The marriage record of Wolfer Gerritsz and his first wife Aeltgen Jansdr, dated 17 Jan. 1605, from the archives of Amersfoort in the Netherlands.
By Jared L. Olar
October-November 2019
The Conover surname in the United States has two completely different ethnic origins -- that is, there are two different kinds of "Conover" in America. Many Conover families are of Irish descent, deriving their surname from the Gaelic given name Conchobhar (which is often spelled "Conor"). There is, however, another Conover family in America, deriving its descent from a Dutch colonist of New Amsterdam (New York) named Wolfert Gerretse van Couwenhoven (c.1584-1662) who came from Amersfoort in Holland in or about 1625. It is from the Dutch Conovers that my wife's late mother was descended. Wolfert's surname indicates that his family had been tenants who worked a farm in Holland called Couwenhoven, located near Hoogland, which is itself near Amersfoort in the Utrecht District of Holland. After coming to North America, with the passing of the generations the family's surname "Van Couwenhoven" was worn down so that it came to be pronounced and spelled "Covenhoven," "Covenover," "Cownover," and finally "Conover" (though some branches of Wolfert's descendants opted for the spelling "Crownover").
Wolfert's ancestry in Holland is shrouded in uncertainty, but his father's name is known and perhaps his paternal grandfather's name also. Some online sources, however, purport to trace the male line of Wolfert's father Gerret back five generations in a line of Van Couwenhovens allegedly from Amersfoort and Schoonhoven. This alleged ancestry of Gerret begins in the latter 1300s and proceeds as follows:
Wolphert van Couwenhoven, born circa 1380 in Amersfoort, Utrecht, the Netherlands, died circa 1434 in Amersfoort.
|
Willem Wolphertssoon van Couwenhoven, born circa 1418 in Amersfoort, died circa 1460 in Amersfoort, married Neeltje Willemsdochter.
|
Jan Willemsz van Couwenhoven, born circa 1440 in Couwenhoven, the Netherlands, died circa 1475 in Schoonhoven, Utrecht, the Netherlands, married Jacomina.
|
Willem Jansz van Couwenhoven, born circa 1465 in the Netherlands, married Cunera van Lynden.
|
Jan Willemsz van Couwenhoven, born circa 1495 in Schoonhoven, Utrecht, the Netherlands, died 1550, married Annetje van den Coulster.
|
Gerret Jansz van Couwenhoven
It is unknown what evidence exists to support this lineage, assuming there is any evidence at all. With little hope of substantiating Wolfert's alleged medieval ancestry, we turn instead now to an account of our own Conover lineage. Most of what follows is derived from the work of my wife's distant cousin David Kipp Conover Jr.
1. JAN VAN COUWENHOVEN, parentage and ancestry uncertain, father of the Gerrit Jansz Couwenhoven who is mentioned in 1564 as tenant of the land of the family Van Vanelveld. That Gerrit is possibly the same as our ancestor Gerret, father of Wolphert Gerretse van Couwenhoven.
2. GERRET [JANSZ?] VAN COUWENHOVEN, born circa 1545 or circa 1560 in the Netherlands.
2. GERRET [JANSZ?] VAN COUWENHOVEN ("Gerrit, "Garret"), perhaps son of Jan van Couwenhoven, born circa 1545 or circa 1560 in the Netherlands, perhaps near Ceulhorst on the Hoogland near Amersfoort, Utrecht District. Conover genealogical researcher David Kipp Conover Jr. provides the following note on Gerret:
"Occupation: Circa 1600: a tenant farmer of the estate of Couwenhoven in the neighborhood of Ceulhorst on the Hoogland near Amersfoort, owned by the family De Wijs who were holding it from the feudal Land Lord of Montfoort. May be identical with Gerrit Jansz Couwenhoven who is mentioned in 1564 as tenant of the land of the family Van Vanelveld."
If our Gerret was the same as Gerrit Jansz, that would mean Gerrit's father's name was Jan (John), perhaps a "Jan van Couwenhoven." However, concerning the identity of our Garret, Dutch genealogical researcher Willem Van Kouwenhoven offered the following cautionary remarks in his October 2004 article, "Wolfert Gerritse in the Netherlands: Further Thoughts About the Van Couwenhoven Family" (published in The New York Genealogical & Biographical Society Review):
It is thus best to be cautious about drawing an easy conclusion that Gerrit the father of Wolfert and Willem succeeded his father on Kouwenhoven and that the family can be found on this farm much further back into the past. This accentuates the conclusion in the earlier article in THE RECORD that there is insufficient basis to conclude that there was a family relationship between Wolfert Gerritse and the Gherit (Gerrit) Jansz who in 1564 was listed as the tenant of Kouwenhoven. Kemp described him as a suitable candidate to be the father of Wolfert Gerritsz and Willem Gerritsz. In his article, he placed brackets around the name [Jansz Couwenhoven] in his "Genealogie Van Couwenhoven" to indicate that the names within the brackets were merely hypothetical for Gerrit Jansz. He was certain that the father of Wolfert and Willem was Gerrit, and it was speculative if the father was Gerrit Jansz Couwenhoven. This thought is repeated in the article in De Bewaarsman with the cautionary observation that Gerrit Jansz would have been unusually old if he were the father of Wolfert and Willem.
A further weakness in the thesis that Gerrit Jansz and Wolfert Gerritsz were father and son is that the patronymic Gerritsz (son of Gerrit) is largely the basis for asserting that this relationship exists while Gerrit together with Willem, Jan and Hendrik are the most common Dutch given names. Gerrit occurs as frequently as Willem in the registers of marriages and baptisms during this period. It is not surprising then that a tenant bore the name Gerrit Jansz, and without further documentary evidence, there is insufficient basis to assert that he was the father of Wolfert Gerritsz. It should be noted that Kemp has cautiously refrained from doing this.
Though the parentage and ancestry of Gerret is doubtful, he is known to have had two sons, possibly three sons:
-- JAN VAN COUWENHOVEN, possible son of Gerret, had two sons, Adriaen Jansz Couwenhoven and Willem Jansz Couwenhoven.
3. WOLPHERT GERRETSE VAN COUWENHOVEN, born circa 1584 in the Netherlands.
-- WILLEM GERRETSE COUWENHOVEN, born circa 1586 in the Netherlands, died before 5 Nov. 1622, married Neeltgie Willemsdochter, had five sons.
3. WOLPHERT GERRETSE VAN COUWENHOVEN, son of Gerret [Jansz?] van Couwenhoven, born circa 1584 in the Netherlands, died between 2 March 1662 and 24 June 1662 at New Amersfoort, Kings County, New Netherland (New York). Wolphert worked as a bleacher and a baker in and near Amersfoort, Utrecht, the Netherlands. However, no record of his baptism can be found in Amersfoort, and because baptismal records prior to 1 May 1579 do not survive, some have speculated that Wolphert was born before that date. However, in a document of 8 Oct. 1638, Wolphert gave his age as 54, which would mean he was born circa 1584. While the farm of Couwenhoven is near Amersfoort, it is probable that Wolphert was not in fact born at Couwenhoven but only lived and worked there in his youth, and thus his baptism likely took place elsewhere.
Wolphert married on 17 Jan. 1605 (banns published 9 Jan. 1605) at Amersfoort, Utrecht, the Netherlands, to AELTJE JANSDOCHTER, born circa 1580 probably in Amersfoort, but he and Aeltje apparently had no children and Aeltje seems to have died within a few years of the marriage. Wolphert's second wife, whom he married circa 1609 probably in Amersfoort, was NEELTGEN JACOBSDOCHTER, born circa 1584 probably in Amersfoort in the Netherlands, died 1658 in Flatlands, Kings County, Long Island, New Netherland, daughter of Jacob Peters and Metgen. Wolphert and Neeltgen had three sons. The eldest son, Gerret Wolfersen Van Couwenhoven, was the direct male-line ancestor of Conover genealogical researcher David Kipp Conover Jr., who was 10th in descent from Gerret Wolfersen.
