoyed a brief triumph with the help of an invading Prussian army in 1787, but in 1795 French troops and a force of self-exiled Dutch citizens replaced the republic of the seven United Provinces with the Batavian Republic, which was modeled on the revolutionary French Republic.

The Batavian Republic survived only until 1806, when Napoleon transformed the country into the Kingdom of Holland. In 1810 he incorporated it into the French Empire. After the fall of Napoleon, the independence of the Netherlands was restored in 1815 by the Congress of Vienna.

The Netherlands now continued as a kingdom under three successive Williams (I, II and II), and they were followed by queens (Wilhelmina, Juliana, and currently, Beatrix). In 1980 Princess Beatrix succeeded to the throne on the abdication of her mother, Queen Juliana. She has several sons, the pretender’s name being Prince Alexander, so the successor to her throne will probably be a king.

A Dutch king has almost exclusively a symbolic and ceremonial function and his powers are rather limited. We are a full democracy and the prime-minister and his crew are held to be responsible (“The King can do no wrong”).

The following was found on the web site:http://users.ids.net/~reveritt/jans2.htm from “Stubborn for Liberty, the Dutch in New York” by Alice P. Kenney chapter entitled “Recovering the Dutch Tradition” p.243-245. Transcribed by Cheri Branca. Edited and tagged by Rolland Everitt.

…Also centered on a woman, interestingly enough, was a cause celebre which made a wide public aware of the Dutch. Anneke Janse, her husband Roelof, their two small daughters, and Anneke’s sister and their mother, a midwife, all apparently from Norway, were among the first settlers of Rensselaerswyck in 1630. But Roelof, a seaman, did not prosper as a farmer, and his women folk disposed of quantities of household goods — quite possibly in the Indian trade — so the family left the Patroon’s service in 1634 before the completion of their contract. But Roelof died in 1636, soon after they settled on a farm in Manhattan, and in 1638 Anneke married Domine Everardus Bogardus. Soon after this marriage she became involved in a colorful incident in which some of her husband’s political opponents caused her to be arrested for indecent exposure in the streets of New Amsterdam. Anneke’s defense was that while passing the blacksmith shop — the seventeenth century equivalent of a gas station as a male gathering place — she merely tidily lifted her skirts to keep them out of the filth which had accumulated in the street. This defense was accepted, and the incident illustrates one use to which sensation-starved frontier colonists put their courts and also the the earthy humor and broad practical joking which was often a feature of Dutch civic controversy. Thereafter Anneke became the mother of four Bogardus children, in addition to her five by Roelof Janse. After her second husband’s death at sea, she went to Fort Orange to live with her married daughter and “make a living” — presumably at the fur trade, since this was the principal occupation of the town. At her death in 1663 she left a modest estate, of which part, which descended to her four surviving children by Roelof Janse, was the 62 acre farm on Manhattan Island which she had inherited from him.

It was this farm which, over two centuries later, made Anneke famous. After a number of transfers, the land became the property of Trinity Church, and, with the rise in property values on lower Manhattan, immensely valuable. But in one of these transfers, one of Anneke’s minor grandchildren had inadvertently been omitted from the deed. His descendants discovered this fact about 1750, and between then and 1847 sued repeatedly and unsuccessfully to break the church’s title to the land. In spite of these legal defeats, the myth would not die; another suit was instituted in 1909, and in the next quarter century the cause attracted much publicity. Lawyers, genealogists, and promoters who scented an opportunity to make a fast buck thereupon started searching for all the living descendants of Anneke Janse, who turned out to be more numerous even than descendants of the passengers on the Mayflower. Finally, the Legislature passed a special act quieting the title and forbidding any further suits, on the grounds that similar irregularities would have called most titles dating from the seventeenth century into question. It also became clear that if the heirs had won, there would be so many of them that the share of each, even in the vast wealth in dispute, would have been less than the contributions many of them were induced to make toward the expenses of litigation.

In the course of this litigation, there grew up an even more astonishing legend about Anneke’s origins. All the evidence now available indicates that she and her husband were both ordinary people, born in Norway (though perhaps descended from Dutchmen in the Baltic trade). The legend, however, made Anneke out to be the granddaughter of William the Silent who had displeased that prince by her insistence on marrying a commoner; nevertheless, he placed her share of his fortune in trust for her descendants in the seventh generation. This fortune was reputed to have accumulated to the sum of 100 million dollars in the early twentieth century. It is difficult to see how this story gained credence in the face of its glaring inconsistencies, but this mythic fortune was as glittering as the other, and only very recently has a patient genealogist finally dispelled the last shreds of it. According to this myth, Anneke’s father, a son of William the Silent by a secret marriage, was named Wolfert Webber, and a New Netherlander of this name (from whom Irving doubtless derived his character) was her brother. It has now been proven, however that this Wolfert Webber and his father of the same name, a respectable Amsterdam wine merchant, had no connection with either William the Silent or Anneke Janse.

