52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks (16): From the Netherlands to New Netherland to New Jersey with my 8-great grandfather

I have to admit that I’ve skipped back to the very early days of my family tree again because I wanted to “use” one of my early ancestors who came from the Netherlands to New Netherland to introduce some history I’ve just learned recently. I know, kind of a roundabout way to get there, but what the heck. If you have the patience to read a little about someone who made some intriguing life decisions nearly 400 years ago, you’ll be treated to this historical tidbit at the end.

In order to find an ancestor who fit the bill – lived in the part of New Netherland that became New Jersey instead of New York – I traced back on one of my many x-great grandmothers and then went way back 10 or 11 generations (I’m the 11th in this case) to find Epke Jacobse Banta, my 8-great grandfather on my mother’s side. (Did you know that we all have 1024 8-great grandfathers?! And that they are likely to have contributed to in the order of 250,000 descendants!!)

Once I found Epke Jacobse, it wasn’t difficult to find information about his life, even though it was so long ago. I am really, really blessed by all the digging into records done by previous genealogy sleuths, much of which is now online. And I suppose if he’s left that many descendants, it’s not so surprising that at least one of them would have gone digging.

I’m going to summarize and paraphrase information that is available in several places, including familysearch.org and wikitree.com

The first interesting “fact” about Epke is that his birth is reported in a few places as “about 1627”, but there is a definitive record of his christening in 1619. I’m going to go with the 1619! As well, his death is listed as 1690 in a few places, but since two sources have reported his gravestone in New Jersey as having the date being 1688, I’m going with the 1688. These are good – and common – examples of what I wrote about in Week 3, Separating out fact from fiction.

So, here are some of the interesting bits I’ve found. Epke Jacobse Banta was born in 1619 in northern Netherlands, in Minnertsga, Friesland. In 1650 he married Tietje Dircksdr, in nearby Harlingen, Friesland, Netherlands. He is recorded as having been a farmer, but he was also a windmill owner and had been a miller in both Minnertsga and Oosterbeirum in the 1640s and 1650s. Court records indicate he and his wife bought a house in Oosterbeirum in 1652, but sold it at a loss in 1655, returning to Minnertsga. When his mother died in 1652, she left an inheritance to him, which was held in trust by his father until after February 1656.

On October 8, 1656 he was arrested, brought before the Public Prosecutor, and fined for permitting a Roman Catholic priest in his home to baptize his child. Catholicism was illegal in that part of the Netherlands at that time, just as Protestant religions were illegal in other pars of Europe. Since the family were recorded as upstanding Dutch Reform Church members once they got to New Amsterdam, one can only assume that they had learned from this experience that sometimes compromise isn’t such a bad thing.

It is not known why Epke and his family left the Netherlands for America (except for the religious bit!), but he is known to have had financial problems. He and his family left the Netherlands in late 1658 or early 1659 from Harlingen on the ship “DeTrouw” (meaning “Faith”) for New Amsterdam. Although this sailing took place at a time of the year when sailing across the Atlantic was usually very harsh, records indicate that the ship sailed from the Netherlands south to the Canary Islands, then to the West Indies and north along Virginia to New Amsterdam arriving on February 12, 1659. Even taking this route, Epke and Tietje must have had awfully compelling reasons to make such a trip, especially at this time of the year, with five small children — Cornelius, 6 yrs; Seba, 4 yrs; Hendrick, 3 yrs; Derrick (Dirck), 2 yrs; and Weart, 9 mos. Just stop and try to imagine what this trip must have been like – in 1659 – with 5 very small children, crossing the Atlantic in a sailing ship to an unfamiliar destination. I can’t imagine making that trip with 5 kids that young on a luxury liner in 2024!

The Banta family sailed under contract with the Dutch West Indies Company, which governed the settlement of New Amsterdam and was anxious to increase the Dutch population. When Epke came to America, it was under the following intriguing agreement with the Dutch West India Company:

  1. Obey all Company orders.
  2. Agree to live wherever told, for six years.
  3. Help in all community projects.
  4. Sell all export merchandise to the Company.
  5. Agree not to sell at a profit, the products they make.
  6. Plant only what they are told to plant.
  7. Not to trade with outsiders or reveal to them the business and profits of the Company.
  8. Pay a yearly rental in farm produce, for farm and home, in addition to the Company’s regular share, for 10 years, after which time taxes must be paid for the support of the Provincial Government and the military expenses of the Fort.
  9. To remain a true Calvinist, as a member of the Dutch Reformed Church.
  10. Any items needed may be purchased at the Company Store, and charged against the purchaser’s account, to be paid for in produce.