The marriage record of Wolfer Gerritsz and his first wife Aeltgen Jansdr, dated 17 Jan. 1605, from the archives of Amersfoort in the Netherlands.
Dutch genealogical reseacher Marcel Kemp found the following references to Wolphert Gerretse van Couwenhoven in the Amersfoort archives in the Netherlands from 1611 to 1623:
The first reference to WOLFERT GERRETSE was when Wulphert Gerrits signed an agreement of 15 Dec. 1611 with his stylized 'A.' According to the terms of that document, he agreed to assume the property and debts of the deceased parents of his wife Neeltgen Jacobsdr from the other heirs for 100 guilders. Her brother Herman Jacobsz also signed this document as well as her brother-in-law Willem Dircx who was married to Aeltgen Jacobs. Petergen Petersdr, the underage daughter of her brother Peter Jacobsz, had already received 50 guilders.
On 22 March 1612, Wulphert Gerritsz and his wife Neeltgen Jacobsdr sold a bleach camp outside the Coppelpoort of Amersfoort to Hendrick Janss and his wife Haesgen Thonis for 1,200 Carolus guilders. The occupation of Wolfert is not disclosed in this document.
On 14 April 1615, Wolphert took part in a curious agreement with Herman Zieboltz of Amsterdam before Johan van Ingen, an officer of the court of Utrechet. Herman's surname suggests that he was a German or that he was of German descent. His name is also spelled Syboelt and Zyeboltz in those documents. According to a "donatiaq iner vivos" (gift to a living person), Ziebolz gave Wolphert two morgens of turf ground near Cologne in recognition of services rendered (but not payment for them). No monetary amount is mentioned for the services or the turf ground. In a second document of the same date issued by the same officer of the court of Utrecht, Zyeboliz made a debt owed by him by Henrick Adrianesz and Adriaen Adriansz over to Wulpher Gerrits, baker, and Cornelis Wynantsz, inkeeper. This second document authorized Wulpher Gerritss and Cornelis Wynantsz to assume ownership of the two morgens of turfground mentioned in the first document. These documents create the impression that Zieboltz was unable to pay Wolfert money that he owed him, that the Amsterdammer made over a debt on which he had not been able to collect, and that Wolfert may have agreed to these vague terms because he would otherwise not be able to retrieve anything from his business dealings with Zieboltz.
On 16 May 1616, Wulpher Gerritss, baker, appeared as a witness before Johan van Ingen, officer of the court of Utrecht, in a case in which Willem Gerritz, miller, testified that Griet Maes was evading the city grain tax. The document does not specify that Wulpher and Willem were brothers, and if such were the case, it is likely that this would have been discussed in the document.
On 28 Oct. 1616, Hendrick Janss and Haesgen Thonis made the last payment on the bleach camp which they had purchased from Wolfert Gerretse and Neeltgen Jacobsdr, and the property was made over to them.
On 30 Jan. 1617 at Langegraft, Amersfoort, Utrecht, the Netherlands, Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven purchased from Aert van Schayck and his wife Anna Barents a house on the Langegraft in Amersfoort which lay between the house of the aforesaid Aert on the one side and that of Henrickgen Barents widow of Aelbert Conrneiss on the other side, while the breadth of the house lay on the Lieverrouwestraet (Dear Lady Street). Wolphert was listed as a baker.
Between Feb. and July 1617, within a short time, Wolpher placed three mortgages on this house. Perhaps the transactions with Zieboltz were unprofitable, and this was one of the causes of his need for money. On 15 Feb. 1617, Wulpher Gerritss, baker, and his wife Neeltgen Jacobsdr borrowed 100 guidlers from the Armen te Amersfoort on which he agreed to pay 6 guilders per year. On 16 May 1617, Wulpher Gerritss, baker, and his wife Neeltgen borrowed 200 guilders from Cornelis Baecx van der Tommen at a yearly interest of 12 guilders. On 25 July 1617, Wulphur Gerritss, baker, and his wife Neelttgen Jacobsdr borrowed 250 guilders from Anna Goerts, widow of Franck Frandkss, at 15 guilders interest per year.
On 3 Jan. 1618, Wulphert Gerritsz and his wife Neeltgen Jacobs purchased a bleach camp outside the Coppelpoort of Amersfoort with Hubert Lambertsz Moll and his wife Geertgen Cornisdochter as their partners. They borrowed 500 Carolus Guilders from Ghijsbert Cornelisz van Cuijlenburch, a citizen of the city of Utrecht, at an annual interest of 25 guilders and 20 stivers. In addition, Hubert Lamberts and his wife Geertje Cornelisdochter contracted a special mortgage ofr 400 Carolus guilders with the consent of Wulffert Gerritsz and his wife. On the north side of the property lay the River Eem, on the east the city moat and on the south and west the heirs of Gerrit van Speulde. This propety came with two other mortgages: 200 guilders to the Poth and 600 guilders to Jo. Catharina van Morendael not yet conveyed to her. In a codicil, Wulpher Gerritsz, baker, and his wife Neeltgen Jacobs become party to the mortgage of Hubert Lambertsz Moll and his wife Geertge Cornelis for 400 guilders with interest on Ghijsbert Cornelisz van Culenborch with restriction that Wulpher would pay 150 guilders in the year 1618 and thereafter be free of obligation. In the margin is a notation that Dirck van Cullenburch as heir of his father Gysbert van Culenburch acknowledged that the obligation on the mortgage was fully paid on 5 March 1628.
NOTE FROM M. KEMP: During the seventeenth century, a bleach camp was a capital-intensive, seasonal business which required the labor of relatively many workers. Profits were meager because the buyers of the finished product and the suppliers of raw materials such as lye were generally the same persons, and they acted to keep their costs and thus the profits of the bleachers low. There were three types of bleaching activities, and the skills and experience reqiuired of workers was generally so high that each bleachery specialized in but one sort of material: Yarn (garenblekerij), woven cloth (lijnwaadblekerij), or clothing (klerenblekerij). In all three cases, the material was first generally cooked in a lye solution and later spread out on green grass for many weeks in small fields surrounding the bleach house where it was kept damp. Later, it was cooked in a solution of wheat meal before being again spread on the field for a lengthy period, the entire process requiring about three months. The consequences of this long procedure was that only wealthy people were the customers of clothing bleachers because only they could afford to part with many items of clothing for so long a time. No equipment of the bleach camp listed in the purchase document for Wolphert are given, so no indication of what type of bleachery Wolphert purchased. The bleach camp he sold in 1612 included a bleach table, meaning it may have been a cloth bleach camp.
Painting of Amersfoort in the Netherlands by Mathius -- original is in the Museum Flehite in Amersfoort. The bleach camps of Wolphert Gerritsz Van Kouwenhoven are depicted in this painting -- they are the white sections in front of the Koppelpoort wall. Image provided by Donna Levy.
On 17 Sept. 1618, Wulphert Gerritss baker and his wife Neeltge Jacobs contracted a mortgage with Coenraet Fransz, former mayor of the city of Amersfoort, for 100 guilders at an annual interest of 6 guilders, with the house of Wulphert on the Langegracht as security, which house lay between the house of Aert van Schayck and that of Hendrickgen Speldemaeckster. From this, it does not appear that Wolfert's endeavor as bleacher met with great success, and this may have been caused by a general malaise in the weavers trade in Amersfoort in this period, which in turn lay on a lack of capital. Because Wolfert's work was dependent on this industry, he was limited as a businessman by the lack of success of the parent industry.
On 5 Nov. 1622, Wolphert was appointed guardian over the five underaged children of Willem Gerritsz Couwenhoven. From NYGBR: "Wulffer Geridtz, bleacher, residing by the Coppelpoort, and Harman Willemsz, citizen of Amersfoort, as 'bloetvoochden' (blood guardians) of the five sons of Willem Gerridsz Couwenhoven, namely Gerridt, Willem, Jan, Harmen, and Willem the Younger, none of whom had yet reached the age of majority, made an agreement with the mother of the children Neeltgen Willemsdr, the widow of Willem Gerridtsz, assisted by the owner of Cowenhoven the honorable Johan de Wijs." This document indicates that Wolfert Gerritse had a brother Willem and that he was the tenant of the farm Couwenhoven which was owned by Johan de Wijs. This document indicates that Wolfert is connected to the Couwenhoven that is by Hoogland. It is at the same time possible that he was also linked to the Couwenhoven near Woudenberg because he was a son of Gerrit Willemsz van Couwenhoven, but documentation for this has not been discovered.
On 24 March 1623, Beernt van Munster made a deposition under oath before the lieutenant, the schout, and the schepenen Dam and Bronchorst at the request of the (police) officer. He stated that the previous Saturday afternoon he had caught a bucket of fish by the Coppelpoort bridge and had given half of it to Wulphert the bleacher according to an agreement which they had made, and that Beernt had caught a small number of fish thereafter. Wulpher and Harmen Teut then took these fish from Beernt, and they would not divide them with him. Wulpher took the net and tried to give it to his wife. Harman hit Beernt in the eye with a weight in the net, but by then, it was ripped. Beernt then went to the defense of his wife, and Wulpher drew his knife and threatened him without harming him. Dirck Gerritsz, stevedore, using well-chosen words, separated the people from each other. On 1 April 1623, Dirch Gerrisz was heard at the request of the officer and made a similar deposition under oath.
On 11 June 1623, Hubert Moll and his wife Geertgen Cornelis sold a bleach camp to Wulpher Gerritsz, bleacher, and his wife in which they had been residing. This was situated in Amersfoort outside the Coppelpoort. The property description differs slightly from that given for the land transaction of 1618, but the mortgages are the same. It is likely that this is the same ground that Wulpher Gerritsz and Hubert Moll purchased then. On the date of purchase in 1623, Wulpher Gerritss sold this property to Monsieur Jacques Chiese, Cuirassier of the company of his Princely Excellency (Maurits?) and the purchser assumed the mortgages.
The document of 11 June 1623 is the last time Wolfert Gerritse appears in the archives of Amersfoort. It was either in 1624 or 1625 that Wolfert left the Netherlands with his wife and sons and settle in New Amsterdam (New York). Some report that their immigration took place on 25 April 1625, but others say it was in June or July 1625 that he, with his wife and family, boarded a ship of the Dutch West India Company which sailed in the expedidition that was made up of the ships Macreel (Mackerel), Paert (Horse), Koe (Cow) and Schaep (Sheep). These ships carried a cargo of cattle, five farm managers, military engineer Cryne Fredericksz (Architect of Fort Amsterdam) and the new West India Company clerk -- Provisional Director Willem Verhulst, who would replace Captain Cornelis Jacobsen May. Wolfert Gerrittse was one of the five farm managers.
In 1629, Wolfert returned to the Netherlands, but on 24 May 1630 he returned from the Netherlands aboard "De Endracht" (the Unity). While Wolfert was back in the Netherlands, Kiiaen van Rensselaer wrote a friendly letter to Wolfert terminating Wolfert's contract with van Rensselaer and mentioning that Wolfert's wife was unhappy living in New Netherland. In the letter, van Rensselaer states that under the circumstances he would not want someone who was not happy working for him to remain in his employ.
On 30 June 1636, Wolphert and his fellow colonist Andries Hudde purchased "Keskateuw" (a placename thought to derive from the Lenape word for "where grass is cut") on Long Island from the Indians -- this was the first known European settlement on Long Island. The purchase consisted of a total of 3,600 acres of land. In Oct. 2007, the original deed of this purchase, signed on Manhattan Island by New Netherland Governor Wouter von Twiller, was sold by the Conover family at a Manhattan auction, the selling bid being $156,000. The deed reads as follows:
We, director and council of New Netherland, residing on the island of Manhattan at Fort Amsterdam, herewith testify and declare, that today, date underwritten, before us personally appeared Tenkirau, Ketaun, Ararikan, Awackouw, Warinckehinck, Wappittawackenis, Ehettin, as owners; Penhawis, Kakappeteno being present as chiefs of the district, have transferred, ceded, surrendered and conveyed as lawful, true and free possession, as they therewith transfer, cede, surrender and convey to and for the behalf of Andries Hudde and Wolphert Gerritsz the westernmost of the flats called Keskateuw belonging to them on the island called Suan Hacky between the bay of the North river and the East River of New Netherland.
Wolphert named his "plantation," which was located near the junction of Kouwenhoven Place and Flatbush Avenue, "Achterveldt," shown on the Manatu Map of New Netherland as Farm No. 36 near the Indian long house of the Kestachau tribe. Wolphert's house, surrounded by palisades, was the focal pont of the village of New Amersfoort, later called Flatlands. On 18 April 1657, Wolfert was granted "small civil rights" in the colony. The following year, Gov. Peter Stuyvesant confirmed the original 1636 deed of sale, updating the deed to specify that Wolfert was by then the sole owner. On 20 Oct. 1661, "Wolfert Gerritsen Van Couwenhoven" was named in a suit filed by Frans Jansen regarding a dispute over a contract in which Jansen was to buy land from Wolfert. That is the first time the surname Van Couwenhoven is mentioned in reference to Wolfert.
In Oct. 2004, Dutch genealogical researcher Willem van Kouwenhoven published an article that considered and critiqued Kemp's earlier findings. The article, "Wolfert Gerritse in the Netherlands: Further Thoughts About the Van Couwenhoven Family," was published in The New York Genealogical & Biographical Society Review. Van Kouwenhoven's comments and critique, which also touches on Wolfert's possible ancestry, is quoted and excerpted here:
The purpose of this article. Several years ago, I made a study using documents about Wolfert Gerritse van Couwenhoven which Marcel Kemp had sought out at my request in the archives of the district Amersfoort in the Netherlands. The New York Genealogical and Biographical Society was kind enough to publish this in THE RECORD as "Wolfert Gerritse in the Netherlands." During the intervening time, I have developed several points of criticism about the article which pertain to the views which were expressed there about Wolfert's first wife Aeltge Jansdochter, the birth order of Wolfert and his brother Willem, the date on which the tenancy of Willem's son Jan on the farm Kouwenhoven was terminated, and the projected picture of Wolfert's childhood.
Wolfert Gerritse in recent literature. Additional information has been published in the meantime by Marcel Kemp and Gerard Raven as "Boerderij Kouwenhoven en de familie Van Kouwenhoven 1400-1650" in De Bewaarsman, the publication of the Historische kring Hoogland, the Historical Society of Hoogland. (The farm Kouwenhoven is located in the neighborhood Coelhorst within the former district Hoogland, which is now a part of the district Amersfoort.) Gerard Raven was co-editor of De Bewaarsman when the article was published. In addition to information about the early history of the farm that appeared in Kemp's article "De herkomst van Wolfert Gerritsz, stamvader van de Amerikaanse familie Van Kouwenhoven" in the 1996 Jaarboek van bet Centraal Bureau voor Genealogie and in the above-mentioned article in THE RECORD, the article in De Bewaarsman contains information about a tenant on the farm in 1536, insights into the lives of the tenants in the period 1620-1650, and a report of the construction of a brick manor house on the farm during the eighteenth century by a new land owner, as well as the history of the farm to the present day. Only the material that pertains to the critique of the article in THE RECORD will be dealt with in this discussion.
Information about Kouwenhoven, its neighborhood Coelhorst, and the local Chapel Coelhorst were included in the booklet "Hoogland-West," the issue of De Bewaarsman for April 2001. The material about the chapel will be recounted in the portion of this critique that deals with Wolfert's childhood.
Aeltge Jansdochter, Wolfert's first wife. As first point of critique, the view of Aeltge Jansdochter which was set forth in the article in THE RECORD should be revised - that it was uncertain that the Wolfert Gerritse who married Aeltge Jansdochter on 17 January 1605 was the same person as the Wolfert Gerritse who is found in numerous documents in the archives of Amersfoort in the period 1611-1623. M. Kemp expressed this opinion initially in the report of his impressively thorough search for documents regarding Wolfert Gerritse which was first given to this writer, and this opinion was used in the article for THE RECORD. By the time it was published, Kemp had expressed the same view in his article "De herkomst van Wolfert Gerritsz, ..." Because other documents were not found which linked Aeltge Jansdochter to the baker/bleacher Wolfert Gerritse, Kemp hesitated to draw the conclusion that Aeltge was Wolfert's first wife. This seems overly cautious. Only one Wolfert Gerritse has been found in the numerous other documents from more or less the same period that have been preserved in the records of the district Amersfoort. Although many documents from this period in the district have been lost for various reasons, those that have survived give no reason to surmise that there was at that time a second Wolfert Gerritse in the district to whom the entry in the marriage register might refer. It would then be better to reason that the Wolfert Gerritse of the marriage record is the same person who is found in all of the other documents. It then follows that Aeltge Jansdochter was Wolfert's first wife, that she died shortly after their marriage without bearing any children who survived, and that Neeltje Jacobsdochter, who is shown as his wife in the documents from the Amersfoort archives, was his second wife and the mother of his known children.
Willem Gerritse, Wolfert's younger brother. Secondly, there is a problem in the article with the estimated birth year that was given for Wolfert's brother Willem. While Kemp made no statements about Willem's birth year in his article in the Jaarboek, he and Raven estimated in the article in De Bewaarsman that Willem was born in the period 1580-1585. Since Willem remained on the farm Couwenhoven as its tenant, it was assumed in the article for THE RECORD that he was older than Wolfert, who was born in 1584. Yet, none of Willem's five children had attained their majority when their father died in 1622. Thus, none of them were capable of succeeding him as tenant. The family was enabled to stay on the farm because Willem's widow Neeltge Willemsdochter married Peter Coenraetsz, apparently with the approval if not the instigation of the owner of the farm, Johan de Wijs of Amersfoort.
If one of Willem's five sons was but a few months removed from attaining his majority, it would seem that it could have been arranged in one way or another that he become the tenant of the farm, if he was in other respects a suitable candidate for this work. That this did not occur suggests that the oldest son was several years removed from his majority, and this is the tenor of the agreement which the "blood guardians" Wolfert Gerritse and Harmen Willemsz of Amersfoort (respectively the brother of Willem and the brother of Willem's widow) made with the mother of Willem's children on 5 November 1622. She was to care for the children and let them attend school and learn to read and write. Such stipulations suggest that some of the children were too young to have learned basic literacy skills at the time of their father's death.
Since Willem's children were not so old when he died in 1622, it would seem that the birth year 1580 that was assigned to him lies too far in the past and that it is likely that he was born several years later. If Willem's children are listed in birth order in the agreement between the "blood guardians" and the widow, Jan would be his third son. He became the tenant on Couwenhoven on 5 July 1636, and he married Nellitgen Henricxdr five days later. Assuming that both father and son married shortly after their twenty-first birthday and that there were three years between each child, results in an estimated birth date of circa 1587 for Willem rather than circa 1580, which was assigned in THE RECORD article.[14] Willem would have been legally eligible to enter into contracts as a tenant only when he reached his majority, which would seem to have been about 1608.
It should be emphasized that this is but an estimate that is based on reasonable assumptions about birth order and birth intervals that have been made in regard to two men. It should be expected that new documents about Willem and Jan could well require further slight corrections regarding their birth and marriage dates. Yet, Kemp's search in the Archives of Amersfoort was so thorough that it is unlikely that further documents about these persons will be found there. Perhaps a reference to them will by chance be discovered in one or more documents from other districts while other matters are being studied.
As the younger son who left home, learned a trade (perhaps with some parental support) and became a businessman: The thought that is being presented here is that although Willem was the younger son, he stayed on the farm, working it and perhaps initially serving as a caretaker for his parent(s) while the older brother Wolfert had years earlier left the homestead, even though it was customary in Hoogland that the oldest son succeed his father as tenant. Wolfert sought to survive in the business world of Amersfoort, where he already resided as a married man when he was twenty-one years old according to the entry in the marriage register of the Reformed Church of Amersfoort, which was located in the St. Joriskerk (St. George's Church). This is a plausible explanation, yet it requires further refinement.
Jan Willemse's tenancy on Kouwenhoven ends. The other tenants on Kouwenhoven about which there is information were not able to labor there many years. Peter Coenraetsz became tenant in 1622, and by 1638 he had died and was succeeded by Jan Willemsz van Kouwenhoven. While Kemp and Raven argue that Jan was deceased as early as 1646, it is certain that he was no longer living in 1656 when the estate of his mother Neeltge Willemsdr. was inventoried.
Kemp and Raven are of the opinion that Jan had died by 1646 since a police report from that year was made by Jan Bartz who lived on Kouwenhoven. Apparently the thought is that the farm Kouwenhoven was so small that the tenant farmer (pachter) could not have employed a resident worker (knecht), but only day laborers (dagloners) as they were needed. Thus, it could be reasonably concluded that a person who listed his residence as Kouwenhoven must have been the tenant farmer of that date. It is noted that it is a problem that Jan Willemsz and his wife Nelletge Hendrixdr would then have had to have had eight children in ten years. Kemp and Raven conclude that Nelletge was forced to depart from Kouwenhoven following Jan's death because none of the children was old enough to become the succeeding tenant.
It would be more reasonable to consider that it would be bad for the health of the wife and the children which she bore if they came into the world made for a healthier farm. . . . It would then seem better to conclude that by 1646, Jan Willemsz and his wife Nelletge Hendrixdr had relocated, that five of their children or so had been born on Kouwenhoven and that the rest were born in their new location before Jan died somewhat more than fifteen years after he had become the tenant farmer on Kouwenhoven.
As a third point then, there is no need to change the view which was expressed in THE RECORD article of 1998 regarding Jan's death date, but it would appear that the family's tenancy on Kouwenhoven likely had already ended by 1646, ten years earlier than was presented in that article.
Wolfert's childhood. What were the circumstances of Wolfert's childhood? Farm work was much harder and heavier than it is now, and it was often necessary to labor in a strong wind in cold, wet weather, which caused severe illnesses. Although it now seems strange, the life of a farmer was similar then to that of a contemporary professional athlete. The training or work began for both early in life, and by the time each was thirty years old, he was already past his peak. While it is now unusual to find an athlete older than forty-five on a team roster, it was then unusual to find a farmer older than forty-five years old on a landlord's list of tenants - not because the older tenant was enjoying retirement in his luxurious villa, but because he had died of exhaustion and illness. Although it would seem that the average lifespan of a tenant farmer in this region did not differ greatly during this period from that of the general population and that it thus was about forty-five years, Jan Willemsz was younger when he died, and it would seem that this was also true of his father. It would seem that some tenants died several years before they reached forty-five while a similar number lived a few years beyond that benchmark.
