The death of David Buller 3

The final two Rundschau pieces mentioning or alluding to David Buller can be dealt with together, since they relate more to David’s son Heinrich than David himself. (Thanks again to Glenn Penner for supplying scans of all the Rundschau pages.)

The 11 April 1906 issue contains another letter from Peter and Anna Warkentin, who appear to have been the Waldheim correspondents for the Rundschau. During the course of a long letter they include an announcement of a recent wedding:

Samstag, den 19. Februar war in Waldheim beim Heinrich Buller eine hochzeit, sein Sohn Heinrich verheiratete sich mit Elisabeth Unruh von Hierschau. Noch eine Anmerkung: Da dieser Freund Buller oft bei mir die “Rundschau” liest und nach Berichten von seinen lieben Freunden aus Amerika sucht, so möchte er gerne Berichte, oder besser richtige Adressen von seinen Freunden haben. Buller ist ein Sohn des David Buller, welcher im Jahre 1904 im November starb.

Saturday, February 19, there was in Waldheim at the home of Heinrich Buller a wedding, as his son Heinrich married Elisabeth Unruh of Hierschau. One more note: since this friend Buller often reads the Rundschau with me, looking for reports of his dear friends from America, so he would like to have reports, or better, correct addresses of his friends. Buller is a son of David Buller, who died in November 1904.

This letter adds nothing to our knowledge of David’s death, but it does add one more piece to the David Buller family puzzle. Not only was David’s son Heinrich married to a woman named Aganetha, as we learned in the previous post, but he and his wife had a son named Heinrich, who married Elisabeth Unruh of Hierschau, the village just to the west of Waldheim.

We will return to Heinrich and Elisabeth Unruh Buller in due course, since the Grandma database offers additional information about them and their family that clarifies a comment in the Buller Family Record. Somewhat surprisingly, however, Grandma does not know that Heinrich the husband of Elisabeth was the son of Heinrich and Aganetha, the grandson of David Buller. I will see if that can be corrected.

The last David-related Rundschau letter originated not from Russia but from Lehigh, Kansas, a small town roughly 5 miles west of Hillsboro and 25 miles north of Newton, that is, right in the heart of the Russian Mennonite part of Kansas. In this letter, which was published on page 2 of the 2 May 1906 issue, Anna Ratzlaff responds to Heinrich Buller’s request for information about family and friends. She begins:

Werte “Rundschau”! Die Ursache meines Schreibens ist die Anfrage von Heinrich Buller, Waldheim, Rußland, nach seinen Freunden. Lieber Vetter, zuerst danke ich für den Bericht, in dem Du die Todesnachricht von Eurem lieben Vater brachtest, später haben wir noch erfahren, daß unsere liebe Tante Karl Schmidt auch schon in die Ewigkeit gegangen ist. Lieber Vetter, ich will Deinem Wunsche gemäß kurz von uns berichten. Ich bin nämlich die jüngste Tochter von Eurem verstorbenen Unkel Jacob Ratzlaff, die liebe Mutter und ich wohnen seit vorigen Herbst in dem Städtchen Lehigh, sind gefund, außer daß die Mutter schon seit mehreren Jahren etwas Reißung hat. …

Esteemed Rundschau! The reason for my writing is the request of Heinrich Buller of Waldheim, Russia, regarding his friends. Dear cousin, first, thank for the report, in which you brought news of the death of your dear father, later we have also learned that our dear aunt Karl Schmidt has also gone into eternity. Dear cousin, I would like to report briefly about us. I am the youngest daughter of your deceased uncle Jacob Ratzlaff, dear Mother and I have found ourselves staying in the town of Lehigh since last autumn, except that Mother for several years has been somewhat torn [?].

Anna continues with notes about her family, all of whom can be identified in the Grandma database. Anna herself is 8825, while her father Jacob is 8816 and her mother Eva Voth is 8793. Anna speaks of her sister Helena (8823), who married Johann Goertz (8828), son of Heinrich Goertz (36876), and Helena and Johann’s seven children (all in Grandma). Anna’s brother Heinrich (8826), she reports, married Elisabeth Warkentin (8862), daughter of Peter (22108), and together they had one son who had already died (8864) and a number of daughters.

Anna closes her letter with a request:

Nun, lieber Vetter, möchte ich bitten, uns, wenn auch nur kurz—ein langer Brief wäre erwünschter—Nachricht von unseren Verwandten zu geben, wie gerne hätte ich schon längst gewußt wie viele Vettern und Nichten ich dort drüben hätte. Noch eine Bitte: In welchen Jahren sind unsere Großeltern gestorben und wie alt sind sie geworden? Haben dieses vergeffen, möchten es aber gerne wissen. Einen herzlichen Gruß an alle lieben Verwandten, Anna Ratzlaff

Now, my dear cousin, I would like to ask for us, if only briefly—a longer letter would be more desirable—to give a message from our relatives, how much I would have already known how many cousins and nieces I have over there. One more request: In which years did our grandparents die and how old did they become? I have forgotten this but would like to know. A cordial greeting to all dear relatives, Anna Ratzlaff

Not only is the German convoluted and, as a result, the translation questionable, but we have now apparently gone far afield from the Buller family. Perhaps so, but we do not want to forget that this Ratzlaff family is of interest to us because David Buller seemingly had a sister previously unknown to us who married into this branch of Ratzlaffs. Perhaps there is more to learn about her, and thus also David, by following the Ratzlaff trail to see where it leads.

The death of David Buller 2

In the first post of this series (see here) we examined the earliest known announcement of the death of David Buller, a letter written just eight days after his burial on 16 November 1904 and published in Die Mennonitische Rundschau two months later. The single sentence reporting that event proved to us that the Buller Family Record dates of his birth and death are in error by a matter of months.

Today we continue our exploration of contemporary sources about David Buller with a second notice in the Rundschau about the death of David Buller. This much longer notice appeared on page 10 of the 22 March 1905 issue. (Thanks again to Glenn Penner, who supplied the scans of the Rundschau pages.)

As before, the section of interest appears under the Rußland heading. As a point of curiosity only, note that the writers of the second letter in the Russia section (bottom of column 2 through most of column 3) are the Peter and Anna Warkentin of Waldheim, who wrote the first announcement about David Buller.

The section that interests us most, however, is the first. This letter was also written from Waldheim, in this case on 6 February 1905, so somewhat less than two months after David’s passing. We will view the letter in two sections, in order to make the original text as large (and readable) as possible.