The following was taken from papers in the possession of Dee Wilson [copied as typed in the original]

Book 9291, Page 582 B8251 Americans of Royal Descent

William of Nassau, 9th Prince of Orange and Sovereign Count of the State of Holland and Zealand, M., 4 times, and had (issue, by each wife, he M, First Anna D. Egmont D. 1558, daughter of Maximillian County De Buren and Leedam; M., 2nd 24 August 1561, Ann Daughter of Maurice, the Famous Electro of Saxony; M 3., Charlooette De Bourdon of the house of Montpensier and M; 4th Louise De Coligny, daughter of Admiral De Castellon, and had by her Frederic Henry aonly son Stadtholder of Holland who succeeded his half brother, who D.S.P. as Prince of Orange, and who was Father of William II, Prince of Orange, who is a daughter of King Charles I, of England and had William III; Prince of Orange, who M, Lady Stuart (daughter of James, Duke of York, afterwars King James II; and became King of England. William 9th Prince of Orange, was Father of; 2 Ann M. Wolfert Webbert, of Wolferthoson in Holland had: 3rd Anneka Webber D, 1663 in Albany, N.Y. She came to New Amsterdam with her brother, Wolfort Arnont, who D, 1715, in 1649 she M, first Reloff Jansen Van Measterlandt he came from Maaslond in 1630, to Rensselaerwyck, and settled in 1636 in New Amsterdam, where he got a patent for sixty two acres of land, which have been for two hundred years the subject of a law suit, Anneke Weber M, 2nd Jan. 29th, 1635 Domine Everadus Bogardus a Clergyman who came to America in 1633, and was lost at sea in 1647, she had four children to each husband, the family is as follows;

Compiled by Browning

New York Genealogical Abstract.

By first marriage of Anneke Webber.

1-Roaloff Jans, Married in Amsterdam, Holland in 1624 and born in 1605. Married to Anneke Webber. Their marriage is on record in Vonmasterland, Holland, and had four children.

Their Issue.

1-Sarah born 1626 in Holland, Married Hans Kierstede, In N.Y.

2-Cathrina ” in N.Y., Married Johanes Van Brugh.

3-Fytje ” ” ” ” to Peter Hartgers.

4-Jan No further trace.

By second marriage of Anneke Webber or Anneke Jans.

1-Dominie Everhardus Borgarus, Married in N.Y. June 21, 1638 to Anneke Jans. They had four children by this marriage in N.Y.

Their Issue.

1-William Bap. Sept. 9, 1638 Married to Wyntje Abrandts, Aug. 20, 1659 and had three children.

2-Jonas Bap. Jan. 4, 1643 He had no descendants.

3-Pieter or Peterus Bap. Apr. 2, 1645 Married to Wyntie Bosch in N.Y. Had one child.

4-Cornelius Married to Helena Teller in N.Y. Had one child.

New York Genealogical Abstract-

By first marriage ­

1-William Bogardus, Bap. Sept. 9, 1638, of New York, Married Aug. 20, 1659 to Wyntje Sybrantds of New York. They had three children in N.Y.

Their Issue-

1-Everardus Bap. Nov. 2, 1659
2-Tytje ” Mar. 16, 1661
3-Anna or Anneke ” Oct. 3, 1663 Married Jacobus Brower, son of Adam Brower, Apr. 30, 1682, Nine children.

Compiled by Bergen

New York Genealogical Abstract-

1-Adam Brower. Emigrated in 1642 to N.Y. from Coulon or Cologue, Married May 19, 1645 in N.A. to Magdalena Jacobs Verdon., He died about 1698, in N.A. resided in Br. N.

1-Pieter, Bap. Sept. 23, 1646, Married to Gertrud Jans in N.Y. Jan. 29, 1682. Had 10 children.
2-Jacob or Jacobus Bap. Married to Anna or Anneke Bogardus Jan. 29, 1682. Had 10 children.
3-Aelije, Bap. Married to Josias Jansz Drats Apr. 30, 1682. Several children.
4-Mathys, Bap. Married to Marretje Pieters Wycoff, Had 8 children.

5-William, Bap. Mar. 5, 1651 Married to Elizabeth Simpson May 18, 1690

6-Adam, Bap. May 18, 1662, Married to Angmetje Feb. 1692. Had 3 children.

7-Abraham, Bap. Married to Cornelia Halsyn, Sept. 15, 1692. Had 5 chidlren.

8-Nicolus, Bap. Married to Annetje Calsier or Coljer, Sept. 20, 1676 Had 5 children.

9-Maria, Bap. June 4, 1653. Married to Jacob Pietersyen, Oct. 13, 1676 Had 7 children.

10-Eytie, Bap. Married to Evert Hendrickson, Feb. 20, 1692. Several children.

11-Helena, Bap. Oct. 30, 1660 Married to Willim Hendrickson, Aug. 5, 1693. Had several children.

12-Anna Bap. She resided near Flatbush. No further trace.