It would seem unlikely that Gerrit the father of Wolfert and Willem would have been able to work as a tenant farmer for many more years than the documented tenants of Kouwenhoven Peter Coenraetsz and Jan Willemsz. It would thus have been unlikely that he would have been able to work as a tenant much more than fifteen years. If Willem became the tenant about 1608, it would then seem that his predecessor may have begun his tenancy about 1593. This is three years later than the estimate given in the above cited article in THE RECORD.
According to the above calculations, Wolfert would then have been nine years old, and Willem six. At first sight, this would seem to suggest that there is something wrong with the assumptions behind these figures, since this would mean that the children apparently were not born on Kouwenhoven, but it is more profitable to reason that insight is thus given into the complex and fragile world into which the boys were born.
There is no document in which Wolfert is listed as a resident of Kouwenhoven or as its tenant farmer, nor for the reasons enumerated above, does it seem likely that such evidence of his presence on the farm will be discovered. Yet, he used the name Van Couwenhoven, and he worked as a farmer and as a farm supervisor. Why the choice for this name? Where did he learn farm work? If he lived and worked on the farm Kouwenhoven as a child, both questions would be answered. Thus, because no better explanation has yet been found, it is reasonable to assume that this farm was his home and work place for a time during his early years.
In the earlier article in THE RECORD it was mentioned that a director of the Dutch East India Company (Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie) in the early seventeenth century bore the family name Couwenhoven, and it was suggested that although this man was not a blood relative, his high position may have afforded Wolfert a further reason to use the name Van Couwenhoven in New Amsterdam rather than another reasonable choice of name such as Van Amersfoort or Van Coelhorst. In regard to this, Gerard Raven has commented that the directors of the Dutch West India Company in Amsterdam would not necessarily know that a Couwenhoven was a director of the Dutch East India Company in Rotterdam. It is thus uncertain that it would have been professionally advantageous for Wolfert to use this name. This implies that he used it for personal reasons, that is to say, because he had lived and worked there during a significant portion of his youth.
It is possible that Wolfert and his brother Willem were born elsewhere and that their father only later became tenant on Kouwenhoven. If so, he probably was tenant for six or twelve years at their previous residence. If that is the case, the father likely died within five years of the start of his work on the farm, although he may have lived longer and have seen Willem become the tenant on the farm, in which event he may then have been able to do but limited work because he would already have reached the advanced age of 45 years. Still, there is a considerable likelihood that the father died before either boy attained his twenty-first year. This implies that there was a tenant intermediate between Willem and his father. If that was indeed the case, how were the children enabled to remain on the farm? And their mother? Other siblings? Because of the dearth of documents, it is not possible to answer these questions. There is for instance no testament or inventory for the estate of Wolfert's father in which his patronymic and that of his mother are disclosed with a list of their children, although it is reasonable to think that such documents once existed. It is not possible to ascertain precisely to what extent Wolfert's life and that of his father Gerrit and his brother Willem were in agreement or disagreement with the possibilities and probabilities which have been set forth here. The contours of the pieces of the puzzle do not come into clear view, and it is not possible to seen how they fit together.
Early change of family on the farm Kouwenhoven. Kemp and Raven list the tenant of Kouwenhoven about 1536 and in 1548 as Reyer Pot. In 1564 the tenant was Gherit Jansz; in 1619/20 Willem Gerritsz. As noted above, the tenant in 1622 was Peter Coenraetsz, and in 1636 Jan Willemsz, while Jan Bartsz apparently had become the tenant by 1646. Clearly a change of tenant families occurred sometime between 1548 and 1564 and again about 1646. Because of the short life expectancy and the disruptions of death, it is likely that other changes in tenant families on Kouwenhoven occurred during this period which are not disclosed because of the dearth of documents.
It is thus best to be cautious about drawing an easy conclusion that Gerrit the father of Wolfert and Willem succeeded his father on Kouwenhoven and that the family can be found on this farm much further back into the past. This accentuates the conclusion in the earlier article in THE RECORD that there is insufficient basis to conclude that there was a family relationship between Wolfert Gerritse and the Gherit (Gerrit) Jansz who in 1564 was listed as the tenant of Kouwenhoven. Kemp described him as a suitable candidate to be the father of Wolfert Gerritsz and Willem Gerritsz. In his article, he placed brackets around the name [Jansz Couwenhoven] in his "Genealogie Van Couwenhoven" to indicate that the names within the brackets were merely hypothetical for Gerrit Jansz. He was certain that the father of Wolfert and Willem was Gerrit, and it was speculative if the father was Gerrit Jansz Couwenhoven. This thought is repeated in the article in De Bewaarsman with the cautionary observation that Gerrit Jansz would have been unusually old if he were the father of Wolfert and Willem.
A further weakness in the thesis that Gerrit Jansz and Wolfert Gerritsz were father and son is that the patronymic Gerritsz (son of Gerrit) is largely the basis for asserting that this relationship exists while Gerrit together with Willem, Jan and Hendrik are the most common Dutch given names. Gerrit occurs as frequently as Willem in the registers of marriages and baptisms during this period. It is not surprising then that a tenant bore the name Gerrit Jansz, and without further documentary evidence, there is insufficient basis to assert that he was the father of Wolfert Gerritsz. It should be noted that Kemp has cautiously refrained from doing this.
Religious life in Wolfert's childhood, the Coelhorst Chapel. A discussion of religion and worship can be added to the treatment of Wolfert's childhood. The Coelhorst Chapel, which was built about 1350, stands just around the corner from the farm Kouwenhoven. This proximity evokes a picture of Wolfert trudging on Sunday mornings with other family members and residents of the neighborhood Coelhorst through the snow to worship services in this building. Yet, the historical story differs greatly from this. About 1350, the residents of Hoogland no longer had to attend Mass in Oud-Leusden, which was several miles south of Amersfoort while their hamlet then stood several miles northwest of the more northerly city. They received their own chapel, which was dedicated to St. Nicholas, who was not only the patron saint of farmers in areas that had just been placed under cultivation, but also the protector from floods. The Reformation brought a step backward to this little settlement. In 1580, Catholic services were forbidden by the provincial parliament of Utrecht, and the church was closed. It seems to have been the intention of the Protestants to hold their own services in this building, which during the intervening two centuries had been endowed with the income from several farms, but a pastor could not be found. It was not until 1655 that it could be arranged that Reformed pastors from the region would hold services in turn in the chapel. In the meantime, itinerant priests had offered the Mass for the faithful without interruption at other places in the neighborhood such as the manor house Hoogerhorst, until Hoogland was again assigned its own priest in 1640. Ill feeling was likely generated when the chapel was closed and its income was not used for many decades for services in that building or for pastoral care for the local residents. Perhaps as a result, the Protestant families gradually departed from Coelhorst in the seventeenth century so that the hamlet was almost exclusively Catholic in the eighteenth century as is noted in another source. This has remained unchanged in subsequent years.
It seems unlikely that such negligence by the administrators of the local Reformed church would have generated interest for that church and its teachings in Wolfert. When he lived in Coelhorst, it would seem that there was little that would have attracted him to the Reformed church. This may explain why none of his children are to be found in the baptismal registers of Amersfoort or Leusden. In a later period when he cultivated contacts with Reformed businessmen such as Killiaen van Rensselaer, he may have found it expedient to affiliate with their church. Perhaps it is for this reason that he is listed on 13 August 1651 as a witness of the baptism of Albert, son of Albert Albertszen, at the Reformed church in New Amsterdam.
The known children of Wolphert Gerretse van Couwenhoven and his second wife Neeltgen Jacobsdochter were:
-- GERRET WOLFERSEN VAN COUWENHOVEN, born circa 1610 in Amersfoort, Utrecht, the Netherlands, died circa 1648 at Flatlands, Kings County, New Netherland (New York), married Aeltje Cornelis Cool.
4. LIEUT. PIETER WOLPHERTSE VAN COUWENHOVEN, born circa 1614 in Amersfoort, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
-- JACOB WOLPHERTSE VAN COUWENHOVEN, born circa 1615 in Amersfoort, Utrecht, the Netherlands, died in 1670 (before 21 April 1670) in New Amsterdam, married twice.
4. LIEUT. PIETER WOLPHERTSE VAN COUWENHOVEN, son of Wolphert Gerretse van Couwenhoven and Neeltgen Jacobsdochter, born circa 1614 in Amersfoort, Utrecht, the Netherlands, baptised in the Dutch Reformed Church of Amersfoort. His name is variously spelled in contemporary records as "Pieter Wolfertsen Van Kouwenhoven, "Peter Van Cowenhoven," "Pieter Kowenhoven," and "Pieter Van Couwenhoven." Pieter accompanied his father and brothers to the colony of New Netherland (New York) in 1630, initially living at Albany, then in Manhattan for a few decades, and finally settling at Elizabethtown, Essex County, New Jersey, where in 1688 Pieter is known to have been a brewer. Pieter had spent time in prison at Manhattan in 1671 because he had defaulted on a mortgage of Elizabethtown property to Governor Philip Carteret of New Jersey.
Pieter Wolphertse Van Kouwenhoven. Pieter was commissioned as a lieutenant during the Esopus War on 30 June 1663 -- the Esopus War was a retaliatory military action by the Dutch colonists on hostile Indians who had massacred most of the men of Esopus (Kingston, New York), destroyed the settlement, and taken the women and children to augment their tribe's numbers. Aided by friendly Native Americans, the Dutch counterattacked and destroyed some native camps and strong places, but apparently could not recover the captives. Pieter was one of the signers of the 1664 peace treaty that ended the Esopus War.
The marriage record of Pieter Wolphertse van Couwenhoven and his first wife Hester Simons, dated 2 Dec. 1640, from Manhattan Collegiate Church records.
On 2 Dec. 1640 at the Dutch Reformed Church of New Amsterdam (New York) Pieter married a widow named HESTER SYMONS DAWS, born circa 1620, died before 4 Nov. 1665 in New Amsterdam (New York City), daughter of Symon Daws. Pieter and Hester had a son and at least one daughter (probably two daughters). However, a little over a year after their marriage, and before he and Hester had any children together, Pieter formally acknowledged and adopted his own illegitimate daughter Aeltje, who had been born to him by MARIA DE TRUY, wife of Cornelis Volckersen. This is known from a document of acknowledgement and adoption, dated 7 Jan. 1642, that Pieter prepared and signed with his mark. The document reads as follows:
I, the undersigned Pieter Wolphersen, hereby acknowledge for myself, my heirs and successors that this day, date underwritten, I have adopted, as I do hereby adopt, Aeltje Pieters van Couwenhoven, my own daughter, whom I have begotten and procreated by Maria de Truy, promising therefore that from this date I shall do by the above-named, my daughter, as a God fearing father is bound and ought to do by his own legitimate daughter; therefore, I hereby discharge and release Cornelis Volckersen, husband and guardian of the aforesaid Maria de Truy, from all charges and responsibilities incidental to the bringing up of a child till she becomes of age; I, Pieter Wolphersen, promising to look after the child, to let her learn to read and to bring her up according to my means.
Furthermore, if I do not beget any children by my present wife, the above named child shall be my rightful heiress and inheritrix, as if she were duly begotten in lawful wedlock, and if it happens that children be begotten by me and my wife, the above named Aeltjen Pieters shall receive, like the legitimate children on my side, a just child's portion of all such goods, means and effects as it shall please the Lord God Almighty to bestow on me. Requesting that this may have effect before all courts, I have signed this without fraud in the presence of the subscribing witnesses hereto invited. Done, the 7th day of January 1642.
This is X the mark of Pieter Wolphersen
Jacob Couwenhoven
Philippe du Trieux
Acknowledged before me, Cornelis van Tienhoven, Secretary.
From this statement, we know that Pieter and Maria had a daughter out of wedlock named Aeltje. It is not clear, however, whether Maria was already married to Cornelis Volckersen when she became pregnant by Pieter. Thus, it may be a case of adultery on Maria's part, and her husband understandably did not want to raise another man's child; or it may be that Pieter and Maria were both unmarried when they conceived Aeltje, and that when Maria married Cornelis he was unwilling to raise Pieter's illegitimate daughter. One way or another, by this declaration Pieter "legitimated" his daughter Aeltje.
Pieter's first wife Hester is known to have died before 4 Nov. 1665, because it was on that date that Pieter and AELTJE SIBRANTS, a widow of New Amsterdam, obtained a license to marry in New Amsterdam. Pieter and Aeltje married on 22 Nov. 1665 in New Amsterdam. They are known to have had a single child, a son named Peter. However, Aeltje died while giving birth to Peter circa May 1668. Pieter subsequently had their son Peter baptised at the Dutch Reformed Church of New Amsterdam on 27 Feb. 1669.
The marriage record of Pieter Wolphertse van Couwenhoven his second wife Aeltje Sibrants, dated 4 Nov. 1665, from Manhattan Collegiate Church records.
Some genealogists say Pieter married a third time on 19 May 1699 in New York City to JOSYNTHE THOMAS. However, David Kipp Conover Jr. notes that, "Not all historians agree that this marriage took place," instead showing Josynthe as one of Pieter's daughters. In any case, Pieter and Josynthe apparently did not have any children together.
The date and place of Pieter's death is unknown. Some online sources show his place of death as New York City, others show Brooklyn, New York, but the most probable guess is that he died in Elizabethtown, New Jersey. As for the year of his death, guesses include circa 1675, 1689, or circa 1699 -- but as he moved to Elizabethtown after 1675 he obviously could not have died then; nor, if he remarried in 1699, could he have died in 1689. Most likely he died after 1699.
The following informative biographical and genealogical sketch of Lieut. Pieter van Couwenhoven's life was published in Alfred Miller Heston's Absegami: Annals of Eyren Haven and Atlantic City, 1609 to 1904 (1904), pages 95-96:
Peter Covenhoven, or Conover, purchased land in what is now Atlantic County in 1695, between which date and 1698 he took up 150 acres in one tract, also 250 acres bounding on Great Egg Harbor River and Patconk Creek.
The founder of this family was Wolphert Garretson Van Courvenhoven, who came from Amersfoot, in the province of Utrecht, Holland, in 1630, and settled near Albany. He soon afterwards removed to Manhattan Island and was enrolled among the burghers of New Amsterdam, now New York. In 1636 he bought a tract of land on Long Island of the Indians, for which he received confirmation of patent from the Dutch in 1658. This tract was known as Flatlands, and here he died in 1662. He had sons Jacob, Garret and Peter, all born in Holland, who came over with him in 1630. The son Peter, from whom descended the Conovers of Atlantic, was married three times. He first married Hester Symons Dows, December 2, 1640; second Alye Sybrants, November 22, 1665; third Josyntee Thomas, May 19, 1699.
Peter Conover was settled in New Amsterdam (New York) as early as 1633. He engaged in mercantile pursuits with his brother Jacob, who was a miller, a considerable trade being carried on in flour, which was bolted in windmills. Jacob became embarrassed in some private speculations and Peter separated his business connections. The property of Jacob, consisting of a good stone dwelling and a mill, was sold. Peter continued his mercantile pursuits and also engaged in brewing, then a profitable business. He also held civil positions and was a magistrate in 1652-4-8-9 and 1661-3. His residence in New York was in Pearl street, near Whitehall, and his place of business at the corner of those streets. He was also a lieutenant in the military service under General Stuyvesant, and on several occasions was in service against unfriendly Indians. In 1663 the Dutch who were settled at Esopus (now Kingston), on the Hudson River, were set upon by a large band of savages. The male portion of the settlers had gone to the field to their accustomed labor, when a number of savages entered the village in a careless manner, sauntering among the inhabitants. Soon after, they sounded their war whoop and began to kill or take captive the women and children. Many of the men were also killed in the field. The total loss of the Dutch was seventy; twenty-five killed and forty-five taken captive. Twelve dwellings, being every house, were destroyed. The mill alone was left. General Stuyvesant ordered Captain Martin Kriger and Lieutenant Covenhoven to retaliate. Their company consisted of two hundred and ten men. of whom forty were friendly Indians, and they marched to Esopus late one afternoon in July. Proceeding four miles, they halted until the moon rose and then marched again, but the country being wild they could not proceed by night. The day being come, they marched forward, felling trees to cross streams, for they had wagons and a cannon. With great difficulty they proceeded twenty-four miles and came within four miles of an Indian fort, to which all the captives had been taken. Lieutenant Covenhoven was sent forward with one hundred and sixteen men to surprise the fort, but the Indians had decamped to the mountains, taking their captives with them. Covenhoven continued in hot pursuit and reached an Indian camp, but that too was deserted. The pursuit was given tip after burning up the Indian stores of maize, beans and grain growing. They then marched to another fort, thirty-six miles distant, when a fight took place and several savages were killed.
Some years later Covenhoven became involved in lawsuits and his temper was soured by some adverse decisions in suits to which he was a party. As he thought these decisions unjust, he made some remarks derogatory of the character of the court, for which he was sentenced to a brief imprisonment and fined. For these reasons he left New Amsterdam in disgust, and Valentine's New York Manual says he retired to a farm which he owned at Elizabethtown, New Jersey, where he spent most of his time.
The surname of this family, originally Courvenhoven, it is said, means "cold farms." In earliest New Jersey records it is given as Corvenhoven, Covenover and Covenhoven, and about the time of the Revolution many members adopted the spelling now generally used of Conover. The descendants in old Gloucester of Peter Covenhoven have a good Revolutionary record. One Peter Covenhoven was a lieutenant, commissioned November 14, 1777; Isaac, John and Joseph were privates. Of those who gave their names as Conover, David, Jesse, Micajah, Peter and Peter B., were soldiers in that war. The family branched over into other counties, and among these Isaiah Conover was a member of the Legislature many years ago from Salem County. Another descendant named Joseph went to old Monmouth County, and was in the Legislature in 1824-26. The given names of Peter and Joseph are quite frequent among descendants of the first Peter. The name of the founder of the Conover family, Wolphert Garretson Van Courvenhoven, means Wolphert the son of Garret of Courvenhoven. Garret, the father of Wolphert, must have been born over three hundred years ago, as his grandson, Peter, was in business in New York in 1633. The Conovers have substantial claim to he considered an old family, as their known family record dates back at least three centuries.
The children of Pieter Wolphertse Van Couwenhoven were:
-- AELTJE PIETERS VAN COUWENHOVEN, born before 7 Jan. 1642 in New Amsterdam (New York City).
-- ANNETJE PIETERS [VAN COUWENHOVEN], married Anders Olofsson Stille.
-- HESTER PIETERS VAN COUWENHOVEN, born after 1641, married Johannis Martin.
-- CORNELIUS PETERSE VAN COUWENHOVEN, born after 1641, settled in New Jersey.
5. PETER PETERSE VAN COUWENHOVEN, born probably in May 1668 on Long Island, New York.
5. PETER PETERSE VAN COUWENHOVEN ("Petrus Van Kouwenhoven," "Peter Covenhoven," "Peter Covenover"), son of Lieut. Pieter and Aeltje van Couwenhoven, born probably in May 1668 on Long Island, New York, baptised 27 Feb. 1669 at the Dutch Reformed Church of New Amsterdam (New York City), died in 1705 (before 17 March 1705) at Great Egg Harbor, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Peter's mother Aeltje died in giving birth to him. His surname is variously spelled in contemporary records as "Van Kouwenhoven," "Covenhoven," "Covenover," and "Cownover." About the year 1695, Peter married MARY (NN), by whom he is known to have had three sons and two daughters.
On 29 Nov. 1695, Peter purchased 250 acres of land along Patconk Creek in Great Egg Harbor Township from Thomas Budd, a merchant of Philadelphia, "under ye yearly quit rent of one ear of Indian Corne to be paid ye said Thomas Budd or hs heirs, if lawfully demanded." On 30 Jan. 1698, Peter bought an additional 150 acres in Great Egg Harbor Township from Daniel Leeds.
Regarding Peter's will, David Kipp Conover Jr. says, "There is some confusion about the date of the will of Peter 'Cownover' of Waymouth Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey. The date was either Nov. 10, 1700, or Nov. 30, 1702." In any case, Peter died probably in early 1705, because an inventory of Peter Cownover's estate was taken on 17 March 1704/5. His will was proved on 21 March 1704/5 at Great Egg Harbor, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Here follows an abstract of his will, as found in Documents Relating to the Colonial History of the State of New Jersey -- Vol. XXIII: Calendar of New Jersey Wills, Vol. I, 1670-1730, page 112:
1702 (?) 30th d. 9 m. (Nov.). Cownover, Peter, of Waymouth Township, Gloucester Co.; will of. Wife Mary. Children: Peter, John, David, Hester, Mary. A tract of 150 acres between Francis Collings and Johnathan Leeds, 150 a. between John Scull and James Stellman, farm of 100 acres; personal property. The wife sole executrix. Witnesses' names do not appear, but in proof of will March 21, 1704-5, John Sommers and Thomas Oliver are mentioned as witnesses. The record gives as date of will 10th d. 9th m., 1700. Lib. I, p. 99, and Gloucester Wills 1704-5 17th d. 1st m. (March). Inventory of the personal estate, £60.13.-; made by John Somers and Richard Gregory.
The children of Peter and Mary Covenover were:
-- PETER COVENOVER, born circa 1696 in Great Egg Harbor Township, Gloucester Co., New Jersey, died betw. 27 June 1730 and 21 Aug. 1730 in Great Egg Harbor Township, married Elizabeth (NN).
6. JOHN COVENOVER, born probably before 1700 in Great Egg Harbor Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey.
-- DAVID COWNOVER, born probably before 1700 in New Jersey, died after 1735, married Sarah.
-- MARY COWENOVER, born probably before 1700 in New Jersey, died before 1738, married John Adams.
-- HESTER COWNOVER, born 10 Nov. 1700 Weymouth, Gloucester County, New Jersey, died after 22 Sept. 1755, married Richard Risley.
6. JOHN COVENOVER, son of Peter and Mary Covenover, born probably before 1700 in Great Egg Harbor Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey, died probably in Feb. 1771 in Great Egg Harbor Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey. His surname is variously spelled in contemporary records as "Conover," Covenover," "Covenhoven," "Cownover," and "Van Couwenhoven." He married circa 1710 to SARAH ADAMS, born perhaps circa 1700 in Huntington, Long Island, New York, daughter of Jeremiah and Deborah Adams. John and Sarah had four sons and three daughters.