Dem Herrn über Leben und Tod gesiel es, uns unsern lieben Vater David Buller durch eine sechstägige Krankheit im Alter von 86 Janren und 10 Monaten den 12. November 1904 durch den Tod in sein Freudenreich zu versetzen. Und da ich in Amerika noch Geschwister habe, denn ich habe schon so manchen Brief an sie geschrieben, aber keine Antwort erhalten. Da aber die “Rundschau” ein so sicherer Bote ist, so bitte ich den werten Editor, meine Trauerbotschaft der “Rundschau” mit auf die Rundreise zu geben, damit die Geschwister es durch dieselbe erfahren. Es sind noch zwei Brüder am Leben, Benjamin Buller, früher Kansas und David Buller, Norddakota, Peter Buller, Nebraska, ist gestorben.

It pleased the Lord of life and death to move our dear father David Buller through an illness of six days’ length, at the age of 86 years and 10 months, on 12 November 1904, through death into the realm of his joy. And inasmuch as I still have siblings in America, I have written many a letter to them but have received no answer. But since the Rundschau is a more certain messenger, I ask the honorable editor to circulate my sad news, so that the siblings find out through the same. There are still two brothers alive, Benjamin Buller, formerly of Kansas, and David Buller of North Dakota; Peter Buller of Nebraska died. …


Dann sind noch Johann Wiensen und Abraham Brauns Kinder, welche meine Schwestern waren. Sollte aber keiner von ihnen die “Rundschau” lesen, so sind andere gebeten, es inhen kund zu thun. Auch bitte ich von allen Geschwistern und Geschwisterkinder Auskunst, sowie die richtigen Adressen. Ich habe noch mehrere Vetter und Richten in Amerika: Johann Ratzlaffs kinder, deren Mutter Vaters Schwester war und Jakob Ratzlaffs Kinder, welcher der Mutter Bruder was. Sollten sie die “Rundschau” lesen, so sind sie all von uns gegrüßt.

Then there are Johann Wiensen and Abraham Brauns children, who were my sisters’. But if none of them read the Rundschau, as others have asked, make it known to them. I also ask for any information about siblings and siblings’ children, as well as correct addresses. I have several cousins and direct relatives in America: Johann Ratzlaff’s children, whose mother was father’s sister, and Jacob Ratzlaff’s children, which the mother’s brother was. You should read the Rundschau so they are all of us greeted.

The letter ends “Grüßend verbleiben wir Geschwister und Freunde,” that is, “sincerely, we remain siblings and friends,” and is signed by Heinrich and Aganetha Buller.

There is a lot here to digest, and not all of it is clear (i.e., the translation may be wrong in a few places). Still, we can know some things with certainty and other things with a high degree of probability.

1. David Buller passed away on 12 November 1904 and was buried, according to the first Rundschau notice, four days later, on 16 November. Whether the dates are Julian or Gregorian we do not know (for now).

2. He was ill for six days before passing away, although the nature of his illness is not indicated.

3. His length of life was 86 years and 10 months.

4. The author Heinrich (more on that below) says that two of his brothers were still living in the U.S.: Benjamin, who had been in Kansas (seemingly Heinrich is unsure of Benjamin’s current location); and David, was in North Dakota. A third brother, Peter (as in Peter D) had already died, which we know to be true, since our ancestor Peter D passed away in 1897.

5. With the help of the Buller Family Record, we can make sense of the reference to the children of Heinrich’s sisters. Heinrich’s sister (i.e., David’s daughter) Elisabeth married Abraham Braun, and his sister Maria married Johann Wiens. Elisabeth died in 1898, and Maria passed away even earlier, in 1894. Thus, both were dead when Heinrich wrote this letter, which explains why he asks readers to let the children of Johann Wiens and Abraham Braun know of the passing of David, who was their grandfather.

6. The reference to “Johann Ratzlaffs kinder, deren Mutter Vaters Schwester war und Jakob Ratzlaffs Kinder, welcher der Mutter Bruder was” is much more difficult to interpret, but it seems that Johann Ratzlaff married David Buller’s sister (Vaters Schwester) and had children with him. The fact that Heinrich refers to the children by way of the two parents and not to the parents in and of themselves might imply that only the children remain alive, that the parents have already passed away. Not to be lost in this uncertainty is the most important point of all: the statement that David Buller had at least one sister, which sister married a Johann Ratzlaff. This is another piece of evidence that may allow us, via the Grandma database, to fill in a blank or two in the David Buller family tree.

7. The mention of “Jacob Ratzlaff’s children, which the mother’s brother was,” remains a mystery, unless “brother” here means brother-in-law, which would then indicate that Heinrich wanted the children of Jacob Ratzlaff, who were nephews and nieces of David Buller’s sister, to know about the passing of their great-uncle David.

8. Finally, who was the Heinrich Buller who wrote this letter? Heinrich refers to David as his “lieben Vater,” his beloved father, and he names three brothers (Benjamin, David, and Peter) and refers to two sisters (Elisabeth and Maria). There can be little doubt, then, that Heinrich is none other than one of the sons of David who stayed behind in Molotschna, specifically in the village of Waldheim, from where this letter was written.

The big question about Heinrich (first mentioned here) was whether he was the oldest son of David and Helena Zielke Buller (so Grandma) or the child of David and his second wife (name unknown), as the Buller Family Record has it. This letter does not decide that question one way or another, but it does give us another datum to fill in for the life of Heinrich: the name of his wife. Neither the BFR nor the Grandma database lists a wife for Heinrich, but the signature on this letter seems to indicate beyond all reasonable doubt that Heinrich was married to a woman named Aganetha.

****

A postscript in the form of a hunch: Is the 12 November date Julian or Gregorian? If the date given is Julian, then David Buller died on 25 November by our calendrical reckoning. Although numbers can become jumbled and dates confused, the fact that the Buller Family Record and Grandma place both his birth and his death on the 25th of the month seems to me an indication that that day of the month likely was significant in David’s life. Although it is impossible to be certain, that inclines me to think that the 12 November date provided from a village in Russia is the date in Julian terms and that the actual date of David’s death on our calendar was 25 November.

The death of David Buller 1

The more we learn, the more we realize how little we know. Consider, for example, the death of our ancestor David Buller (father of Peter D, father of Peter P, father of Chris). The Buller Family Record states that he died on 25 September 1904 at the age of 86 years and 10 months.

The source of this information (a family Bible? a government record? a personal letter?) is not given; all that we know is that the compilers of the BFR—Aunts Maria and Sara Buller and Gordon Buller—recorded it for their generation and those to come in the future.

But why should we think that they got it right? If nothing else, we should keep all these questions open in our minds until we have documentary evidence confirming or correcting what has been written in the Buller Family Record. We have seen this already, with the discovery that Peter D and family came to the U.S. on the S.S. Switzerland, not the S.S. Vaderland, as the BFR claims (see here). A contemporary record, the ship manifest, left no doubt about this fact.

Thanks to Glenn Penner (once again!), we have several contemporary records associated with David Buller’s death that are well worth examining carefully. But first a little background.