13.-Sara Bap. July 13, 1692 Married to Thomas Smith, Sept. 23, 1692. No Decendants.

14-Rachel Bap. Married to Pieter Hendrickson, June 5, 1698 from Viers-Land. No Descendants.

Compiled by Bergen

2-Jacob or Jacobus Brower son of Adam Brower, Married Ap. 30, 1682 at Flatbush to Anna or Anneke Bogardus, he hails from Gowannus and she from N.Y. and had 10 children, he died in 1733.

Issue-

1-Sybrandt born in Brooklyn, N.Y. 1682 Married to Sarah Weber, had 8 children.

2-Jacob born in Brooklyn, N.Y. 1684 ” ” Pietronella De La Montaque in N.Y. Oct. 1799.

3-William born in Brooklyn, N.Y. 1687 ” ” Marie Hermian May 29, 1719, No descendants in N.Y.

4-Everdus born in Brooklyn, N.Y. Dec. 8th, 1689

5-Elizabeth born ” ” ” Nov. 15, 1694.

6-Adam Bap. ” ” ” ” Mar. 29, 1696 Married to Deborak

7-Hillegnont Bap. ” ” ” N.Y. Dec. 27, 1697

8–Wyntie Bap. ” ” ” N.Y. Mar. 8, 1701 (M. to Richard Pet1

9–Magdalene Bap. ” ” ” N.Y. Mar. 8, 1704 (Married to Joost Veden June 1725 in N.Y.

10-Nicholas-Made his mark to document.

New York Genealogical Abstract-

2-Jacob Brower of N.Y. son of Jacob Brower and Anneke Bogardus, Married Oct. 1, 1709 to Pieronella De La Montaque of N.Y.

Issue

1-Jacob. Bap. In Brooklyn, Sept. 24, 1710 Married Maria De Lony, Had 6 children

2-Johannes born in N.Y. Jan. 6, 1710 or 1711 ? Married Susanna Deroitleet or Durlje in N.Y. Oct. 9, 1734. Had 6 children.

3-Abraham (born in N.Y. Feb. 6, 1712 Married June 1, 1743 Aolje Vengerld (twin)

4-Cornelia born in N.Y. Feb. 6, 1712 No further trace. (twin)

5-Annetje or Antje born in N.Y. May 5, 1714

6-Adam born in N.Y. Dec. 1, 1716 Married Catharine Mitchel, Jan. 12

7-Cornelius-Twins born in N.Y. Dec. 1, 1716 Married Mary Asker, two marriages Hester Boden, Aug. 10, 1736

8-Amanda born in N.Y. Jan. 4, 1718 No further trace.

9-Peter) born in N.Y. Mar. 9, 1720 No further trace.

10-Affer) ” ” ” ” 10, 1720 No further trace

11-Elizabeth-born in N.Y. Feb. 20, 1722 No further trace

12-William ” ” ” May 1, 1727, Married Margaret Van Sickle, Sept. 17, 1748/

13-Henry ” ” ” Oct. 29, 1729 No further trace.

Compiled by L.A. Abbitt.

New York Genealogical Abstract-

2-John Brower or Johannes Brower, Bap. Mar. 19, 1710 of N.Y. son of Jacob Brower and Pietronella De La Montaque. Married to Susanna Deroilhet or Durljet in N.Y., Oct. 9, 1734, and had six children.

Issue

1-Susanna Bap. Sept. 5, 1735 Married to Samuel Demorse, Dec. 1, 1768

2-Annetje ” Feb. 8, 1738 No further trace

3-Jacob ” Mar. 26, 1740 Married to Margaretia Voelandt, July 26, 1750 something?

4-Antje Bap. Nov. 7, 1742 No further trace

5-Ellenor or Nelletjes, born June 12, 1745, Married to Garrett Kip.

6-Johannes Bap. Dec. 2, 1747 Married Perkins Lambert in N.Y. Died Apr. 13, 1804. Had 7 children.

Jacob Brower born Mar. 26, 1740 Married Margretia Vroelandt July 26, 1759. In N.Y.

Issue-

1-Paul Baptized Jan. 2, 1759

2-Jacob ” Feb. 6, 1760

3-Abraham ” Nov. 20, 1762

4-Marytje ” Nov. 20, 1762

5-John ” Oct. 14, 1764

6-Johannes ” June 29, 1766

7-Petrus ” Apr. 2, 1769

8-Margretia ” July 17, 1770

9-Simion ” Feb. 2, 1772

10-David ” June 18, 1773

Paul Brewer, Bap. Jan. 1780. Married Grace Timson, 1785.

Issue

1-Mose, born about 1786

2-Thomas

3-Nancy

4-Elizabeth

5-John born Sept. 24, 1793

6-Rachiel

7-Hannah

8-Fannie born about 1799

9-Samuel ” ” 1800

Fannie Brewer, born 1799, Married Samuel Edwards Apr. 7, 1825.