In 1718, John purchased purchased about 300 or 400 acres of land from Peter White -- the land was located in present-day southern Absecon and northern Pleasantville, between Absecon Bay and Conover's Creek (between Shore Road and New Road). His land was bordered by Samuel Gale's land to the south and Thomas Risley's to the north. John, a yeoman farmer, held the office of Surveyor of Highways for Gloucester County in 1731.
John made his will on 19 May 1762 at Great Egg Harbor. Here follows an abstract of his will, as found in Documents Relating to the Colonial and Revolutionary History of the State of New Jersey -- First Series - Vol. XXXIV: Calendar of New Jersey Wills, Administrations, Etc., Volume V, 1771-1780, page 112:
"Covenover, John, of Great Egg Harbor Township, Gloucester Co., yeoman; will of. Eldest son, John, ½ of my plantation where I live, it being the southwest side, and joins Samuel Risley, containing 150 acres; also ½ of 50 acres of backland. Son, Joseph, the other ½ of my plantation, which joins Richard Risley; also ½ of the 50 acres of backland. Son, Peter, land between David Addoms and Nehemiah Leeds, being the ½ of the plantation, formerly belonging to Jeremiah Addoms. Son, Jeremiah, a bond of David Addoms, and mortgage. Sons, John, Peter and Joseph, my cedar swamp on the south branch of Absecon; also 2 lots of cedar swamp, at or near the head of Badcock's Creek. Daughter, Sarah, £5. Daughter, Rebecah, £5. Daughter, Mary, £5. Wife, Sarah, rest of personal estate. Executors--wife, Sarah, and my son, John. Witnesses--John Ingersul, Micajah Covenover, Rebecah Risley."
John died probably in early 1771 and certainly before 19 Feb. 1771, when an inventory of his estate of taken by John Steelman and John Ingersoll. The inventory valued his estate at £176.18.0 and include a Negro woman slave. His will was proved 26 March 1771.
The children of John and Sarah Covenover were:
7. JOHN COVENOVER ("John Conover"), born circa 1722 in Great Egg Harbor Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey.
-- JEREMIAH CONOVER, born in New Jersey, died 1774 (before 18 Aug. 1774).
-- REBECCA COVENOVER, born in New Jersey, married James Scull.
-- MARY CONOVER, born in New Jersey, died after 19 May 1762.
-- PETER CONOVER, born circa 1739 in Gloucester County, New Jersey, died between 1 April 1779 and 15 May 1779 in Gloucester County, New Jersey, married Sarah (NN).
-- SARAH CONOVER, born 20 Jan. 1723 in Great Egg Harbour, Galloway Township, Atlantic County, New Jersey, died 1 March 1796, married Joseph Dole Jr.
-- CAPT. JOSEPH CONOVER, born circa 1741 in New Jersey, died Dec. 1801, married Sarah Steelman.
7. JOHN COVENOVER ("John Conover"), son of John and Sarah Covenover, born circa 1722 in Great Egg Harbor Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey, died in 1781 (before 3 May 1781) in Great Egg Harbor Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey. His surname is variously spelled in contemporary records as "Covenover," "Covenhoven," "Cownover," and "Conover." In 1778 he held the position of Overseer of the Poor. John married three times. He first married before 1750 to a woman named CATHERINE (NN), who died before 1776. John and Catherine apparently had no children together, or at least none who survived to adulthood. John remarried circa 1776 to (NN), who died in or circa 1777 -- again, John had no children of this marriage, or none who survived to adulthood. He married a third time on 30 Oct. 1778 at Greenwich Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey, to LETITIA CLARK ("Letisha," "Letishew"), born perhaps circa 1760 in New Jersey. John and Letitia had two sons and four daughters.
John died prior to 3 May 1781, when an inventory of his estate was taken. Administration of his estate was granted to his widow Letitia on 5 May 1781, as we find in Documents Relating to the Colonial History of the State of New Jersey -- Calendar of New Jersey Wills, Volume VI, 1781-1785, page 97, which says, "1781, May 5. Covenhoven, John, of Gloucester Co. Int. Adm'x -- Letitia Covenhoven. Fellowbondsman -- Enoch Willson; both of said Co. 1781, May 3. Inventory, £83.15.2, made by Enoch Willson and Allen Sharp. Lib. 23, p. 343"
The children of John and Letitia Covenover were:
-- ISAAC CONOVER, born in New Jersey, married twice.
-- JOB CONOVER, born in New Jersey, died before 4 May 1839, married Rebecca Somers.
-- SOPHIA COVENOVER, born in New Jersey, died 12 March 1823, married James Steelman.
-- SUSANNA CONOVER, born circa 1778 in New Jersey.
-- SARAH CONOVER, born in New Jersey, married David Adams.
-- SYLVIA CONOVER, born in New Jersey, married (NN) Drake.
8. SUSANNA CONOVER, daughter of John and Letitia Conover, born circa 1778 in New Jersey, died circa 1850 in Egg Harbor, Gloucester County, New Jersey. On 28 May 1798 in New Jersey, Susanna married her second cousin ENOCH SOMERS, born circa 1761 in Galloway Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey, died circa 1803 and certainly before 1 Oct. 1804 in Galloway Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey, son of Isaac and Maryann Somers. Susanna and Enoch were both great-grandchildren of Jeremiah Adams of Huntington, Long Island, and Great Egg Harbor, New Jersey. Enoch Somers appears on the 1784, 1785, 1786, 1789 and 1802 tax lists for Galloway Township. Susanna and Enoch had two sons and a daughter. After Enoch's death, Susanna remarried on 1 Oct. 1804 to Enoch's younger brother ISAAC SOMERS JR., born 20 Aug. 1767 in Galloway Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey, died between 19 Aug. 1826 and 15 Feb. 1827 in Galloway Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey. Susanna and Isaac had two daughters and a son.
The will of Enoch's father Isaac Somers Sr., dated 28 Dec. 1809, names Isaac's "Two grandsons, Isaac and Enock (sons of my dec'd son, Enock)" and "their three sisters, Silvey, Judith and Susanna." All five of these grandchildren of Isaac Somers Sr. were born of Susanna (Conover) Somers. Based on the dates of Susanna (Conover) Somers' two marriages, and the stated dates of birth of Enoch's sons Isaac and Enoch and of their sister Susannah, those three must have been children of Enoch, while the daughters Silvia and Judith must have been born to Enoch's younger brother Isaac Jr. Silvia and Judith also had a younger brother named William -- the fact that William is not named in the will of his grandfather Isaac Sr. indicates that he was born after 23 Dec. 1809.
The children of Susanna and Enoch Somers, along with the children born of Susanna's second marriage to Enoch's brother Isaac, were:
-- ISAAC SOMERS, born 1799 in Galloway Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey.
-- SUSANNAH SOMERS, born circa 1801 in Galloway Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey.
-- ENOCH SOMERS JR., born 6 Oct. 1803 in Galloway Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey, died 6 March 1872.
-- SILVIA SOMERS ("Silvey"), born circa 1805 in Galloway Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey.
-- JUDITH SOMERS, born circa 1807 in Galloway Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey.
-- WILLIAM SOMERS, born circa 1810 in Galloway Township, Gloucester County, New Jersey, died 8 March 1871.
Conover-Van Couwenhoven Genealogy Resources:
Descendants of Wolphert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven, beginning with Wolphert's father Gerret. Find-A-Grave: Wolfert Gerretse Van Kouwenhoven Wikitree: Gerrit (Jansz) van Couwenhoven (1516-1604), with link to Gerret's alleged ancestry for five generations. We Relate: Wolfert Gerretse van Kouwenhoven.