Mennonite communities around the world were served by various periodical publications: monthly magazines, weekly or semimonthly newsletters, and the like. One in particular stands out among all the rest: Die Mennonitische Rundschau (aka Die Mennonitische Rundschau und Herold der Wahrheit between 1901 and 1908). According to Harold S. Bender and Richard D. Thiessen, this newsletter “was the oldest Mennonite periodical published continuously under one name, with its first issue on 5 June 1880 and its last issue in January 2007. … The Rundschau was the paper of the Russian Mennonites for decades, and continued to carry something of this general character.”

Although written in German, the Rundschau was published in the U.S., generally as a weekly with as few as four but often as many as sixteen pages. The purpose of newsletter was to enable Mennonites in the U.S. to keep up to date with their Old World families and communities. One of the interesting features of the Rundschau was its inclusion of letters from individuals in Russia informing relatives and friends of important events that had taken place, in many cases the death of someone known to the readership of the Rundschau. These death announcements are so frequent that Mennonite researchers have compiled an index of all those whose deaths were announced in the Rundschau (available online here).

Fast forward to 2015. Glenn Penner not only mentioned the fact that David Buller (yes, that David Buller) is listed in the Rundschau index four times for the years 1905 and 1906; he also forwarded scans of the pages where David Buller’s death is reported or commented upon. We shall look at each of these pages in turn. We begin with page 9 of the 18 January 1905 issue of the Rundschau.

The section of greatest interest begins halfway down the second column, under the heading Rußland (Russia). Below the heading we discover important information about the letter: it was written from Waldheim on 24 November 1904.

If Waldheim sounds familiar, that is because we noted earlier (see here and here) that David Buller lived in this Molotschna village for at least the last four decades of his life, possibly more. The date is also important, since it is around the time of David’s reported death.

The letter continues with opening pleasantries: “A warm greeting to the respected editor and all beloved Rundschau readers! Long, yes long I have wanted to write for the beloved Rundschau. Since my friend David Hübert of Henderson, Nebraska, asked me to give news of his friend, Cornelius Richert, I will thus with this report briefly on his friends, provided the dear editor accepts my little writing into the Rundschau.”

Eleven lines down in column 4 we learn who is writing this letter: Peter and Anna Warkentin. In between the opening pleasantries and ending ascription, in the second full paragraph of column 3, we find the part of interest to us.

Nun möchte ich noch einige Todesfälle berichten. Den 16. November wurde der alte Großvater David Buller im Alter von 86 Jahren und 10 Monaten hier in Waldheim begraben.

Now I would like to report some deaths. On November 16 the old grandfather David Buller was buried at the age of 86 years and 10 months here in Waldheim.

Here we have a contemporary report of key information related to the death of David Buller. How contemporary? Although this issue of the Rundschau was published 18 January 1905, the letter itself was written 24 November 1904, a mere eight days after the date of David’s burial in the same village in which the letter writers lived. Historical evidence is rarely more contemporary than that.

Why is the contemporaneity—and presumably reliability—of this evidence so important? Because it forces us to reconsider the information found in the Buller Family Record. According to the BRF (see above), David passed away on 25 September 1904, exactly 86 years and 10 months after he was born. The Warkentins agree that he lived for 86 years and 10 months, but they say that he died sometime before 16 November (the date of his burial).

Unless we are to believe that the Warkentins were confused about when the funeral took place (they thought that it was eight days before writing the letter but it had actually been a month and a half), we must take their testimony at face value and accept the fact that the BFR date of death is incorrect. David died in November 1904, not September of that year.

Interestingly, both the BFR and the Warkentins report that David lived to an age of 86 years and 10 months. Since it was common for Mennonite death reports to specify length of life down to the day (e.g., elsewhere in the Rundschau and in the Przechovka church book), the 86 + 10 length may be a precise length of life; however, apart from knowing with certainty David’s date of birth, we will not be able to say one way or the other.

What we can also conclude from this single sentence is that the BFR apparently has David’s date of birth wrong as well. If he lived to an age of approximately 86 years and 10 months, then he certainly was not born in November 1817 but in January 1818. That is the only way one can have his death in November 1904 and a length of life of 86 years and 10 months.

Before we leave this first Rundschau announcement, two additional matters merit attention. First, we still do not know exactly when David passed away. All we know is that he was buried 16 November. Immediately after the sentence about David we read of Tobias Sperling of Hierschau (the next village over from Waldheim): he died on 17 November and was buried on the 21st. If the timing for David was roughly the same, then he probably died around the 12th.

The second issue relates to the calendar being used in the report of these dates. We covered this issue a while back (see the asterisked paragraph at the bottom of the post here), so a brief summary should suffice. Since 1752 the U.S. has followed the Gregorian calendar, but until 1914 Russia still used the Julian one. Presumably the Warkentins were following the Julian calendar when they dated David’s burial to 16 November. It is possible, of course, that they or the Rundschau editor converted the date to Gregorian before publication, but for the moment we must hold open the possibility that David was buried on 16 November Julian, which was 29 November Gregorian.

It is remarkable that one sentence of twenty-one words could raise so many questions. In the end, all that we can say with any certainty is that the Buller Family Record has David’s dates of birth and of death incorrect. Perhaps the next mention of David in the Rundschau will bring some clarity to the scene.

Source

Bender, Harold S., and Richard D. Thiessen. 2007. Mennonitische Rundschau, Die (Periodical). Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Available online here.

Bullers and Buhlers 2

Several posts back (here) we explored what Gustav Reimer claims are various spellings of the Buller surname: Büller, Boller, Boeler, and Buijler. Although we cannot be certain that Buijler (or Buijlert) is related to our family name, it is noteworthy that all these Buller variations are attested in the area of Schwetz, that is, the general area of the Przechovka congregation whose church book we have consulted on a number of occasions.

The next post (here) turned from the Buller surname to the Buhler one, once again drawing upon the information provided by Reimer’s 1963 work. His list of Buhler names includes the spelling “Buller” and eleven other variants (some of them with the “von” prefix so common in Germanic contexts); interestingly, all the names are attested in and around the free city of Danzig, some 80 miles north of the Schwetz area.

What are we to make of the all this evidence, both the overlap of having Bullers listed as part of the Buhler group and the geographical division between Bullers to the south and Buhlers to the north?

Are the Bullers in Danzig related to us, who are descendants (or so we think at present) of the Schwetz Bullers? If we are related, then are we also related to the other Buhlers included in that group?

Reimer presumably does not think that Buhlers and Bullers are related, since he places them in different family groups. In fact, modern science in the form of DNA testing proves that Reimer has it right.

