Dutch-Colonies-L Archives

Archiver > Dutch-Colonies > 2003-04 > 1049725825


From: "Peter R Christoph" <>
Subject: [D-Col] Lutheran death records
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:29:15 -0400
References: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0303221522281.8072-100000@echonyc.com> <008201c2f4b9$52798d20$0ccbf7a5@D74JNG11>


I am looking for death or burial records for the Lutheran Church or Lutheran
cemetery in New York city for 1723. If anyone is aware that such a record
exists for that time period, I would appreciate knowing about it.

Peter


----- Original Message -----
From: "Howard Swain" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [D-Col] Duke's Law


> Hi Patricia and all,
>
> From: "Patricia Tidmarsh" <>
> Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 12:23 PM
>
> > Any pointers to the most important differences between Roman-Dutch law
and
> > Anglo-Saxon laws.?
> >
> > Women
> > Inheritance
> > Legal age
>
> Peter has given you a good intro, and maybe that is all you wanted.
> But to answer completely would take pages and pages. A whole book
> could probably be written on using various aspects of these laws in
> genealogy. Does anyone know if one has been?
>
> If you have a specific question about a certain document or event,
> you might want to ask that.
>
> Meanwhile, I'll try to give some pointers to some sources that I've run
> across that might be of interest.
>
> First, Albion's Seed -- David Hackett Fischer's book about four different
> English groups that emigrated to America. One of the things he discusses
> is the different inheritance practices of these groups. Namely,
> the Cavliers of Virginia tended to continue the primogeniture practice
> in which the eldest son got everything -- or at least the whole
plantation,
> which served to maintain the large estates.
> The English Quakers in Pennsylvania, though, had the same egalatarian
> customs as the Dutch, and the children tended to inherit equally.
> The Puritans in Massachusetts to some extent steered a middle course
> in which sometimes the children inherited equally except the eldest
> son got a double share. This was in part due to their interpretation of
> Deuteronomy 21:17 and Genesis 48:22 (Fischer p. 172, fn. 9)
> Fischer calls this "double partible".
>
> This last case has been the most helpful to me in genealogy. I had
> the case of a family in New England where there were no birth
> dates for any of the children. The father's will named only child
> (a son) by name and he was to get a double share. I had seen
> secondary sources term that son the eldest, but did not know the
> reason. After reading Fischer, I now believe they were assuming
> the father was following the above practice. Of course, in a
> situation like this, it is still an assumption, I would think.
>
> You can also see from the above that not all regions of English influence
> did things the same way.
>
>
> Second, "The Paternity of Aert Theunissen Middagh: A Suggestion;
> The Ancestry of Theunis Gysbertszen Bogaert: A Caveat," by
> Cameron Allen in TAG vol 36 no. 3 (July 1960) pp 129-136.
> This article deals (at least in part) with using various aspects of the
> Roman-Dutch law to answer some genealogical questions. In the
> course of the article, several books on Roman-Dutch law are cited
> as well as some examples, particularly related to ages.
>
> (For those who might be interested in the second man, there is a
> later article, "The Parentage of Theunis Gijsbertszen Bogaert" by
> Herbert F. Seversmith in NGSQ vol 55 (June 1967) pp 89-91.)
>
>
> Thirdly, "New York Inventories, 1666-1775" by Kenneth Scott in
> NGSQ vol 54, pp 246 ff.
> The intro quotes from the Duke's law of 1 Mar 1665 and from the
> law of 11 Nov 1692 re. intestate estates. From the 1665 law it
> appears that if the man died intestate, the widow got 1/3 and the children
> equally divided the other 2/3, except the eldest son got a double portion.
>
>
> Lastly, then as now there were different ages to be allowed to do various
> things. My impression is that the age when a male could do _everything_
> was 25 under the Dutch (Holland province and NN) and 21 under the English.
> But because there were different ages for different things it is very
dangerous
> to assume these ages applied in a given situation. Eg. the age to bear
arms
> and serve in the militia seems to have been 16 for both the Dutch and
English.
> So, you really need to search out the particular event or situation in the
> context of a particular place and time.
>
> Regards,
> Howard
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ==== Dutch-Colonies Mailing List ====
> To Unsubscribe from this mailing list, Send message to:
> ONLY Message; unsubscribe
> For problems; contact Holly Timm
> LIST ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/dutch-colonies
> and
http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=dutch-colonies
>
> ==============================
> To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records,
go to:
> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237
>
>


This thread: