Angela van Bengale
about 1646 – before 1720-07-18 · van Bengale line
Names
- Given
- Angela
- Surname
- van Bengale
The formal baptismal name and the name a person was actually called are both kept, and neither is derived from the other. Spelling drift between records is evidence, not noise.
Three generations around this person
Work out how this person is related to somebody else →
Click any name and the same three generations are drawn around that person instead. There is no first couple here and no top to the tree: it is only ever the family standing closest to whoever you are reading about, and a blank is a gap in the record rather than a statement about anybody.
Immediate family
- Children
- Michiel Basson
A life in the record
- before 1720-07-18 died Died
- about 1646 born Born
Stories
- mentioned A woman's forty-six possessions
What we don't know
- Neither parent is recorded, so this person is not attached to the tree above them.
- No dated record ties this person to a specific piece of ground.
A sourced gap beats an unsourced fill. These are the open questions on this person, stated rather than papered over.
Research notes
A DIRECT ANCESTOR, at eleven generations, by a second and separate line from Catharina van MalabarM: Angela van BengaleH -> Anna de Koningh -> Christina Bergh -> Johannes Carolus de Wet -> and onward to the anchor. So the two are not one story told twice; they are two women, on two lines, both in this ancestry. Her recorded partners are Arnoldus Willemsz Basson, Francois de Coninck and Johannis van Asschen, and she died on 18 July 1720 - a dated death, which is more than most people of her status in the early Cape were given. NO PLACE IS ASSERTED HERE. The private tree gives a birthplace, but this project treats the tree's place strings as hostile and they are least reliable exactly where they matter most - on people carried across an ocean. The toponym in the NAME is what the Cape record itself used and is recorded as written. VERIFICATION ROUTE: the First Fifty Years project, which transcribes the Cape records of 1652 onward and documents enslaved and free-black people rather than only settlers. Nothing here should be repeated as established until it is checked against a transcribed record. [TREE] [TO VERIFY]
[15 Aug 2026, FS] FamilySearch id filled from the FamilySearch id field of the family tree exports, matched on this row's own tree id and accepted only because the tree's NAME AND YEARS agree with this row. It is a door to the sources, not a source: nothing here is taken from the profile.
[22 Sep 2026, SRC-664] FIRST FIFTY YEARS g6/p6260.htm (Wayback snapshot 20241009125621): arrived on the Amersfoort, 21 February 1657; sold by Van Riebeeck to Gabbema 19 April 1662; freed with three children by Abraham Gabbema 13 April 1666; granted an erf in the Heerestraat 25 February 1667; baptised 29 April 1668; married Arnoldus Willemsz Basson of Wesel 15 December 1669, seven Basson children; will 13 January 1718. DEATH DATE CORRECTED from 1720-07-18 to ../1720-07-18: that day is the date BY which she was dead, not the day she died. [FFY; originals it cites to pull]
These are working notes, not finished prose: they carry the reasoning, the corrections and the things still marked to verify. They are kept here so the page itself can read as what is known.
Open questions
-
FamilySearch ids for the enslaved and free-black ancestors, and for Anthony van de Kaap
priority 1 · LEAD-0112
Eleven people at the head of this family — the ten of S021 plus Catharina van PalliacattaM — and the one enslaved man in the family's own estate papers carry no FamilySearch id between them. Which of them have profiles, and what are the ids?
What would settle it An id per person, or a recorded finding that no profile exists.
-
Import the nine Cape descent chains - they are Frans's own ancestry, generation 9 to 13
priority 1 · LEAD-0116
Eight of S021's ten have no recorded child in this model, so the site names a descent it cannot walk. The private tree holds every chain. Importing them means about fifty new person rows across the de Wet, Mocke, Duminy, Snyman, van Dyk, Janse van Vuuren, Smuts and du Preez lines. Is that in scope?
What would settle it Frans deciding. A middle course exists: import only the chains that reach families the site actually writes about, and leave the rest as a stated gap on the page.
Elders
FamilySearch profile LH2P-G72