Transcriptions » Recently created summaries of historical documents

Users of Open Archives can have a summary made of the transcriptions created using handwriting recognition.
Both artificial intelligence tasks are not perfect, but often more than sufficient to make the historical document understandable. In the transcripts, names are underlined in green and clickable (to search the personal entries on Open Archives for the name in question), the recognized dates have a light gray background and recognized place names have a light purple background.


View transcript 


This document records a list of buyers at what appears to be an auction or sale. The text shows 42 numbered entries of people purchasing items, with their occupations, locations, and the amounts they paid in guilders and cents. The buyers included:
View transcript 


The document describes a will made in Amsterdam. The longest-living person of the couple would become the sole heir of the deceased partner. After both partners died, their property would go to heirs according to legal succession rights from the estate of the deceased. The testators (people making the will) declared this to be their last will and testament. They wanted it to be followed after their death as a will, codicil (addition to a will), gift among the living, gift in case of death, or whatever legal form would be most valid according to the law. The following people were involved: The witnesses confirmed they knew the testators and that these were the people whose names appeared in the document.
View transcript 


Jeuriaen Welt agreed and promised to pay van Noijen within 2 months from this date the 150 guilders for the yearly house rent that was due in May. He also had to pay all the house rent that would be due by the end of those 2 months in the year 1696, and from then on pay the rent every quarter year precisely when it was due, along with the costs that van Noijen had already made and would still make. Both parties pledged their persons and goods, movable and immovable, present and future, without exception, to fulfill this agreement. This was done and passed in the city of Amsterdam at the notary's office, in the presence of Harman Jansz and Jan Vosmeer, bookbinders, who were asked to be witnesses.

On 18 August 1646, Lady Sara du Pire, widow of the late Jan Wallis, notary, appeared before notary Francois Meerlo. She stated that in January 1644 she had bought at a public auction a certain house standing at the Ooster markt in this city, which at that time belonged to Anthonij Roesinck. Although the deed of sale had already been registered at the secretary's office and she had paid the 40th penny (a tax) amounting to 149 guilders and 3 stuivers to the secretaries, she had never received proper transfer of ownership because Roesingh could not meet the conditions stated in the auction document. Therefore the sale had not gone through. The lady had then complained about this by petition to the court in this city, and the secretaries had authorized and ordered in the margin of that petition that the 40th penny should be returned to her as was proper.

This was done in the city of Amsterdam at the notary's office, in the presence of Cornelis Appeln and Harman Jansen, witnesses.

On 1 August 1646, Steven Jansz van Noijen, merchant in this city, and Jeuriaen Welt, also living here, appeared before notary Francois Meerhout. They stated that at the end of 1644 they had agreed about the rent of a certain house standing and located on Uijlenburch, which Welt had rented from van Noijen for a period of one year. This period started on 1 May 1643 and would end on the last day of April 1645, for the sum of 150 guilders yearly, to be paid every quarter year in equal parts. When that year had expired without Welt having paid a single penny, van Noijen had nevertheless agreed at Welt's request that he could continue living in the same house for the following year for the same amount of 150 guilders yearly, to be paid on the same conditions, with the express agreement that Welt would immediately pay the expired year's rent to van Noijen and continue paying the future rents from quarter year to quarter year. However, since Welt at this time was unable to raise the expired rent, the parties had now agreed anew that Welt would

View transcript 


Date not specified The longest-living spouse was given the right to decide how much to distribute to the legitimate children from the marriage. The children would not receive their full inheritance portion immediately. When the longest-living spouse remarried, they only had to prove their distribution decisions to two men, either from the family or outsiders, whom they could choose themselves. The longest-living spouse had to provide the children with the profits from the inherited property, while keeping the capital. However, the longest-living spouse did not need to make an inventory of the estate, provide detailed accounts, or offer security. The first spouse to die appointed the surviving spouse as the sole guardian of their children and administrator of the children's property. If the surviving spouse remarried, supervising guardians would be appointed, including the person to whom the surviving spouse had provided proof regarding the children's inheritance. After the death of the surviving spouse, guardians would be appointed as the surviving spouse had chosen. The city court chamber of the relevant locations where the testators lived or owned property was explicitly excluded from involvement in these matters. The testators declared this to be their last will and testament, which could also be considered a codicil, a gift among the living, or a gift in case of death, to be executed after their death. This document was made in Amsterdam in the presence of Jan Vosmeer and Abraham Marier as witnesses. The witnesses confirmed they knew the testators well and that the testators were the ones mentioned in the document. The mark of Hendrik Phunwen Hoven appeared on behalf of the testator, along with the marks of Jan Vosmeer, Abraham Marier, and the notary Swerrs.
View transcript 


27 January 1724, Huijden. Jan Vosmeer from Pernis appeared before notary Mr. Marten Schrick in Amsterdam. Vosmeer acted with special power of attorney for Maria and Geertruijd Peltzer, who were adult daughters and children of Peltzer. Each of them inherited one-sixth part from Geertruijd Hoedenrijck, who in her life was the widow and estate holder of Matthijs Peltzer. They also inherited one-fourth part from their deceased brother Albertus Peltzer. Vosmeer declared in his capacity that he received and took over the following 4 bonds from the children and heirs of Guillelmo Hoedenrijck, Eduard Entinck, and Joannes Hooft, who in their lives had been guardians over Maria Peltzer and Geertruijd Peltzer:

  1. One bond charged to the common land of Holland at the office of this city for the sum of 1,283 guilders and 6 stuivers in the name of Albertus, Geertruijd, Maria, and Coenraet Peltzer. The name of Maria was left out by mistake in the voluntary judgment on the transaction mentioned later. Dated 1 June 1689, number 1824, folio 124 verso, registered 30 November 1691, number 10367, register folio 687.
  2. One similar bond for the sum of 1,200 guilders in the name of Willem Harmensz, dated 17 August 1653, folio 354, registered 24 December 1653, register folio 241.
View transcript 


View transcript 


Hastij and his brothers received so much support from the distant villages that the messenger from the Orang Kaya (local chiefs) could not deliver them, even if he had promised to hand over these three brothers. This could not be achieved without leaving behind such remnants of rebellion that it would be better to remain in complete war. The people of Boero (Buru) wanted these three men to be considered their rightful countrymen, not people from Ternate, since they were born on Boero and had never seen Ternate. The Dutch could not arrange this matter as they wished and therefore decided to send Hastij and his brothers away without settling the issue, waiting for a better opportunity. They were told they would be satisfied when peace was fully achieved and the work on Boero with the gathering of villages at Kaieli would be firmly established. In the meantime, the Dutch took as much security as possible by completely stripping Hastij of his power, which he and the Orang Kaya of Boero seemed happy to accept. It was agreed that: Since the gathering of villages at Kaieli could not proceed steadily without building a wooden barricade there, the Dutch considered this necessary and built one. It would be maintained as long as the authorities wished, but in their opinion it could be removed once all the people of Boero lived there and peace with Makassar was firmly established. They also thought about abandoning the other barricade on Amblau in place of this one. This had recently been fully decided in council but without effect because of the large number of nutmeg trees found on Boero as mentioned before. Once these had been brought home safely, they would proceed with this plan, since no more spice trees were found on Amblau after careful investigation. Hastij and his brother Captain Land were now with them in the Hongi (fleet); the third brother stayed home. They hoped to send all three, or at least one of them, to the authorities that same year. The outcome of matters upon their return to Amboina would inform them further.
View transcript 


View transcript 


The agreement did not require any summons or prior warning to be valid. The parties promised to uphold and enforce whatever the mentioned attorneys would arrange based on this document. They also agreed to maintain and fulfill this agreement at all times, with legal obligations as required by law, and requested and consented to official documentation. However, regarding Geertruijd Brasker, the widow of the late Albertus Swederrijk, this agreement only applied to her minor children if it received approval from the honorable court of the city of Edam. The document was signed in the city of Amsterdam in the presence of witnesses Adam Scheepe and Fredrick van Grol. The following people signed the document:
View transcript 


Hendrik Offerman's children were to receive an inheritance when certain conditions were met. Regarding Maria Hendriks, widow of Jan Vosmeer, the testator's express wish was that her house and property located in the Hoogstraat within the city would be sold by the executors after the testator's death. The full proceeds from the testator's inheritance portion would be secured on the aforementioned house for Maria Hendriks, who would remain bound to it. The buyers had to continue paying the widow Jan Vosmeer from the proceeds of the inheritance portion to Maria Hendriks, and after her death to her children, a sum of 200 guilders with interest, first on the full sum and then on the remaining capital at 3 percent per year. This would continue until the complete execution and payment of the mentioned capital. The testator appointed executors of the testament, administrators of the estate, and organizers of the burial. They were to pay out the net proceeds of the estate to each of the previously named heirs according to their portion. Frans and Jan Dominicus Tier, residing in the city, were appointed with the request that if one died, the other would continue.
View transcript 


  • On 28 March 1903, Johannes Vosmeer, a private individual living in Haarlem, appeared before notary Benjamin Egbertus Cornelius Seignette in Haarlem.
  • Vosmeer acknowledged that he legally owed Antonius Vasen Hendrikszoon, a cloth bleacher living in Haarlem, a sum of 4,000 guilders in Dutch currency.
  • The money came from a loan that was provided when this document was signed.
  • The debtor agreed to pay back the loan in 5 years from that date, or afterwards within 3 months after a demand for payment was made by either party.
  • The debtor had to pay interest of 4.25% per year, starting on that day and to be paid every 6 months on 28 March and 28 September of each year, with the first payment due on 28 September of that year.
  • All payments of principal and interest had to be made directly to the creditor at his home, in good Dutch money, without deduction or debt settlement, and all costs of collection, demand, warning and payment would be at the debtor's expense.
  • As security for repayment of the capital and correct interest payment, the debtor mortgaged a shop house with separate upper dwelling and land in Haarlem, at Spaarnwouderstraat, marked 96 black and red, cadastral Section D number 2699, measuring 52 centiares, which belonged to the undersigned in full and unencumbered ownership.
  • It was further agreed that the mortgaged property had to be maintained in good condition, could not be changed in nature or purpose or reduced in value, all taxes had to be paid promptly, and the property could only be rented out or given to others for use with written consent of the creditor.
  • The buildings on the mortgaged property, present or still to be built, had to be and remain insured against fire damage, proof of which had to be shown to the creditor on request and especially when paying interest.
View transcript 


Maria Nosmeer (wife of Jan Vosmeer) and Catharina de Maagt (wife of Abraham Vosmeer), both living in Amsterdam, appeared before notary Daniel van den Brink on 18 August 1734. They testified at the request of Trijntje Dirks Kamp (wife of Jacobus Vosmeer, also living in Amsterdam). The witnesses stated that they knew Dirk Dirks Kam and his wife Elsje Mulders very well, who had lived on the Angeliersstraat in Amsterdam. The couple were legally married in Amsterdam in 1702. They had 4 children together:

Elsje Mulders died in September [the text is incomplete].

View transcript 


  • 21 June 1912: Albertus Ophof, a messenger aged 35 living in Amsterdam, and Jan Voogd, also a messenger aged 35 living in Amsterdam, appeared before the civil registration officer. They declared that on 20 June in the afternoon at 10 o'clock in Amsterdam, Willem Faassen had died. He was a cigar factory owner, living in Woensel, aged 62, born in Woensel. He was married to Rosalie Alberts and was the son of Lambertus Vaassen and Christina Snelders, both deceased.
  • 22 June 1912: Franciscus Bonsen, a funeral director aged 34 living in Amsterdam, and Johannes Boekhof, also a funeral director aged 57 living in Amsterdam, appeared before the civil registration officer. They declared that on 21 June in the afternoon at 1 o'clock in Amsterdam, Anthonica Johanna Maria Ceeve had died. She had no profession, lived in Amsterdam, was aged 22, and was born in Nieuwer Amstel. She was the daughter of Anthonius Hendricus Ceeve, a supervisor at the city tram company, and Anthonica de Zwart, who had no profession, both living in Amsterdam.
  • 21 June 1912: Albertus Ophof, a messenger aged 35 living in Amsterdam, and Jan Voogd, a messenger aged 35 living in Amsterdam, appeared before the civil registration officer. They declared that on 20 June in the afternoon at half past 5 o'clock in Amsterdam, Gerardus Hendrikus van der Vliet had died. He was a wine merchant's helper, living in Amsterdam, aged 31, born in Muiden. He was married to Gesina Johanna Manoth and was the son of Dirk van der Vliet, deceased, and Antje Mulder, who had no profession and lived in Amsterdam.
  • 22 June 1912: Hendrik Cordes, without profession, aged 70, living in Amsterdam, and Gerardus Andreus Heynings, without profession, aged 74, living in Amsterdam, appeared before the civil registration officer. They declared that on 21 June in the morning at 3 o'clock in Amsterdam, Wilhelmina Elizabeth van Sitteren had died. She had no profession, lived in Amsterdam, was aged 72, and was born in Amsterdam. She was the widow of Hendrik Zuiver and the daughter of Reijnier van Sitteren and Naatje Mulder, both deceased.
  • 21 June 1912: Godfried Ferdinand Belset, a funeral director aged 39 living in Amsterdam, and Hendrikus Arnoldus Hoogveld, a merchant aged 53 living in Nijmegen and brother of the deceased, appeared before the civil registration officer. They declared that on 20 June in the afternoon at half past 12 o'clock in Amsterdam,
View transcript 


1723: The person making the will (called the testator) kept the power and ability to change this will at any time. He could add to it or reduce it, create legacies and make promises, and set up substitutions (replacements) one after another. He completely excluded the orphan's chamber (an organization that managed inheritances for orphans) from having any power over his estate after his death. He also excluded all friends and strangers who might want to interfere with his estate, whether they tried to do so by his own hand, through official positions, or in any other way, even if they claimed to act on behalf of the testator's estate. The testator wanted all interference excluded unless instructions were given orally before 2 witnesses (either men or women). The testator declared that everything stated above was his last will and testament. He wanted it to be followed and carried out after his death. The testament could be valid as a testament, a codicil (a supplement to a will), a gift because of death, a gift while living, or in whatever legal form would make it valid as a last will. Even if not all legal formalities required by law were observed in this document, the testator still wanted it to have full force and be maintained as if it had been properly executed before a notary and witnesses. This document was drawn up in Haarlem in the presence of Jan Verboek and Jan Natorp as witnesses. The notary was hendrik van maris Cornelis. The document was signed by Jan Verboek. The notary was N 6 Cleijnenbergh. The date was 17 1/23. 42.
View transcript 


Johan Fredrik Natorp, a citizen and merchant in Hamburg, appeared before the mayor and city council. He explained that on 20 March 1719 the joint heirs of the late Kenning Cleven Leignies had given him power of attorney regarding an inheritance matter of Matthiessen in the East Indies. However, he was prevented from carrying out this task because of other business matters. Therefore, using the power granted to him in the original power of attorney, he appointed Gotfried Ohm, city pharmacist in Batavia, as his substitute representative. He gave Ohm complete power and authority to handle this inheritance matter in all places on behalf of himself and the original clients.

View transcript 


Thos Anderson wrote a bill of exchange in Gothenburg on 22 March 1735. He ordered that one month after seeing the bill, Mr. Lenders Wass should pay 210 Reichsthaler to George Desbard & Son, who were merchants in Amsterdam.

Blieff Pelterson endorsed the bill with an order in Gothenburg on 29 March 1735.

Ant Wass also endorsed it.

Madts Truelsen endorsed the bill with an order from Waldera Ahbergh on 24 April 1735.

Oliff Dittesson ordered payment to Paul Sternberg or his order in Cruiglangen, Ahlburg on 21 April 1735.

Mats Arucelse ordered payment to Johan Fedrich Natorp & Bernder in Herenburgh in the accounting records of Ahlberge on 2 April 1735.

Paul Stomberg endorsed it on behalf of Johan Freidrick Natorp & Orndes in Hamburg on 25 April 1735.

View transcript 


On 1 March 1731, a bill of exchange was issued in Saint Petersburg. Johan Ludolph Dohn or his order was to be paid 250 guilders and a quarter in Dutch currency. The value was received from Jacob Stelling. The payment was to be made through Isaac van Eyl in Amsterdam and then to the order of Johan Friedrich Natorp. The document was witnessed by several people including Johan Sudeloh Dohn, Johannes Das, Adr. Baars (notary), and Jan Krins.
View transcript 


H. Lamers released Jan Natrop from a mortgage on property that Natrop had bought. The mortgage had been placed on the property by the seller through a legal document dated 19 April 1853, which was registered at the mortgage office in Nijmegen on 4 May in register volume 43, number 56. Lamers agreed to the partial removal of this mortgage registration.

The document was created and signed at Heteren in the office of the notary on 20 December 1856. The witnesses present were Carel Johan Hendrik van Kessel, a notary clerk, and Derk Vermeer, an innkeeper, both living in Heteren. After the document was read aloud, the people involved and the witnesses signed it along with the notary.

The document was registered in Elst on 2 January 1857 in volume 46, page 48. Various fees were paid: 50 guilders for cancellation, 12 guilders 80 cents for the release, and additional taxes totaling 3 guilders 86.5 cents. The tax collector was W. Macalester Loup.

View transcript 


  • 17 October 1716, Adrian Baars, a public notary in Amsterdam, recorded the following will.
  • David Natrop, a master tailor, and Raantje Schadee, his wife, living on the Cingel in Amsterdam, appeared before the notary.
  • David Natrop was physically weak but still able to walk and stand, while Raantje Schadee was ill and bedridden, but both had clear minds and could speak properly.
  • They declared that, thinking about the fragility of life, the certainty of death, and the uncertainty of when death would come, they freely and deliberately made their will and last wishes.
  • They canceled and declared void all previous wills, additions to wills, and other types of last wishes they might have made together or separately, regardless of any clauses they contained.
  • They made a new arrangement as follows: if David Natrop (the husband) died first, he named as his heirs the children he had with his previous wife, as well as his current wife.
View transcript 


View transcript 


The deputies found that certain matters would not be valid, especially when they would affect the rights of a third party. The deputies believed that when a temporary regulation needed to be created for closing the accounts from 1300 to 1304 inclusive, this should be done by their High Mightinesses as executors of the testament of the late Lord of Engelant. A petition was read from Anthonius vander Burgh, minister of God's word at Emmenes within the dike in the district of Utrecht. He stated that their High Mightinesses on 20 June last had granted to the petitioner's son Dendrick vander Burgh the income from 3 scholarships or benefits founded by Aert Swaens, each worth 50 guilders, to study. He requested that their High Mightinesses order the receiver Dirck St. Gravesande to pay out the money he had received before the granting of these scholarships for the benefit of the petitioner's son. After deliberation, it was decided that a copy of the petition would be sent to the General Accounting Chamber so they could send their advice to their High Mightinesses. A petition was read from the governors and inhabitants of Halsteren, Noordgeest and Beijemoeren. They requested that their High Mightinesses grant the petitioners permission to negotiate a sum of 15,000 guilders to pay:
  • The treasurers of the 10,000 guilders from previous years
  • The 600 guilders for prisoners they had paid in advance
  • The heavy daily wages of 121 guilders per day
After deliberation, it was decided that a copy of the petition would be sent to the Council of State so they could send their advice to their High Mightinesses. A petition was read from Willem Veltman, master ship's carpenter, and Gerritt 't Heen, master tree maker, both citizens of the city of Amsterdam. They stated that after much effort, time loss and very heavy costs, they had finally invented the making of a double pump to pump water out of ships and elsewhere, with which they could pump up 4 times as much water in the same time as with ordinary pumps, and with no more manpower. The petitioners had also invented a new invention for the ship's wheel and residents.
View transcript 