Several weeks ago Glenn Penner (the same one who gave permission to post the translation of the Hendrik Berents travel diary; see here and here) wrote that “DNA analysis shows very clearly that the Buhlers (who belonged to the Flemish churches in Prussia) and Bullers (who belonged to the Alt Flemish church) were not related.” He explained further “that the Y-DNA results (those rows of numbers on the Y-DNA spreadsheet) of Buller men and Buhler men do not match, and not even close.”

The DNA analysis that Glenn references is that of The Mennonite DNA Project, which is collecting DNA from people who can demonstrate Low-German Mennonite ancestry in the service of five related goals (see further here):

1. Establish how many progenitors (common ancestors) there were for the present day Mennonite population.
2. Determine the number of progenitors there were for each present day Mennonite family name.
3. Use DNA results to aid in making genealogical connections within families.
4. Use DNA results to aid in making genealogical connections between families.
5. Look at the “deep ancestry” of the Low-German Mennonites.

The focus at present is on “testing Y chromosome DNA, which is the DNA that is passed down from father to son. This is particularly useful since family names are also passed down from father to son. The second phase will also include mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) which is passed down from mother to child.”

As of 1 January 2015, there were 810 Y samples in the data set, including Bullers and Buhlers. The entire Excel table can be accessed via the link provided above, but a snippet of the data set should provide a sense of the results.

If I understand correctly, the DNA samples thus far collected include two derived from the line of Abram Buhler and two from Heinrich Buller, that is, the Buhler and Buller family groups that Reimer identified in his 1963 work. Glenn Penner and Tim Janzen write in their introduction to this project:

The interpretation of Y-DNA results can be somewhat complicated, but some general principles apply. As a general rule, two men who have 8 or more markers that don’t match out of 37 markers tested almost certainly do not descend from a common ancestor who lived within the past 600 years (within the time period when surnames first came into common use). Men who have the same surname who have between 4 and 7 markers that don’t match out of 37 markers tested may descend a common ancestor who lived within the past 600 years but we can’t be certain about that based on the DNA results alone. Men with the same surname who have 3 or fewer markers that don’t match out of 37 markers tested almost certainly descend from a common ancestor who lived within the past 600 years. 

So, for example, the spreadsheet above shows that the two samples of the Heinrich Buller line have identical DNA markers in all but three cases. They are, therefore, “almost certainly” descended from a common ancestor. Similarly, the two Abram Buhler samples have only two sets of differing markers, so they are likewise almost certainly related to each other. But what do we find when we compare the Buhler and Buller samples against one another? Looking at the entire range of markers (not all shown above), there are twenty-five differences between the Abram Buhler line and the Heinrich Buller line—which fully justifies Glenn Penner’s comment that the two lines “do not match, … not even close.”

The evidence in its entirety allows us to draw certain conclusions.

1. The Buhler family group of the Danzig area and the Buller family group of the Schwetz area were not related. 


2. Further, the Bullers who were part of the Buhler family group in Danzig were not related to the (our) Schwetz Bullers. In other words, not all Bullers in Poland were relatives of ours. 


3. Clearly, then, similarity of spelling of a family surname is sometimes a matter of coincidence, not a marker of relation. 


4. To turn the matter around, I think it is also true that dissimilarity of spelling may be a matter of coincidence and not proof of a lack of relation. That is, the fact that the Danzig Buhlers were not related to the Schwetz Bullers does not prove that there never were (other) Buhlers associated with the Schwetz Bullers.

In the end, although we have no evidence that Buhlers were ever part of our family group, we should hold the matter open, in case documentary evidence for that association comes to light sometime in the future. We already have proof that Buhler can equal Buller (in Danzig), so the idea that Buller might have equaled Buhler in Schwetz should be kept open as a possibility awaiting evidence that settles the case one way or the other.

***

I know of one member of our family who has participated in the DNA project. Perhaps he would like to share some of his experience or what he has learned as a result of it?

Source

Reimer, Gustav. 1963. Die Familiennamen der westpreußischen Mennoniten. Schriftenreihe des Mennonitischen Geschichtsvereins 3. Weierhof: Mennonitischen Geschichtsverein.

Bullers and Buhlers

The previous post reviewed the various surnames that Gustav Reimer connected to Buller, that is, Büller, Boller, Boeler, and Buijler. Not all of these are certain (I doubt that the last one has a connection with Buller), but they presumably are more likely than names listed elsewhere. Or are they?

The entry above Buller in Reimer’s list is Buhler, which offers some interesting information.

The names associated with Buhler include Buler, Bollart, Buller, Bolla, Bullaert, Buhlert, Boular, von Bulaer, Bulaert, Buylaert, von Bulart, von Bular, and Bulaert (listed a second time because the name is cited in a second source).

As with the Buller entry, Reimer indicates via abbreviation where each name is attested. Buler, for example, is listed in KbD = Kirchenbücher der Mennonitengemeinde Danzig (the church book of the Mennonite congregation at Danzig). The same abbreviation is used with six additional names, which begins to hint at the primary location of the Buhler grouping.

The surname Buhlert has only a date given, 1681, which Reimer explains refers to the Verzeichnis der mennonitischen Einwohner in Danzig 1681, that is, a directory of Mennonite residents of Danzig (the Danzig area, since noncitizens such as the Mennonites were not permitted live within the city). Reimer also adds that the directory is found in the Danzig State Archives.

The two names that are identified with “Salv” are associated with the St. Salvador congregation of Danzig. The name of the church indicates that it was a Catholic church, not a Mennonite one, but the recording of data about non-Catholics in Catholic records was common in that day. Most important for our purposes is the location of this church—and record of Buhler-related surnames—in Danzig. Finally, the one name identified via year only (the second listing of Bulaert with 1586), is found in a signature list of a letter from West Prussian Mennonites in the record books of the congregation at Heubuden, a village approximately 25 miles southeast of Danzig.

Unlike the Buller group, which is attested in the villages of Schönsee, Jeziorka, Deutsch-Kazun, and Montau-Gruppe—all villages along the Vistula River 80 or more miles south of Danzig—the Buhler group was tightly packed all around Danzig.

Why is this significant? It raises the possibility that not all Bullers in Poland/Prussia derived from the same basic family group. The Danzig Bullers and the Schwetz Bullers (for lack of a better term) may have shared a name without sharing any common ancestors. The case is not closed on this, of course, but Reimer may be correct to keep the Bullers in the church book of the Mennonite congregation at Danzig separate from those whom we assume to be our Bullers.

Fortunately, the story does not end here. Modern science, specifically, DNA testing, has evidence to offer as well, but that is a topic for another post.

Source

Reimer, Gustav. 1963. Die Familiennamen der westpreußischen Mennoniten. Schriftenreihe des Mennonitischen Geschichtsvereins 3. Weierhof: Mennonitischen Geschichtsverein.