In accordance with the above, Epke was apparently told to open an Inn and Tavern, because when he arrived at Vlissengen (now Flushing, NY), on Long Island, he did indeed become an innkeeper, first in Flushing and then in Jamaica, where he became a miller. Quite a different image from what Flushing and Jamaica, NY are like now!

Subsequently, sometime before 1675, he moved to Bergen (now Jersey City, NJ). In 1681 he purchased land at Hackensack and with his sons became some of the earliest settlers in that village. In 1686 Epke Jacobse (also recorded now as Jacob) purchased another 240 acres north of what is now Cherry Hill. Much of his original purchase was subsequently deeded to Hendrick Brinckerhoff, whose family continued to own the land for 200 years.

(Source: WikiTree)

Epke became known as an upstanding and respected citizen of Bergen, and on February 18, 1679 he was appointed as a Magistrates Assistant to the Court of Oyer and Terminer, under Captain John Berry. The Court, on which Epke served, met semi-annually and had jurisdiction of all indictable crimes. Interestingly, despite his position with the courts, Epke Jacob was arrested in 1686 by the Sheriff of Bergen Co., with other land owners for rioting and for refusing to obey the King’s authority. He died in Hackensack, Bergen, NJ in 1688.

There are two words in the final two sentences describing Epke Jacob’s life in the New World that speak to the reason behind me looking for his history: “King” and “NJ” (New Jersey). For, of course, when the Banta family arrived in New Amsterdam in 1659, under the auspices of the Dutch West Indies Company, they arrived in a newly settled place that was under Dutch control. But a short 5 years later, in 1664, the English took control, and after a bit of going back and forth, that control became permanent. So, it’s not as surprising as it may seem that many “respectable” citizens would be deemed by the new “masters” to be rioting and refusing to obey the King’s authority, even if it was officially under the King’s authority that Epke’s appointment was made in 1679. They were Dutch!

Epke Jacobse Banta (Source: WikiTree)

Also, both the history books and nearly every other writer reminds us that New Amsterdam was renamed as New York when the Brits took over, in honour of the Duke of York. They also remind us of that for the naming of New York State. But, of course, New Netherland included what is now New Jersey as well as what is now New York. It was fellow blogger (and runner and author) Roy McCarthy, from Back on the Rock, who pointed out to me after a previous ancestor post that New Jersey was named after his current homeland of the Isle of Jersey. I grew up near all these places, am fairly up on my history, and I had never, ever heard this. So, I thought the least I could do is share this bit of history with you.

From Roy:

“It was Sir George Carteret who renamed New Netherlands to New Jersey in 1664 – the de Carteret family are alive in kicking at St Ouen’s Manor here in Jersey to this day.”

Of course, I googled this history immediately, and, straight from the horse’s mouth (aka nj.gov):

On June 24, 1664, James, Duke of York, granted Lord Berkeley and Sir George Carteret, ownership of a swath of land between the Hudson and Delaware Rivers. The charter referred to these lands as “New Jersey” in honor of Carteret’s defense of the English Channel island of Jersey during the English Civil War.

And thus ends our history lesson for this week. Thank you, Roy.

 

This entry was posted in 52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks, History and Politics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to 52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks (16): From the Netherlands to New Netherland to New Jersey with my 8-great grandfather

  1. Deb says:

    Fantastic Jane, you got back into history quite far with this one! As I read the agreement between Epke and the DWI Co. the first thought that came to mind was “indentured servant”. I googled because I always think medieval Europe with that term but lo and behold it does apply fully to the agreements that immigrants with these “companies” as America was settled.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Interesting, indeed. We are inclined to think of an indentured servant as someone with far more constraints on their freedoms and far less revenue than our Epke seems to have had, but I guess the philosophy of a contract is the same. Good work, Deb! I still can’t get over a 40- and 34-year old couple taking 5 extremely young children on a voyage into great uncertainty. They have to have been running from something major!