Issue

1-Ellis born Oct. 13, 1825

2-Levinia ” July 28, 1828

3–Elizabeth ” Jan. 1, 1831

4–Fleming ” Feb. 7, 1835

5–Elmiria ” Jan. 31, 1839

6-Jane ” Mar. 11, 1840

7–Oscar ” Mar. 21, 1844

Levinia Edwards, born July 28, 1828, Married William Corson, June 1, 1848.

Issue

1-William born May 1, 1849

2-Emma born May 26, 1851

3-Charles ” Jan. 16, 1854, Married Mary Bickle Aug. 25th 1877

4-Daniel born Sept. 28, 1856

5-Fannie “born July 26, 1859

6-Harry born Sept. 1, 1860

7-James born Sept. 2, 1868

8-Howard born Mar. 29, 1873

Charles Fleming Corson, born Jan. 16, 1865 Married Mary Bickle, Aug. 25, 1877.

Issue.

1-Myrtle M. born July 6, 1879

2-Roso ” Dec. 9, 1880

—-John ” Dec. 9, 1880 (Twin)

3-Ida Elizabeth born May 27, 1883

4-Martha Bowman born Feb. 1886

5-Emma born June 17, 1889

Additional handwritten notes:

John Corson had 3 girls

Dorothy Corson had one daughter Jeanne

Edyth Corson (changed name to Carson) married Carlos Rodrigues and had 2 sons

Alma Corson (also changed name to Carson) and had two sons

[I did not include living descendants of these families.]

Roelof Jansen arrived at New Amsterdam by “de Eendracht,” May 24, 1630.[21]’ The ship sailed from the Texel, March 21, 1630. He was to work in the colony of Rensselaerswyck for $72 a year. He was accompanied by his wife Anneke (Anetje) jans, his daughters Sarah, (Katrina) and Fytje. Until quite recently it has been believed that Roelof Jansen and his family were Dutch. In the “Van Rensselaer Bowier Manuscripts,” (p. 56f. note) it is shown by A. T. F. van Laer, Archivist of New York State, that they were not from “Maasterland,” but from “Masterland” or “Maesterland,” meaning Marstrand, which is on a small island off the coast of Sweden, near Goteborg (Gothenburg). The editor and translator of “Bowier Manuscripts” concludes therefore that jansen’s family probably were Swedes. But why not Norwegians? Marstrand belonged to Norway prior to 1658, and it is significant that Claes Claesen and Jacob Goyversen, both from Flekker, Norway, sailed with Roelof and work’ed with him on “de Lacts Burg.” There were on July 20, 1632, only three men on this farm: Jansen, Claesen, Goyversen, three Norwegians.

On July 1, 1632, Roelof Jansen was appointed schepens. The oath of the schepens, administered by the Schout to Jansen, and other schepens, among whom was Laurens Laurensen, anotherNorwegian, was as follows:

This you swear, that you will be good schepens, that you will be loyal and seal to my gracious lord and support and strengthen him in his affairs as much as is in your power; that you will pass honest judgment between the lord and the farmer, the farmer and the lord, and in the proceedings between two farmers, and that you will not fail to do this on any consideration whatsoever.

“So help you God.”

As schepen, Roelof Jansen got a “black hat, with silver bands.

As to Roelof’s farming, but little can be said. Van Rensselaer, always exacting in his demands, complained in a letter written July 20, 1632, to Wolfert Gerritz, that it showed “bad management that Roeloff Jansen could not get any winter seed. I hope that he has sown the more summer seed.”

Likewise in a letter of April 23, 1634, to Director Wouter van Twiller, the Patroon said: “I see that Roeloff Janssen has grossly run up my account in drawing the provisions, yes, practically the full allowance [even] when there was [enough in] stock. I think that his wife, mother, and sister and others must have given things away, which can not be allowed. He complains that your honor has dismissed him from the farm, and your honor writes me that he wanted to leave it. It would thus appear that Jansen left the colony of Rensselaerswyck in 1634.

Roelof Jansen moved with his family to New Amsterdam about 1634 or a little later. In 1636 he received a groundbrief of thirty-one morgens of land lying along East River. “It formed a sort of peninsula between the river and the swamps which then covered the sites of Canal Street and West Broadway.” Here Jansen “probably erected a small farmhouse upon a low hill near the river shore at about the present Jay Street; but he had hardly made a beginning in the work of getting his bouwery under cultivation when he died, leaving his widow the arduous task of caring for a family of five children in a colony hardly settled as yet.” Of Jansen’s children, Sarah, Katrina and Sofia married in New Netherland (See the articles following). Annetje died as a child. Jan (Roelofsen) settled in Schenectady and was killed by the Indians in the massacre of 1690.

Jansen’s widow married again. The Dutch Reformed preacher in New Amsterdam Everardus Bogardus took her for his wife in 1638. See the article “Anneke Jans.” Of all Scandinavian immigrants in early New York she is probably the best known.