A bailiff demanded from the people listed above the immediate payment of 1,900 guilders plus interest from 12 December 1913 at 4.5 percent per year, as well as the costs of serving notice and making the demand. When no payment was received, the bailiff announced that the creditor would use the irrevocable power of attorney to proceed with a public sale of the mortgaged real estate on Friday 29 May 1914 at 1 o'clock in the afternoon at the Friesche Koffiehuis in Velseroord, municipality of Velsen, before notary Gerrit Daniel Boerlage or another authorized notary or candidate notary who would replace him. The sale would recover the principal amount, interest, costs, and whatever else was owed to the creditor under the deed. The costs amounted to 10.22½ guilders. The document was registered in Haarlem on 16 May 1914, volume 14, folio 154 verso, section 4.

Klaas Koster, a café owner living in Ymuiden, municipality of Velsen, gave power of attorney to Henri Albert Buisman, a candidate notary living in Velsen, to sell publicly on his behalf the real estate that had been mortgaged. This power of attorney was based on article 1223 of the Civil Code, granted in a loan deed with mortgage on 17 December 1908 before notary G. D. Boerlage in Velsen, made against the heirs of Hendrik Veltman and Cornelia Wekker, who had lived in Velseroord, municipality of Velsen. The property consisted of 3 residential houses and 1 residential and commercial house with plots on Kalverstraat E14, 14-a, 16, and 18 in Velseroord, municipality of Velsen, registered as cadastral municipality Velsen (division Ymuiden), section

View transcript 


Hendrik van der Hoven, Maertij Tmerck Aelbertsz, and Marta Pieter Abrans (the second parties) agreed to fully settle all matters without keeping anything back or making any reservations. They also gave up any claims or demands they might have against the two first parties. In return, the second parties received a sum of 35 carolus guilders, which they received and accepted in the presence of the notary and the first party. With this payment, the second parties agreed to fully release the first parties from all obligations. They pledged their persons and property as guarantee for this agreement, without any exceptions, and placed themselves under the authority of all courts, especially the court of Holland. They consented to have this agreement recorded officially. This was done and completed in Haarlem, with Simon Hendriks and Willem Veltman present as witnesses. The document was signed by Hendrik van der Hoven, Maertij Tmerck Aelbertsz, Marta Pieter Abrans, Willem Veltman, and Simon Tmerck, and confirmed by the notary.

View transcript 


J. Veltman, who was a Director and Head of the Telegraph office in Miedhecht, found it acceptable that the previously mentioned documents about Musheu Outbrecht could still be submitted for receipt, even though they appeared to have been lost despite being requested on time, but had meanwhile been found again. On 6 July 1812, a letter was sent to the Minister of Colonies. The writer politely requested His Excellency to return the documents concerning his student Willem Veltman, which had been withheld from being admitted to the examination for training as a military pharmacist in the Indies. The documents could not be submitted because the certificate of the literary-mathematical examination could not be provided, and therefore he could not be considered for the examination. The letter was written in Miedrecht on June 1804.
View transcript 



Previous pageNext page

Find your ancestors and publish your family tree on Genealogy Online via https://www.genealogieonline.nl/en/