Büllers, Bollers, Boelers, and Buijlers

Several posts ago we noted several different spellings of surnames that are often linked to our own, namely, Boeler, Boller, and Buijler (or Buijlert). We are not the only ones to notice these variations. In fact, the Buller listing in Gustav Reimer’s Die Familiennamen der westpreußischen Mennoniten list these variants (minus Buijlert with a -t) and one other.

Buhler and Buller in Reimer 1963, 105.

The first section of Reimer’s listing provides a shorthand way of indicating where each spelling of the surname is attested. For example, the spelling Büller appears in SC, which stands for Special Consignation, a reference to the 1776 census of Mennonites. Boller appears in Hu 1 and Boeler in Hu 1 and 2; the Hu abbreviation stands for Hendrik Berents Hulshoff, whose name lists we surveyed in earlier posts (here and here).

A second section (after the —) identifies the church or town/village in which various sources locate the family name. For example, the first entry, Afl = Gemeinden der Alten Flaminger, points to the Old Flemish churches (in the Schwetz area) and identifies the source of that information, the Hendrik Berents Hulshoff lists. Other places listed are Ssee fl. = the Flemish congregation at Schönsee (Wbe = Wiebe 1939 as the source), Jez = Jeziorka (Wbe), Kaz = Deutsch-Kazun (Wbe), and MGr = Montau-Gruppe. Why repeat all this minutiae? If Reimer is correct, these are the places where we should look for the earliest Bullers who may be our ancestors.

Reimer ends with a comment on the relation of the Buller names that he lists: “Die namen sind nicht klar zu trennen, möglicherweise ausverscheidenen Wurzeln herzuleiten” = “The names are not clearly distinguished [and] may derive from different roots.” This meaning of the first clause is not entirely clear, but the primary point is contained in the second clause: the different variations listed for Buller may derive from different roots. Stated differently, there may be no actual link between Boelers and Buijlers, just as we suspected earlier.

We have not even touched on the variant spellings listed for Buhler above the Buller entry, which variations include, oddly enough, Buller. More on that in a subsequent post. We will also explore further what recent DNA analysis can contribute to the discussion. Little by little, perhaps we can continue to narrow our search and eventually locate the place from which our ancestors began their journey from Poland to Russian and on to the U.S.

Sources

Reimer, Gustav. 1963. Die Familiennamen der westpreußischen Mennoniten. Schriftenreihe des Mennonitischen Geschichtsvereins 3. Weierhof: Mennonitischen Geschichtsverein.

Wiebe, Herbert. 1939. Mennonitische Familiennamen in den Weichselniederungen von Graudenz bis Thorn. Mennonitische Geschichtsblätter 4:34–39.

———. 1952. Das Siedlungswerk niederländischer Mennoniten im Weichseltal zwischen Fordon und Weissenberg bis zum Ausgang des 18. Jahrhunderts. Wissenschaftliche Beiträge zur Geschichte und Landeskunde Ost-Mitteleuropas 3. Marburg a.d. Lahn: Johann Gottfried Herder-Institut.

What a long, strange trip

The world today seems incredibly mobile, as children grow up and move from the family home to locales far away. However, none of us or our kids can really compare with the mobility that one of Grandpa’s uncles experienced.

If you check in the Buller Family Record, you will be reminded that Jacob P Buller was the younger brother of Peter P. In fact, you will see that Jacob was born 2 August 1879, around a month after the family had arrived and settled in Nebraska. He was the first member of the family born in the U.S.

Of course, we should not forget that Sarah Siebert Buller was six months pregnant when the family emigrated, so Jacob actually began his life’s journey (in utero) in Kleefeld, Molotschna colony. Why is this worth noting? Because Jacob’s journey did not merely take him from Kleefeld to Henderson but all the way to Honolulu.

Thanks to this photo provided by Abe and Alice Buller, we have occasion to focus on Jacob P Buller, brother to Peter P and uncle to Grandpa Chris.

As already mentioned, Jacob was born shortly after the family arrived in Nebraska. The Buller Family Record provides more information about his life: “J.P. Buller attended Fremont Normal School and graduated from the University of Nebraska in 1911. He was a teacher in the public schools of Nebraska, Texas and Idaho until 1921. He taught in the Hawaiian public schools until 1928. He was then appointed high school principal and served as such in several schools until his retirement in 1942.” That date was, of course, one year after the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Online sources fill in a few other details. According to the Hawaiian Genealogy Indexes website (see here), on 4 August 1925 Jacob married Elizabeth C. Gordon in Honolulu, on the island of Oahu. Whether Jacob and Elizabeth met in Hawaii or met earlier and decided to relocate together is unclear. Jacob was eighteen years older than Elizabeth, who was born in Philadelphia on 1 April 1897. The Buller Family Record also reports that Jacob and Elizabeth had one son together, Jospeh Gordon Buller, a year after they married.

The 1930 United States Census Report confirms that Jacob was a high school principal. Little more is known of his life, but online records document at least one trip back to the States (Hawaii was still a territory at that time). The ship manifest below lists the passengers of a voyage from Vancouver, British Columbia, to Honolulu in August 1934.

The page detail below uncovers additional information. For example, we confirm that Elizabeth was born in Philadelphia. Further, we learn (apparently) where Jacob was principal. Looking closely, we see that Elizabeth and Joseph list Leilahua School Wahiawa, Hawaii, as their U.S. address. (Jacob’s is given as “Department of Public Instruction.”) Presumably the school in view is today’s Leilehua High School, a public, co-educational, college preparatory high school northwest of Honululu in the center of the island.

Jacob died in 1957, and Elizabeth followed five years later, in 1962. The Buller Family Record also states that their son Joseph married Joan Marie Schneider in 1966.

Apparently the entire family moved to California at some point, since Jacob is buried in Forest Lawn Memorial Park, Glendale, California (see here). There is also a record of a 2001 real-estate transaction for Joseph and Joan in Los Angeles-Lake Balboa. It appears that Joseph and Marie are both still alive.

These bits and pieces from another branch of the Buller tree are of no direct relevance for us except as a reminder of how far our family has come and how far we all will continue to go. Jacob was a bridge between the Old World (Kleefeld) and the New World (Henderson), but he continued his journey all the way to the island of Oahu and then back to California, where his brother Peter P had lived since 1936. That was a long way for both to travel to wind up in the same place.

By George, I think we’ve got it!

This continuation of the Dutch visitor to Poland series is the point of all that that has gone before. To recap, we noted a number of apparent Bullers in the Derks and Berents lists. These included (Bullers and spouses, when known):

• Jurjen Boeler† — Dijna Toomske (aka Dijna Tomas in the Berents list)
• Cornelis Voet — Saartie Bollers
• Hans Boller — Boeiste Onrouw = Hans Boeler — Boetstje Onrouw
• Lijsabet Buijlers
• Trijntje Buijlerts
• Jeurijen Buijelerts
• Saartje Boelers

One name begs to be noticed, a name that we have considered before—and it is not even a Buller name. Earlier this year, in a post titled “Old Buller or Original Buller?” (23 January), we looked at the statement about the Buller family at the front of the Przechovka church book.