ANNEKE JANS From Scandinavian Immigrants in New York 1630 – 1674. by John O. Evjen

Anneke Jans arrived with her husband and three children at New Amsterdam May 24, 1630. As we have seen in the foregoing sketch, she came from Marstrand, Norway. She was with her husband at Fort Orange until 1634 or 1635 when the farnily moved down to New Amsterdam and settled on sixty-two acres of land, which Jansen received in 1636. He died shortly afterward. Anneke was left with five children, though she, no doubt received some aid from her mother, Tryn Jonas, midwife, and from her sister, Marritje, both of whom were in New Amsterdam. Kiliaen van Rensselaer released her from what she owed him. In a letter of September 21, 1637, to Director van Twiller he said: “I only have from you the recommendation of the widow of Roeloef Janse, written to me hastily and with few words and your oral greetings by Jacob Wolphertsen. I released the said widow from her debt long ago. My reason for so doing I will tell you orally, when we meet, God willing, in good health.” In March, 1638, Anneke was married to the Dutch Reformed pastor in New Amsterdam, Everardus Bogardus, who in 1633 had come to New Amsterdam to succeed the ministry of Jonas Michaelis. He had at the time a little church on the East River shore, or upon the present Pearl Street, between Whitehall and Broad Streets, and adjoining it was the parsonage. In addition to his clerical duties he assumed the cares of a landed proprietor. In the marriage settlement, still extant, Anneke had provided for the securing to her first husband’s children the sum of 200 guilders each. The sixty-two acres of land which she inherited from her first husband now got the name of the “Domine’s Bouwerie.” “United in early English days to the Company’s Bouwerie, it formed part of the famous tract, which, bestowed in the time of Queen Anne upon Trinity Church, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was the subject of repeated and hotly contested action at law in which Annetje’s name conspicuously figured.” On August 12, 1638, Everardus Bogardus, as the “husband of the widow of Roelof Jansen of Masterlandt” gave Power of Attorney to Director van Twiller “to collect money due said Jansen.

Anneke, no doubt, was now a lady of leisure compared to what she had been when she was fanning with Roelof on de Laets Burlg. But her position as the wife of a parson was severely tested immediately after her second marriage. Anthony Jansen from Salee and his wife, Grietje Reiners, were none too well disposed to Domine Bogardus and Anneke. Grietie found an opportunity of circulating the report that Anneke had given public offense. Anthony Jansen, whose tongue vied with that of his wife, helped to spread the report. The matter came before the Court. Mrs. Lamb’s version of this case is as follows:

“Mrs. Bogardus went to pay a friendly visit to a neighbor; but on getting into the ‘entry’, discovered that Greitje Reinirs, a woman of questionable reputation, was in the house, and thereupon turned about and went home. Grietje was greatly offended at this ‘snubbing’ from the Dominie’s lady, and followed her, making disagreeable remarks. While passing a blacksmith’s shop, where the road was muddy, Mrs. Bogardus raised her dress a little, and Grietje was very invidious in her criticisms. The Dominie thought fit to make an example of her; hence the suit. Grietje’s husband being in arrears for church dues, Bogardus sent for him and ordered payment, and not getting it, finally sued for the amount.” (See Lamb, History of the City of New York, 1. p. 86).

Anneke’s second husband was a fearless and outspoken person. He was at variance with Governor Van Twiller as well as with his successor Governor Kieft. He accused Van Twiller of maladministration and in consequence was himself charged with unbecoming conduct, and was about to depart for Holland to defend himself, but was detained by Governor Kieft. He opposed Kieft’s policy in regard to the Indians, and in 1645 denounced him for drunkenness and rapacity. He was therefore brought to trial, but compromised with Kieft. But the old difficulties appeared again. In 1646 the Director and Council of New Amsterdam summoned Bogardus to appear and answer charges against him. The “summons” is as long as it is violent, likely the work of Kieft. We shall give a few extracts from it:

“…We have letters in your own hand, among others, or?t dated June 17, 1634, wherein you do not appear to be moved by the Spirit of the Lord, but on the contrary by a feeling becoming heathen, let alone Christians, much less a preacher of the Gospel. You there berate your magistrate, placed over you by God, as a child of the Devil, an incarnate villain, whose buck goats are better than he, and promise him that you would so pitch into him from the pulpit on the following Sunday, that both you and his bulwarks would tremble… “You have indulged no less in scattering abuse during our administration. Scarcely a person in the entire land have you spared; not even your own wife, or her sister, particularly when you were in good company and jolly. Still, mixing up your human passions with the chain of truth which has continued from time to time, you associated with the greatest criminals in the country, taking their part and defending them… “On the 25th of September, 1639, having celebrated the Lord’s Supper, observing afterwards in the evening a bright fire in the Director’s house, whilst you were at Jacob van Curler’s, being thoroughly drunk, you grossly abused the Director and jochim Pietersen, with whom you were angry…

” Since that time many acts have been committed by you, which no clergyman would think of doing… “Maryn Adriaensen came into the Director’s room with pr-determined purpose to murder him. He, notwithstanding, was sent to Holland in chains against your will. Whereupon you fulminated terribly for about fourteen days and desecrated your pulpit by your passion… Finally, you made up friends with the Director, and things became quiet…

In the summer of… (1644) when minister Douthey ad-ministered the Lord’s Supper in the morning, you came drunk into the pulpit in the afternoon; also on Friday before Christmas of the same year, when you preached the sermon calling to repentance.

” On the 21st March, 1645, being at a wedding feast at Adam Brouwer’s and pretty drunk, you commenced scolding the Fiscal and Secretary then present, censuring also the Director not a little, giving as your reason that he had called your wife a , though he said there that it was not true and that he never entertained such a thought, and it never could be proved “You administered the Lord’s Supper without partaking of it yourself, setting yourself as a partisan.. .”

Such was the husband of Anneke Jans in the opinion of the highest official in the land who himself was so hateful to the people that he was obliged to resign. When Kieft returned to Holland, after the arrival of Governor Stuyvesant in 1647, Bogardus sailed in the same vessel to answer the charges brought against him, before the classis in Amsterdam.

The vessel entered Bristol Channel by mistake, and struck upon a rock, going down with eighty persons, among thenm Bogardus and Kieft. This happened on September 27, 1647.

Anneke was thus widow for the second time of her days. No doubt she had borne her share of the discomfort caused by the enmity between Kieft and Bogardus. The following extract of a letter of Rev. Megapolensis in Albany, written August 25, 1648. to the Classis of Amsterdam shows what she still had to contend against, and what was his opinion of the Kieft-Bogardus feud.

“After the Lord God was pleased to cut short the thread of life of Domine Bogardus by shipwreck…, his widow came here to Fort Orange… to reside and make her living. She has nine children living, some by a former husband and some by Domine Bogardus, and is also deeply in debt. She has, however, no wav to liquidate her debts, nor means for her own subsistence, unless the West India Company pay her the arrears of salary due her husband. Domine Bogardus repeatedly asserted that a higher salary was promised him, before leaving Holland, than he ever received here… “It is now about two years since I was called upon by DirectorGeneral William Kieft, to settle the difficulties between said Kieft and Domine Bogardus. I attempted several times to smooth the differences which had arisen here, but all in vain. Domine Bogardus asserted that it could not be done here, but that the matter ought to be laid before the Hon. Directors; or even if it could be determined here, he would, nevertheless, be obliged to go home, in order to demand, before his death, the salary promisd him, for the maintenance and support of his family… “He had been paid for a considerable time only 46 guilders per month, with 150 guilders extra per year for board money… “Annetje Bogardus… has requested me to write to the Rev. Classis, in her name and in her behalf, in order that the Rev. Classis, or the Deputies thereof, might, for the sake of a preacher’s widow, petition the Company for the money due her, to be paid to her or her attorney, to enable her to pay her debts and support her family…”

The letter of Megapolensis, it would appear, does not exaggerate her distress. She had several little children to support, though three of her grown-up daughters were married. Her house in New York was situate on what is now No. 23 Whitehall Street.

In 1652 she was enabled to buy a lot in Albany on the corner of James and State Streets. Here she built a house and resided the remainder of her life. It would appear that her son-in-law Pieter Hartgers secured this property for her. It was “bounded east bv land of Jonas and Peter Bogardus, and west by Evert janse Wendell. Being 2 rods 81/2 feet wide, and 5 rods 9 feet long.” On June 21, 1663, after the death of Anneke, it was sold by the heirs to Dirck Wessells. The price was “1,000 guilders in good merchantable beaver skins, at 8 guilders a piece.” (Collections of the New York Historical Society, IV., p. 488). In 1654 she obtained from Governor Stuyvesant a patent in her own name on the land she had inherited from her first husband. This Patent reads as follows:

“Petrus Stuyvesant, Director-General of New Netherland, Curacao and the Islands thereof, on the behalf of their Noble High Mightinesses the Lords States-General of the United Netherlands and the Honorable Directors of the Incorporated West India Company, together with the Honorable Councillors, declare that We on this day, date underwritten, have given and granted to Annetje Jans, widow of the late Everardus Bogardus, a piece of land situate on the Island of Manhattan on the North River, beginning at the palisades near the house on the Strand it goes north by east up to the partition line of old jan’s land is long 210 rods; from thence along the partition line of said Old jan’s land it extends E. by S. up to the Cripple bush (swamp) it runs S. W. long 160 rods front the Cripple bush, to the Strand it runs westerly in breadth 50 rods; the land that lies to the south of the house to the partition line of the Company’s land begins on the east side, from the palisades southward to the posts and rails of the Company’s land, without obstruction to the path, it is broad 60 rods; long on the south side along the posts and rails 160 rods; at the east side to the corner of Kalchhook is broad 30 rods; to the division line of the aforesaid piece of land it goes westerly in length 100 rods; it makes alltogether 31 morgens.” (Historic New York. Ed. by Goodwin, Royce and Putnam I., p. 84 f.)

