Baptism 9 January 1692, Amsterdam: Maria de Nijs, daughter of Jacob de Nijs and Janna Marij Bousijn
church register (original scan) + index entry · consulted 2026-08-06
- Type
- church register (original scan) + index entry
- Repository
- FamilySearch, "Netherlands, Noord-Holland, Church Records" > Nederlands Hervormde > Amsterdam > Dopen 1677-1748; indexed in "Netherlands, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1910"
- Reference
- Dopen 1677-1748, image 168 of 649, under the heading Ao 1692 Januario; index ark:/61903/1:1:XB5V-D4G
- Consulted
- 2026-08-06
The citation as it was given
THE ENTRY, READ BY ITS COLUMNS, which is how an Amsterdam doopregister is laid out - date, father, mother, witnesses, and the child's name out in the right margin: '9 Januario | V[ader]: JACOB DE NIJS | M[oeder]: JANNA MARIJ BOUSIJN | G[etuige]: MAREA GAETJIN' - child MARIA. The superscript on the first abbreviation is a d, so it is VADER. This note first expanded it as 'Vr[ouw]', which would have made Jacob de Nijs the WIFE and inverted the entry; A later hand has written 17-29/7-43 at the foot of the column, which is not part of this entry. Note also that the fragment at the far left of the image - a name ending -illem and what looks like Geeters - belongs to the PRECEDING entry, not this one. WHY IT MATTERS FAR MORE THAN ONE BAPTISM. The FamilySearch index record for this entry is ATTACHED IN THE TREE TO TWO WOMEN: Johanna Maria Boesijns (9J1K-S7X) and MARIJ ZACHARIAS (LJR9-7H8), the Cape-born daughter of Maria van Bengale. The register names the mother JANNA MARIJ BOUSIJN. Zacharias is not Bousijn, and Amsterdam in 1692 is not the Cape. This is the likeliest explanation of the arithmetic that would not close on that branch - Marij Zacharias born 1660, married December 1672, son born about 1671 - and it is not a wrong date. It is TWO WOMEN RECORDED AS ONE, upstream of this project, with the splice carried into the private tree. The tree's places point the same way: Jacob Jansz De Nijs is placed at Amsterdam, Jan De Nys at Duesseldorf, their descendants at Mauritius and then Cape Town, which is a European family arriving, not a Cape family. Places are hostile evidence here and are used only as a pointer. WHAT THIS DOES NOT SETTLE: the 1692 record is the baptism of a DAUGHTER, Maria, not of Jan De Nys born about 1671, so it does not by itself name Jan's mother. LEAD-0118.
Kept verbatim. This project contradicts published genealogies and corrects a family's own oral tradition, so every claim has to be checkable by someone who was not in the room.
Nothing in the model cites this source yet.