Buller entry in the Przechovka church register, with summary/translation below

This is the first time that this family name appears. All the Bullers are descendants of this family. His given name and original residence are not known. He died at a very old age. The only information about his marital status is a notation found with No. 930B and No. 339. This indicates that he was married to Jacob Thomsen’s daughter, Dina, and that she survived him. Jacob Thoms, No. 930, lived at Dorposch.

The Dina Thoms (alternate Thomsen) mentioned as being married to the earliest Buller of the church is apparently the Dijna Toomske/Dijna Tomas mentioned in the Derks/Berents lists. In other words, we have contemporary evidence—a record from the very time that Derks and then Berents visited the area (1714–1716, then 1719)—that Dina Thoms existed.

But this is not the most important conclusion to draw from the Derks list. Think back to our earlier discussions: Who was Dina Thoms’s husband? Exactly which Buller did she marry? If you recall, Dina married number 339 in the church record immediately below, good old *** Buller, whom we have dubbed Unknown Buller and the Grandma database identifies as ______ Buller (further below).

Why call attention to this now? Look again at the Derks entry for this couple: Jurjen Boeler† — Dijna Toomske. Unknown Buller in now known. His name was Jurjen, that is, George. *** Buller has a name, and we even know approximately when he passed away. The † by his name means that, although he was alive when Derks visited sometime around 1715, he had passed away before Berents visited in 1719.

Although secondary resources can enlighten us about the political, geographical, sociological, and religious background of a particular time and place in history, reading them is no substitute for digging into the actual primary sources deriving from that period and locale. There is no better proof of this than the fact that, based on the primary source provided by Derks and Berents, we can now fill in an important blank for the Bullers with a connection to the Przechovka church. The original Buller of that church (at least as far as the church book knows) was George Buller, who died sometime between 1715 and 1719 and left behind (still living in the school—what should we make of that repeated fact?!) his widow Dina Thoms Buller.

I will let everyone know if the Grandma database accepts this revision to their listing. As far as I am concerned, however, this loose end has been tied up quite nicely, and hereafter the Buller Time blog will refer to George Buller rather than to Unknown Buller.

A Dutch visitor to Poland 2

In addition to the travel diary included in the previous post, Hendrik Berents provided several lists of names of people in the Schwetz area.  These lists have been a primary source for researchers in Mennonite geneaology and history, and they continue to help us to identify the inhabitants of that eighteenth-century community.

Looking toward Świecie (Schwetz), Poland, today

Interestingly, Berents did more than record the names of the Mennonites whom he encountered on his visit to the area; he also included a list of names by someone who preceded him by several years: Ale (or Alle) Derks. As Glenn Penner explains, “the exact year of the Derks visit is unknown,” but “a comparison of the list below with the Przechowka records would suggest 1714 to 1716” (see here). Berents included and updated the Derks list, using a cross to identify those who had died between Derks’s and Berents’s visits.

We begin with the first section of the Berents list as provided by Glenn Penner, who kindly granted permission to post this information (for the complete assemblage of lists, see here). For fun, see how many names you can decipher—and how many Bullers you can spot.

List of Names of Mennonite Families in the Environs of Schwetz

Andries Weedel	Trijntie Richers his wife
Hermen Vrien†	Saartie Wedels
Hindrik Onrouw†	Widower
Benjemijn Weedel	Saartie Raatslafs
Tobias Raatslaf	Eefke Spaarlinkx
Aaltien Adams	Andries Raatslafs widw.	is one household
Abraham Onrouw	Boetsie Ijsaäks, now Onrouw	}
Cornelis Richers	Trijntie Antsen	}
Abraham Richters†	Elske Bekers	}
Hans Voet Widower		} in one house
Jurjen Boeler†	Dijna Toomske	reside in the new school

   Jacob Raatslaf has not been written in and is now dead already. [annotation by Hendrik Berents]

Hendrik Voet†	Marike Swegelers	}
Peter Raatslaf	Saartie Smits	}
Hans Raatslaf Widower		} in one house

   remarried the widow of Abraham Rigger [annotation by Hendrik Berents]

Hans Raatslaf	Trijntie Weedels	}
Cornelis Voet	Saartie Bollers	} in one house
Tobias Spaarlink	Trijntie Raatslafs	}
Ijsaak Spaarlink	Grietie Onrouw	} in one house
Peter Bekker	Trijntie Raatslaf

   The hired hand is dead; Antje Keuns is dead. [annotation by Hendrik Berents]

Hans Frein	Grietje Voets†	}
Sijmon Wedel	Marike Riggers	} in one house

 
The list continues with Konopat and Schönsee, among other villages. Of particular interest for us is the mention of Hans Boller and Boeiste Onrouw in Konopat. Beyond that, several entries for Konopat indicate that Lutherans lived alongside these Mennonites. Interestingly, the Schönsee part of the list rates some of the people’s homes as “bad housing” or “very bad housing.”

After reproducing and annotating the Derks list, Berents provides his own list of households for the Schwetz area. According to Glenn Penner, Berents lists only baptized individuals, so children are not counted. Included below is the Przechovka portion of this list. (The names with asterisks had passed away by Berents’s second visit to the area in 1733.)

Sijmon Wedel, Merijke Riggers his housewife	2
Andries Wedel, Trijntje Riggers his housewife, Saartje widow	3
Jacob Wedel, widower, Antje Koppers* widow	2
Benjamin Wedel*, Saartje Raatslaf his housewife, Trijntje Wedel*, Peter Wedel, Aaltjen Schellenberg's* widow, Adam Raatslaf	6
Abraham Onrouw, Boetsje Ijsaäks his housewife*, Berent and Boetsje Raatslaf, Boetje Jansens	5
Cornelis Riggers*, Trijntje Jansen* his housewife, Derk* and Mertje Riggers, Lijsabet Wedel	5
Dijna Tomas, Marijke Swegelers his widows, reside in the school	2
Hans Raatslaf, Elske Berents*, Heijn Riggerts*, Lijsabet Buijlers, Peter Smit, Trijntje Bekkers	6
Peter Raatslaf, Saartje Smits*, Eefke Voets, Antje Jansen*, Hans Raatslaf, Hendrik Onrouw	6
Jeurijen Nagtegaal, Antje Riggerts, Elsje Riggerts*, Trijntje Buijlerts, Benjamin Wedel, Jeurijen Buijelerts	6
Tobijas Spaarlink, Trijntje Raatslaf, Marijken Wedels*, Jan Jansen, Ijsaäk Spaarlink*, Grietje Onrouw	6
Tobijas Raatslaf*, Eefje Spaarlink, Pieter Smit, Jan Riggerts, Boetsje Bekkers	5
Hans Vrij*, Boetsje Voets*, Trijntje Riggerts	3

Berents continues with Konopat and other locales nearby. In those sections of the list we encounter both Saartje Boelers and the Hans Boeler who was married to Boetstje Onrouw in the Konopat list above.