Her will, dated January 29, 1663, and on record in the original Dutch in book of Notarial Papers, in the County Clerk’s office, Albany, reads as follows:

“Will of Anneke Jans Bogardus. – In the name of the Lord, Amen. Know all men by these presents, That this day, the 29th of January, 1663, in the afternoon, about four o’clock, appeared before me, Derrick Van Schelluyne, notary public, in the presence. of the witnesses hereafter mentioned, Anneke Janse, widow of Roeloff Janse, of Master Land, and now lastly widow of the Reverend Everhardus Bogardus, residing in the village of Beverwyck, and well known to us, notary and witnesses; the said Anneke Janse lying on her bed in a state of sickness, but perfectly sensible and in the full possession of her mental powers, and capable to testate, to which sound state of mind we can fully testify. The said Anneke janse considering the shortness of life and certainty of death and the uncertainty of the hour or time, she, the said Anneke janse, declared after due consideration, without any persuasion, compulsion, or retraction, this present document to be her last will and testament, in manner following: First of all recommending her immortal soul to the Almighty God, her Creator and Redeemer, and consigning her body to Christian burial, and herewith revoking and annulling all prior testamentary dispositions of any kind whatsoever, and now proceeding anew, she declared to nominate and institute as her sole and universal heirs her children, Sarah Roellofson, wife of Hans Kierstede; Catrina Roeloffsen, wife of Johannes Van Brugh; also jannetje and Rachel Hartgers, the children of her deceased daughter, Fytie Roeloffsen, during her life the wife of Peter Hartgers, representing together their mother’s place; also her son Jan Roeloffsen, and finally, William, Cornelius, Jonas, and Peter Bogardus, and to them to bequeath all her real estate, chattels, money, gold and silver, coined and uncoined, jewels, clothes, linen, woolen, household furniture, and all property whatsoever, without reserve or restriction of any kind, to be disposed of after her decease and divided by them in equal shares, to do with the same at their own will and pleasure without any hindrance whatsoever; provided never the less with this express condition and restriction that her four first born children shall divide between them out of their father’s property the sum of one thousand guilders, to be paid to them out of the proceeds of a certain farm, situate on Manhattan Island, bounder on the North river, and that before any other dividend takes place; and as three of these children at the time of their marriage received certain donations, and as Jan Roeloffsen is yet unmarried, he is to receive a bed and milch cow; and to Jonas and Peter Bogardus she gives a house and lot situated to the westward of the house of the testatrix in the village of Beverwyck, going in length until the end of a bleaching spot, and in breadth up to the room of her, the testatrix, house, besides a bed for both of them and a milch cow to each of them, the above to be an equivalent of what the married children have received. Finally, she, the testatrix, gives to Roeloif Kierstede, the child of her daughter Sara, a silver mug; to Annetje Van Brugh, the child of her daughter Catrina, also a silver mug; and to jannetje and Rachel Hartgers, the children of her daughter Fytie, a silver mug each; and to the child of William Bogardus named Fytie also a silver mug; all the above donations to be provided for out of the first moneys received, and afterwards the remainder of the property to be divided and shared aforesaid. The testatrix declares this document to be her only true last will and testament, and desiring that after her decease it may supersede all other testaments, codicils, donations, or any other instruments whatsoever; and in case any formalities may have been omitted, it is her will and desire the same benefits may occur as if they actually had been observed; and she requested me, notary public, to make one or more lawful instruments in the usual form of this, her, testatrix, last will and desire. Signed, sealed, and delivered at the house of the testatrix in the village of Beverwyck, in New Netherland, in the presence of Ruth Jacobse Van SchoonAerweert and Evert Wendell, witnesses.

“This is the + mark of Anneke Janse with her own hand.

“Rutger Jacobus, “Evert Jacobus Wendell. “D. V. Schelluyne, Notary Public, 1663.” (For this and other translations I am indebted to Collections of the New York Historical Society, IV., p.487 ff.)

Anneke died March 19, 1663, and lies buried in the Middle Dutch Church Yard, on Beaver Street. She was the first Norwegian “predikantsvrouw” (pastor’s wife), in New York. And of all the pastors’ wives in New York she has become the most famous. But this fame is due to chance and circumstance rather than to Anneke herself. Mrs. Lamb says: “Although she (Anneke) may not have seemed rich in the days when great landed estates were to be bought for a few strings of beads, yet she is reverenced by her numerous descendants as among the very goddesses of wealth. She was a small well-formed woman with delicate features, transparent complexion, and bright, beautiful dark eyes. She had a well-balanced mind, a sunny disposition, winning manners, and a kind heart…”

Anneke Jans’ fame rests on property and progeny. Her descendants are numerous. Many of them are wealthy, some of them have been conspicuous in the litigation regarding Anneke jans’ farm. John Fiske speaks of this litigation as “one of the most pertinacious cases of litigation known to modern history.” (The Dutch and Quaker Colonies in America, II., p. 32).

