Willem Stolts, Slave/freed - Locking Profile completely

If you want to have a discussion about what a DNA test proves, you need to upload it and reference that - and explain how it constitutes proof.

That way everyone can participate.

Karen, I'm battling to follow you here. You are aware that Geni is one world collective tree, and it is you who are adding information to our tree, not the other way around? As a PRO user it seems unlikely that you don't know that it is you who are putting information into the public domain above.

Delia Robertson or Private do either of you have access to the article about him in Familia: Margaret Cairns, "Willem Stolts of the Cape - 1692-1750", Familia (Willem Stolts of the Cape - 1692-1750) XXVII/1990 No. 2 (1990): p.46-50 it's much referenced, but nowhere available to read that I can find.

Karen - it isn't clear what you want to prove. (I also can't see the doc attached - can you do that again?)

1 Do you want Willem Stolts not be the grandfather of your YDNA:R-M269 relative(?) Marcus Stoltz?

Right now, the 'paper trail' of the connections of the profiles you put onto geni look like this:

Willem Stolts, Slave/freed
→ Gabriel Stoltz Stolts, b2 his foster son → Gabriel Stoltz his son → Gabriel Stoltz his son → Gabriel Gerhardus Frederik Stoltz his son → Coenraad Frederik Stoltz his son → Willem Johannes Stoltz his son → <private> Stoltz his son → <private> Stoltz his son → Karen Stoltz his daughter

You can remove any of the profiles managed only by yourself from this Descent Line. Let me know if you need my help disconnecting.

2. Do you want Willem Stolts to be shown as the son of Gottfried Stolts ?

June's Curator note tells you why he isn't shown as that on Geni:
Curator Note from June Barnes (25/9/2019):
Willem Stolts was born in bondage c. 1692/93 - no Baptism record found
He could not be the son of Gottfried Stoltz (b. 1697) who arrived in the Cape in 1712.
Do not link him to Gottfried Stoltz as his son.
Parents unknown - lack of sources

As June says, we need the sources to prove that Gottfried Stoltz was in the country at the time of Willem's conception - otherwise we look a bit ridiculous. That no sources have been found yet, doesn't mean they can't ever be. If you've found some sources to prove parentage, this is the place to raise them for Discussion. We would all celebrate if we could justify adding another generation to this (or any) line on geni. It's what we're all here for.

3. Do you want Willem Stolts not to have been born a slave?

You do understand that many slaves had European fathers, don't you? This is common at the Cape at the time (and it's why most of the South African Afrikaner population have a percentage of their atDNA that is non-European).

The YDNA:R-M269 is one of/if not the most common European YDNA profiles there is. My father has it. The GENI GM, Mike Stangel, has it.

If your Stolz paper trail to Willem is correct, it simply proves that he had a European father. This is highly likely to be true. We pretty much expect that he did. It doesn't disprove the documentation that tells us he was a slave though.

I don't understand how your reference to the MTDNA:J1c2c1 is relevant to this discussion. It appears to have no bearing at all on Willem Stolts' DNA profile?

Neither do I understand how the DNA of Walter FitzAlan, 1st High Steward of Scotland is relevant here. At 29 generations distance it could never be proved that his Y DNA is in William. Of course it's possible that William had a European father who was a Stewart descendant - that must encompass thousands and thousands of us.

PTID:6000000178793884842:6000000089668476949 -- if you have a problem with the activity of any curator, or indeed any user, please contact misconduct@geni.com to report it.

The discussion forum is not the place to do that.

Thanks for removing those, Anne. I take it they were pretty libelous, and not responding to the questions about the specifics of the problem Karen is wanting looked at.

Sharon Doubell do you perhaps a month or year or edition of the Familia.I willgladly get t and forward to you If you could just send your email address to me again, that will be better. I have lost all my contacts thank to the thieves.

Will do, Judi: Margaret Cairns, "Willem Stolts of the Cape - 1692-1750", Familia (Willem Stolts of the Cape - 1692-1750) XXVII/1990 No. 2 (1990): p.46-50

Racist, libelous and misinformed comments aside, it would be good to get a source onto this profile that documents his reported servility.

Agreed. Judi is searching for it as we speak.

We have this from Stamouers about Gottfried Stolts and Esther du Buisson; but it doesn't solve the issue pointed to in June's CN.

STOLZ Gottfried Written by AM van Rensburg. Posted in R - U

Gottfried Stolz van die dorp, Sonnenberg, het in 1712 op die skip, Arentsduijn, in die Kaap aangekom. Hy was van plan om sy vrou se bedoel aan die Kaap te kom beredder. Sy vrou was Ester du Buisson, weduwee van Jan Hendrik Carnak. In 1720 vra hy om weens sy gebreklike hand en die feit dat hy nie selfonderhoudend kan wees nie, na Europa terug te keer. Die owerhede voldoen aan sy versoek, maar in 1741 keer hy eindelik weer na die Kaap terug om sy vrou se boedel finaal te beredder. Dit is nie bekend of sy familie in Europa gedurende die bykans 21 jaar dat hy weg was, vir hom moes onderhou nie.

C. 119, pp. 92-103. Dingsdag den 12 December 1741, ’s voormiddags. Geeven reverentelijk te kennen weesmeesteren deser steede hoe ter haarer vergadering van den 22 der jongst afgeweekene maand November door hunnen president is te kennen gegeeven dat eijndelijk met den persoon van Godfried stolts wegens zoodaenig proces als deselve aanvankelijk in den jaare 1712 teegens Sijn E. schoonvader, wijlen den oud burgerraad Sr. Michiel Leij [6] (die nevens den burger Fredrik van der Lind [7] gemagtigdens waren van sijn stolts voorsaat den opperchirurgijn Jan Hendrik Carnak [8] en sedert tegens de vertoonders als administrateurs des boedels van gesegde Sr. Leij had gemoveert, [9] niet alleen tot een minnelijk vergelijk was gecomen en die saak blijkens de door Sijn E. vertoont werdende secretariaale acte van acquit volkomentlijk vereffend, maar selfs ook alle de nog overige papieren dewelke nu eenigen tijt herwaarts onder den oud burgerraad Sr. Abraham Cloppenburg, als gesubstitueerde gemagtigde van eenen Joris de Bok, voor een somma van ƒ850 Hollands waaren verpand geweest, uijt handen van hem stolts hadde ontfangen ende dus dat veeljaarig proces ganschelijk ten eijnden gebragt.

Die vrygestelde slaaf, Willem, was sy seun.

Bronne: Resolusies van die Politieke Raad C. 35, pp. 66-72. Dingsdagh den 21en Januarij 1716

J. Hoge, Personalia of the Germans at the Cape

Bydrae: AM van Rensburg

On the About: Willem Stolts was born in 1692/93 in bondage at the Cape of Good Hope
Reference Margaret Cairns, "Willem Stolts of the Cape - 1692-1750", Familia (Willem Stolts of the Cape - 1692-1750) XXVII/1990 No. 2 (1990): p.46-50

Willem Stolts was a slave for the first 32 years of his life. At the time of his death he was described as a vrij swart (free black). He was born into slavery in 1692 as Willem van de Caab and remained in bondage until until 1724 when he was manumitted by the his owner - Christina de Bruyn, widow of Jan Botman.

How he gained his wealth is not known, but at the time of his death in about 1750 he owned 11 slaves. He was owner of Wolwedans as well as the neighbouring farm Hoornbosch. His assets realised 5 578 rixdollars. Significant sums of cash were left to his heirs once the farms and slaves were sold. He had been married to Johanna van Beulen for 15 years when he died, and had 6 surviving children.

Minutes of proceedings in criminal cases, 22 September 1733:

This was the same mare, he added, which he later used one other time behind the fence of Charles Marais’ vineyard.38 After this revelation, Landdrost Lourensz immediately sought out the slave Alexander and detained him in the Castle. Gerrit’s life was spared while Alexander was found and interrogated. On Monday 21 September Gerrit confirmed his confession in Alexander’s presence (of course not under oath) and he added a detail which was to become the focus of the subsequent investigation: he said that (when the woodcutters returned from the forest) he and Alexander had been sent to Claas Mallabaar’s house by the knegt Augustus Lourens, who wanted them to fetch wine from Claas Mallabaar. And all this was as true, he said ‘as he hoped shortly to appear before God and receive his judgment.’39 In my opinion, Gerrit Coetsé’s third and last confession has the ring of truth. It has a breathless and urgent quality, as though the person whose speech was recorded was eager to unburden himself. But in the end (fortunately for Alexander) Coetsé was not believed. Alexander (who was about 50 years old and came from the island of Ternate) agreed, when questioned, that about one year ago he had gone to Drakensteijn with his mistress’s waggon and her knegt, in the company of Willem Stolts, and that they had stopped at the farm of Jacobus Coetsé. Coetsé’s son Gerrit had indeed shown him the way to the mountains, but on his return he had not been sent to the house of Claas Mallabaar; he had not left Jacobus Coetsé’s house, he said.40 The Council of Justice took the allegations sufficiently seriously to call a special meeting, on Tuesday 22 September, during which, at the Governor’s suggestion, Gerrit and Alexander were confronted with one another. The Governor urged Gerrit to tell the truth, but the young man stuck to his story, saying that there were witnesses who could back him up: the vrijswart Willem Stolts was present when Pieter van den Heever’s knegt gave him money and sent him with Alexander to buy wine from Claas Mallabaar; and Claas Mallabaar’s wife or concubine (‘bijsit’) had given him a jug of wine in the presence of Alexander.41 Alexander, by contrast, denied that he had ever been to the house of Claas Mallabaar; he knew it only from afar, he said, and the knegt Augustus Lourens could testify that he had not sent him there.42 Perplexed by these contradictory statements, the Council of Justice instructed Landdrost Lourensz to question Willem Stolts, Augustus Lourens and Claas Mallabaar’s concubine, ‘so as to see whether one cannot throw some light on this tricky matter and [decide] which of the two – the accuser or the accused – they should believe.’ The Council also 38 CJ 337, p. 339, Further confession of Gerrit Coetsé, 18 September 1733. 39 Ibid., Recollement, 21 September 1733. 40 CJ 337, Interrogation of the slave Alexander of Ternaten (‘in de Portugeese taal’), 21 September 1733. 41 CJ 15, Minutes of proceedings in criminal cases, 22 September 1733.
Claas Mallabaar’s concubine was Constantia of Bengal. She was the mother of Johanna de Ryk, who in turn was the widow of Claas Mallabar’s deceased son, Johannes Claasz. Johanna de Ryk later married the free black Leendert Barendsz van Saxen, owner of the unfortunate grey mare. (Mansell Upham, ‘Claas van Malabar’, in Nicolaas Claassen and Gert Hendrik Claassen (eds), Die Claas(s)en afstammelinge in Suid-Afrika (Centurion: 2001).) 42 Ibid. 9

Sharon Doubell I have sent the Familia in question to your email.

Please let me know if you have it.

Groete

Judi

Mike Stangel if you sent me your e-amil again, as i have lost mine due to the theft, I will send you the said article in FAmilia as above.

Judi