So, how many Bullers did you spot? How many different spellings of the family name? The next post will explore one of these Bullers and tie up the loose end mentioned a few posts back. For now, we puzzle over one observation about the spelling of those who appear to be Bullers.

It is understandable that the Dutchman Berents would spell the names according to his own phonetic and orthographic background, so we should not expect him to spell the last names as those whose last names he was recording might have spelled them. However, one would at least expect him to spell the same name consistently.

How, then, are we to explain the listing in this last section of Lijsabet Buijlers, Trijntje Buijlerts, and Jeurijen Buijelerts in Przechovka versus Saartje Boelers and Hans Boeler in Konopat? The simplest explanation would be that Berents was hearing different surnames at this point, not spelling the same surname differently. Further, the simplest explanation of the different pronunciations would be that these names represented different, probably unrelated, family lines.

We do not have enough evidence to know whether the “obvious” explanation is the correct one, let alone to suggest that either the Buijelerts (I take the lack of a -t- in Lijsabet Buijlers to be an error, not evidence for a different pronunciation) or the Boelers were part of our larger family. For now, as so often, we end with questions for further exploration. (Step 1: Compare Berents’s spellings of all the names listed, first and last, to assess the level of his consistency and to identify any spelling or phonetic similarities either to Buijelerts or Boeler.)

That investigation will take time, so in the meantime I invite you to pore over all the possible Bullers given in this post to see if you can spot a remarkable piece of evidence about a Buller whom we have discussed on more than a few occasions.

Sources

Hulshoff, H. Ch. 1938. Bezoekreis van Hendrik Berents Hulshoff aan de Doopsgezinden Gemeenten der Oude Vlamingen in Pruisen in Polen in 1719. Bijdragen en Mededeelingen van het Historisch Genootschap 59:32–82. This is a standard article on the Berents diary. It is available online here in Dutch but can be translated to English by your browser or at translate.google.com.

Penner, Glenn H. Przechowka, West Prussia, Memberships lists for 1715 and 1733 from the Travel Diary of Hendrik Berents Hulshoff. Available online here.

Zijpp, Nanne van der. 1956. Hulshoff, Hendrik (1664–1745). Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Available online here.

Happy birthday, Dad! (reposted)

Eighty-two years young!

A Dutch visitor to Poland 1

Historical research at its best relies more on primary sources than secondary resources. That is to say, although a historical investigator may learn from what others say about a given subject in secondary resources such as journal articles, textbooks, monographs, encyclopedias, and the like, the real work of historical discovery takes place when a researcher deals with realia, the records and papers and artifacts of the time under investigation.

For the past eighteen months this blog has relied on secondary sources when necessary (e.g., links to articles in the Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online or quotations from relevant and reliable books), but we generally have found the greatest enlightenment by working with the primary sources themselves: the ship manifest from the S.S. Switzerland (see here), the Przechovka church book (first mentioned here), school records from Kleefeld and other villages (here), and a number of photographs of Bullers from years gone by.

With this post we encounter another type of primary source: a travel diary from the first half of the eighteenth century. But first, Nanne van der Zijpp provides background in a secondary resource: “Hendrik Hulshoff, usually called Hendrik Berents, was … an elder of the Groningen Old Flemish Mennonites. … As elder he made official trips to the Old Flemish congregations; in 1719 he made a journey all the way to Polish Prussia. On 22 May, accompanied by his brother Arent Berends, he started out on a trip via Groningen and Harlingen, to Vlieland, and from there by boat to Danzig, where they arrived on 28 June. Here he met with Mennonite leaders.… In Gruppe he visited Jacob Bertelt (Bartel), … for whom he had brought a letter and a ‘great basket full of books’ from Holland. On 5 July the travelers arrived at Przechovka or Przysierk, later called Wintersdorf, not far from Schwetz” (van der Zijpp 1956).

We pick up the story there, thanks to Glenn H Penner, who graciously gave this blog permission to reproduce a portion of his translation of the Berents diary. For Glenn’s introduction to the diary and the entire account of Berents’s time in Poland, see here.

At friends in Przysierk [Przechowka]. About 1 o’clock we came upon Pschighofke [Przysierk, later called Heinrichsdorf, in the neighbourhood of the city of Schwetz] at our friends, at uncle [oom, Aeltester in German] Benjamin Wedels’ house, who received us with uncommon love and affection; just as that afternoon came many friends, who welcomed us with tears and showed us such love, that it cannot be said or written well, and that furthermore, because we had traveled for so long; for which they had been so concerned, that we might have died accidentally, so that the joy was now uncommonly great for them; sang several welcoming songs for our diversion. Thursday the 6th we made plans to speak to brothers and sisters a bit to thank the Lord for showing us his goodness, that we arrived at our friends in good health and in good bodily state. With a hearty address and exhortation, that we may together pray to the attention of the Lord in celebration and strength of mind, that it may please his fatherly goodness to shine upon us with his strength of mind [fortitude], to first open my mouth; to be allowed to speak of the secret of the evangelism Jesus Christ and secondly to open the ears of the friends and to unify hearts, so to be allowed to hear and understand correctly, so that our work not become idle and poisoned, but that it may bring forth fruits; that thereby the name of the Lord be honoured and praised etc.

The Biestken’s Bible, one of the “most
wanted” books (Duerksen 1967, 108).

Friday the 7th we made some deliberations to ordain the most wanted books and then many friends have also visited us and showed us uncommonly great love, with whom we there spent the day. Saturday the 8th more friends again visited us, but, because I had to preach Sunday, so I needed time to practise, but would not leave me in peace; such love they showed us; yes they are so full of love, that they could not conceal. Sunday the 9th I preached about Heb: 1 etc. which the friends received with many tears. That afternoon the friends had a brotherly gathering to speak of the election and a few arrivals. Then came the women and many youths, such menfolk and womenfolk and spoke with us; showed us much love, which much diverted us, spent our time with singing and talking about what the blessed instruction came to.