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Mary Rimmer says:

    I wonder if the ‘rioting’ had something to do with religious/political tensions. James, Duke of York (briefly James II of England) was a Roman Catholic and there was a lot of fear among Protestants in England that he would re-establish the Catholic church and start persecuting Protestants. Once he became King (1686) he seemed to many to be moving in that direction–and then in 1688 his wife produced a male heir, who would be brought up a Catholic. That’s when his son-in-law William of Orange and daughter Mary were invited to come to England by a group of Protestant politicians and aristocrats, and take the throne in what is often called the ‘Glorious’ or ‘Bloodless’ Revolution (not entirely accurate designations). If Jacobse had decided to go back to being a ‘true Calvinist’ after his earlier encounter with the law, he might well have been protesting being suddenly under a Catholic King.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Wow, Mary, you may be onto something here. I remember when I was reading about the final treaty between the Netherlands and England giving the territory over to England, not until 1674, that the Dutch had insisted on religious freedom being incorporated, undoubtedly with that very possibility in mind rather than because they were big on inclusion. They would have known how the winds of religion changed according to what King was in charge from their experiences in Europe. Good thinking, Mary. Thanks.

      Like

  3. DM says:

    Wow, That is a lot of detailed great information about someone that far back. That detail about crossing the Atlantic with 5 little ones.. can’t even imagine. Heck, we have a hard time keeping 4 grand kids somewhat entertained for an hour (happened this morning/ left me tuckered out) I’m going to make a concerted effort to stay current with your family history series. Good stuff. DM

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Rose says:

    What a fantastic bit of history you’ve discovered in your family tree!

    Liked by 1 person

  5. swabby429 says:

    Indentured servitude sounds awful. I doubt if I would have agreed to such draconian conditions. Weathering out life in the “old country” seems like a better fate.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      It’s certainly intriguing. Clearly, if a couple decides to take 5 young children on a perilous sea voyage and leave everything they know behind to start a new life, there must have been an extremely good reason. Their “deal” included free passage and not particularly onerous “servitude”. In this particular case, the label may be worse than the reality. The Dutch were trying very hard to increase the population in New Netherland, but 5 years after Epke got there, the Dutch still couldn’t keep the Brits at bay.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. The travel that family must have endured on the ocean trip is in itself incredible and unimaginable!!! The history lesson itself is amazing and I’m loving it!!!

    Rita

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Eilene Lyon says:

    All these situations seem almost incomprehensible to those of us in today’s world. I often wonder what it was really like for them. Did they expect things to be this way? Was it less awful to them than it would be to us – used to modern comforts? There’s a lot in this story to ponder.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      For sure. There’s so much to ponder when we stop and realize how vastly different life was in earlier times. And in the New World way back, there weren’t even established villages, mostly just trees, animals, and some indigenous people. For all the early centuries, just carts with horses, no indoor plumbing, heating and cooking by burning wood, etc. Making our own clothes, mending them, the list is endless. That’s the part of genealogy I love trying to wrap my head around. It brings history to life.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Wynne Leon says:

    I love how personal bringing the story of your 8-great grandfather and the history makes it! And the rules – wow! Fascinating!

    Like

  9. debscarey says:

    As you say Jane, it must’ve been something pretty serious to have had them make that journey, especially with what they had to commit to once they got there. This is an utterly fascinating investigation, thank you for sharing it with us 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      I’m glad you’re enjoying some of this history as well, Debs. All around the world people continue to demonstrate their resilience in the face of hardship (even braving small boats to cross the Channel! 😏). It’s hard not to have enormous respect for them, whatever century we’re looking at.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Fascinating as always, Jane. Your ancestor went through a great deal of change in a time when change doesn’t seem as prevalent as it is today. But I guess history shows up that there were upheavals in everyday lives during all eras.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jane Fritz says:

      Oh, there really were. Change who’s ruling – king, emperor, etc – and suddenly if you don’t change to their religion you’re tried for witchcraft or hung and quartered. Aside from religion, landownership or usage for farming could be taken without recourse. Mankind seems to be good at upheavals.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.