Big changes have come to — all content is now read-only, and member subscriptions and the Shop have been discontinued.
Learn more

Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: VanSickle Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Re: Van Siclen/Van Sicklen Controversy revisited”
Posted by: Ed Gusman (ID *****7908) Date: December 05, 2002 at 21:51:04
In Reply to: Re: Van Siclen/Van Sicklen Controversy revisited” by D G Van Curen of 1585

Hi there guy....

Quoting your last paragraph - "Church records in Dutchess County New York readily prove that Simon Lawson and Simon Lassen and Simon Latson and Simon Lasson and Simon Lassing(plus all of those for Simeon) are all the same man."

The above church records are without merit. They do not record a birth father for Hannah Lossing.

I know from your Van Sicklen genealogy that the father of Annetje Lawson was Simeon Lawson I care not about the various names for a Simeon Lawson.
13 May, 1756: Syman LASSING marries Margrieta Van Keuren
29 Oct, 1756(short gestation periods back then):Simon Lassen and Margreit Van Keuren baptise daughter Marya
2 Jun 1764:Simeon Lassing and Grietje Van Keuren baptise twins Johannes and Willem
16 Nov, 1765: Simon LASSING/Margaretha Van Keuren baptise daughter Geertruy
24 Oct, 1769: Simeon LASSEN and wife, Margriet, sponsor a baptism for Johannes Lassen
15 Apr, 1770: Simeon LASSON(note this spelling) and Geertje Van Keuren baptise son Benjamin. Ed will claim these are differnet people because of the spelling, but the baptism sponsors are Matheus and Annatje (Green)Van Keuren, brother and sister in law of Margriet Van Keuren who married Syman Lassing in 1756.
15 Nov, 1771: Simeon LASSEN and wife Margriet Van Keuren sponsor a baptism for Tjerck Van Keuren/Maria Westerveld, brother and sister in law of Matheus and Margriet Van Keuren
May 17, 1772: Simeon LASSEN and Margriet Van Keuren baptise daughter Catharina

Hannah Lawson - 23 Oct, 1774, Simeon LASSON and wife Margriet Van Keuren baptise daughter Annatje...named for sister in law Annatje Green. Note that the spelling is LASSON.
Interesting but proves only that Simeon Lasson had a daughter whose name should be Annetje Lasson. (like father like daughter) Why did you tamper with the spelling and change it to Lawson? Please - in future correspondence use exact spellings as they appear in your reference records.

Margariet Van Keuren lends credence to the possibility that Simeon Lasson is Simeon Lawson. However, that is of relatively little importance.

I know from your Van Sicklen genealogy that the father of Annetje Lawson was Simeon Lawson I care not about the various names for a Simeon Lawson.

Page 313 of the New Hackensack Church index says "Lassen(see also Lansing, Lasse, Lassing, Lasson, Lauson, Lossing, Lawson).

Again interesting but does not show who the birth father of Hannah Lossing is.

Names appearing in an index cannot be used as a basis for proving that all of the surnames apply to the same man. Have you checked the index/page referenced to determine if each male surname has the same maiden name for a wife?

Please provide in your next posting and from whatever record you use, an exact copy of the entry recording the birth of Hannah Lossing include both the father's and mother's surnames.

In future correspondence where you include male surnames please also include the wife's maiden name or state that it is not available.

If you are to prove that Hannah Lossing can be aka'd into replacing Annetje Lawson it is absolutely imperative that the name of Hannah Lossing's parents are known.

If Margariet Van Keuren does not appear as the mother of Hannah Lossing along a fathers name of Simeon Lawson or Lasson you cannot aka Hannah Lossing as a replacment for Annetje Lawson.

Doug wrote "The Van Siclen/Eastling history is soon to be published in it's proper lineage within the Van Keuren family history......"

Publish or publish not as you see fit. Only be certain that what you include matches exactly what is written in the affidavits. Or alternatively be certain that you source with a notation information that there are affidavits available and where they can be obtained.

I suggest that if you intend to publish anything addressing the Eastling lineage, including Cornelius Van Siclen and Catherine Johnson without sourcing the fact that there are refuting affidavites and you plan on changing anything in the affidavits prior to including the data in your genealogy, including the removal of Catherine Johnson and the testimony that Cornelius Van Siclen was a Revolutionary Veteran, that you first consult your attorney. Bear in mind that only the Courts can alter the contents of a sworn and notarized affidavit.

Specifically mention to your attorney and show him this e-mail, that it is sworn and notarized affidavit content that you plan on altering and including in your genealogy but you do not plan on providing a reference or source where the the affidavits can be found or what affidavit content you changed.

Frankly young or old man if you include anything in the Eastling lineage using what I e-mailed you, you will take on the appearance of an incompetent research fool. There have been that many changes.


Let me know who will be publishing your genealogy and exactly when - I look forward to reading it.

Notify Administrator about this message?

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network