We have mentioned that Director Stuyvesant gave the heirs of Anneke a patent, on the land in question, in 1654. This patent was confirmed in 1664 by Governor Nicolls, after the English had conquered New Netherland. In 1671 five of the heirs conveyd. the whole farm to Col. Francis Lovlace, then governor of the province of New York. In 1674 the Duke of York confiscated it, so that it was the “Duke’s Farm” until 1685, when with James’ accession to the throne it became the “King’s Farm.” In 1705 it was leased or granted by the colonial authorities under Queen Anne to Trinity Church. One of Anneke’ s sons, Cornelius, had not joined in the conveyance of 1671; the heirs of this son have claimed that his failure to join invalidated the sale and that they therefore had a right to their share of the property. Between 1750 and 1847 not less than sixteen or seventeen suits in ejectment were brought against Trinity Church by heirs who coveted the property. They were brought “with such a persistency which seemed to learn no lesson from defeat. In tS47 Vice-Chancellor Sanford decided that, after waving all other points, the church had acquired a valid title by prescription, and all the adverse claims were vitiated by lapse of time” (Fiske, Dutch and Quaker Colonies, 11., p. 258).

Let us also quote from the article “Annetje Jans’ Farm,” in “Historic New York” (I., p. 95):

“Sixty-eight years after the sale to Lovelace, and thirty-one years after Queen Anne’s grant, the descendants of Cornelius Bogardus began to protest against the occupancy of Trinity Church. There was a confused notion then as to what they could claim, and this confusion has increased in the minds of the “heirs” during two hundred years. The history of the repeated suits is long and involved. No court has sustained the claims of the “heirs” for a minute, and yet, with every generation, new claimants appear, though every possible right has long since been outlawed. Mr. Schuyler says in his Colonial New York: ‘In view of the repeated decisions of the highest judicial tribunals and of their publicity, any lawyer who can now advise or encourage the descendants of Annetje jans to waste their money in any proceedings to recover this property must be considered as playing on the ignorance of simple people, and as guilty of conscious fraud, and of an attempt to obtain money under false pretenses.’ Mr. Schuyler made a close study of the subject, and is himself a distinguished descendant of Roelof and Annetje Jans.”

As late as 1891 Trinity Corporation found it necessary to publish the following:

“To all whom it may concern:

“As letters are being constantly received from various places in the United States making inquiries about suits pending against this corporation in respect to its property, or about negotiations assumed to be on foot in respect to the alleged claims of the descendants of Anneke jans or of other persons, notice is hereby given that no such suits are pending, and no such negotiations are going on, and all persons who suppose themselves to be descendants of Anneke Jans, or otherwise interested in claims hostile to this corporation, are cautioned against paying out money to any person alleging the pendency of such suits or negotiations.”

Societies have been formed like the Anneke Jans Association, founded in Astor House Library in New York, 1867, The Anneke Jans International Union, etc. But no organized endeavor has as yet succeeded in invalidating the claim of the Trinity Corporation. It has continued to enjoy all the benefits and revenues of the vas+ I property to this day. No wonder that Trinity Church can contribute more than four hundred thousand dollars a year to charity! Trinity Church is Episcopal. It is the wealthiest church organization in America and it is continually reminded of it, even in the twentieth century. For as late as 1909 Trinity Corporation was sued again by an heir of Anneke Jans. Mary Fonda wanted, as heir, one per cent of valuable Trinity property. Regarding the descendants of Anneke jans, see: I. Munsell, Collections on the History of Albany II.; and The New York Genealogical and Biographical Record. See also S. P. Nash, Anneke jans Bogardus, her farm, and how it became the Property of Trinity Church, New York, 1896. Of the many prominent families which by ties of marriage have augmented the genealogy of Anneke jans, Mr. Torstein jahr’s article in “Symra” mentions Bayard, De Lancey, De Peyster, Gouverneur, Jay, Knickerbocker, Morris, Schuyler, Stuyvesan”, Van Cortland and Van Rensselaer.

Sara Roelofs, daughter of Anneke Webber and Roeloff Jansen Van Maesterlandt was born in New Amsterdam, New York. She married Surgeon Hans Kierstede, and lived on the present northeast corner of Pearl and Whitehall streets. She afterward married Cornelius Van Borsum, the owner of the ferry to Long Island, and subsequently Elbert Elbertsen. She was proficient in the Indian languages, and acted as interpreter between Stuyvesant and the Esopus and Wappingers, the Agh-in-sack, the Long Island, and the State Island Indians, when their treaty was made with Stuyvesant in the spring of 1664. The great session was held in the council chamber at Fort Amsterdam, where the various representative chiefs assembled. That was the last treaty of peace between the Hollanders and the Indians, and was signed under a salute from the guns of the Fort.