Monday the 10th called upon me the prospects for school, which were 31 in number; to whom I then spoke of teaching and edification, so that they might think right, what they were about to embark upon. Tuesday we spoke to a few friends and the love, that they showed us can one in no measure describe well. Wednesday the 12th we held together a day of fasting and prayer to access the Lord; that He would allow our attempts to succeed and to go with us in work and labour and to steer us according to his Will etc. Thursday the 13th was then held the election of two preachers of the word and the most votes went to Jacob IJsaäks [Jacob Isaacs] residing across the Wijsel [Weichsel] and to Abraham Onrouw [Abraham Unrau], residing at Pschighofke [Przechowka]. Friday and Saturday the 14th and 15th I had to keep very quiet alone with the books in order to do the offering and investiture Sunday. Then it was very swoel hot weather, like it had been at departure and almost no rain.

Sunday the 16th I served the offering; were 31 persons and the investiture etc. Monday the 17th we spoke a bit with the friends. Tuesday the 18th we drove to ‘t Wolt [Wolz] and further to Schoonzee [Schönsee] in order to also visit some friends there, lodged with Hans Voet [Hans Voth] in Schoonzee. Wednesday the 19th I preached [served] there, about the fruits of the mind, and in the afternoon spoke to the friends. Thursday the 20th we visited some more friends there and then we attended Hans Voet [Hans Voth] and his wife and ate lunch at Jacob IJsaäks’ [Jacob Isaacs] and then visited other friends in ‘t Wolt and travelled further with uncle Benjamin and Pieter Dekker [Peter Decker] back to their house. Friday and Saturday the 21st and the 22nd, I had to once again remain with the books, in order to serve the offering and washing of feet on Sunday, although Saturday afternoon we had business of the circumstance of Hans Voet [Hans Voth]; brought it to the satisfaction of the friends in the end. Sunday the 23rd we held unity [service] and the washing of feet which occurred with the shedding of many tears.

Area of Schönsee, which is known as Sosnówka today.

After that exhortation, I made it known to the brothers and sisters that we were of the intention to again leave the friends on the Wednesday the 26th, to again turn back to ours and that with permission of the Lord I was of the intention to take leave of the friends with the serving of a last meal on Tuesday the 25th, which caused almost all friends to shed tears (but not so with everyone of them); because their love is so great, that they could not conceal it. Have received many more visitors that afternoon and when one speaks of leaving, then run forthwith the eyes of many friends. Monday the 24th I kept myself again with the books, but then came several friends and complained, that they would gladly travel with us to Dansig, but because it was the middle of harvest, that very time it would be necessary to take in the rye; so they could not venture it and almost none of the friends could travel with us; arranged therefore with tears, that we really should stay until Saturday the 29th, because to just let us drive on like that, they would not forget in a lifetime. Something which we could not resolve to do, since we had been so long away from home; so that in the end we resolve to stay until Saturday; which brought such gladness to the friends, that it was shortly known to the friends in ‘t Koepat [Konopat in the environs of Schwetz] and also across the Wijsel [Weichsel].

Tuesday the 25th have I then preached about Efe: 6 [Paul to the Ephesians, Chapter 6, verse 11 and 13.]; of God’s weapons rest etc. There had come many friends from the other side of the Wijsel and also two servers of the word from the other Mennonites, named Derk Wiggerts and IJsaäk Geerts and several more of their friends. Afternoon we had so much talk with the friends, that it was so uncomfortable due to heat in the house, that one could not comfortably remain. …

Farewell. Saturday the 29th most of the friends visited us at the house of uncle Benjamin to say their last good-byes, to which end we first said good-bye at half past ten, with an uncommonly great sadness due to leaving each other. Then the friends saw us off as long as they could. Then drove with us four wagons full of our friends for close to three hours in order to keep us company, which after we said good-byes with great sadness to separate from each other.

Like most diaries, travel or otherwise, a significant amount of minutiae is included, as the key events of each day are recounted. One’s mind can easily wander with the repetitiveness of the day-by-day narration. Looking more closely, paying attention to details, however, one can also see glimpses of our ancestors’ daily lives.

For example, we see that our forebears in Poland grew rye, which had to be harvested mid-July. We notice also a school with thirty-one students in the community. Berents mentions several times the washing of feet, which was part of the worship practices of some Mennonites of that time. Mention is also made of books that were wanted. Here a secondary resource can help us understand more. Jacob A. Duerksen explains that Hendrik Berents “brought a large basketful of Dutch books with him from the Netherlands which had been requested by members of the Old Flemish Mennonite Church in Przekhovka and by members of the Frisian churches in Montau and Schönsee” (Duerksen 1967, 108, emphasis added). In Poland, at least at this time, these Mennonites still relied on Dutch materials. Of course, this raises the question of what language they used in their worship services.

So many more observations could be made, but these few will have to do for now, since there is other material in the Hendrik Berents travel diary that demands our attention. The next post will reproduce another part of Glenn Penner’s translation of the diary, the part that lists the names of the Mennonites whom Hendrik Berents (and others) encountered during their time in the Przechovka area. Needless to say, we will see a Buller or two recorded there.

Sources

Duerksen, Jacob A. 1967. Transition from Dutch to German in West Prussia. Mennonite Life 22:107–9. Available online here.

Penner, Glenn H. Przechowka, West Prussia, Memberships lists for 1715 and 1733 from the Travel Diary of Hendrik Berents Hulshoff. Available online here.

Zijpp, Nanne van der. 1956. Hulshoff, Hendrik (1664–1745). Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Available online here.

A photographic interlude

Before we tie up the loose end mentioned earlier, another early picture of Grandpa and his siblings deserves our attention.

Peter P and Margaretha Epp Buller (Grandpa’s parents) had twelve children. The first son, named Peter, was born on 10 August 1891 and died eight days later. Based on this information and working from the list of other children, we can identify the nine children in this photograph with a fair degree of certainty. The children who survived infancy are:

• Magaretha P—29 July 1892 (see further here)
• Katharina P—1 March 1895 (see further here)
• Benjamin P—5 July 1897 (see further here)
• Sara P—30 September 1899 (see further here)
• Klaas P—3 March 1902 (see further here)
• Elizabeth P—21 March 1904 (see further here)
• Cornelius P—17 April 1906 (see further here)
• Maria P—21 May 1908 (see further here)
• Peter E—25 May 1911 (see further here)
• Anna P—9 October 1913 (see further here)
• Henry P—20 December 1915 (see further here)

The two oldest girls in the center are obviously Margaretha and Katharina, although it is hard to tell which looks three years older than the other. The oldest boy on the right must be Benjamin, followed by the younger girl toward the left of the back row: Sara (one of the compilers of the Buller Family Record). That would make the boy to the far left Klaas, and Elizabeth would be the girl farthest to the right.

The lad wearing the double-breasted coat in the front is Grandpa Chris. The two remaining kids are Maria (another compiler of the Buller Family Record) and Peter, who seems to be just shy of two years of age.

If Peter is almost two, then we might date the photo to spring of 1913, when he was twenty-three months. Obviously, Anna and Henry were not yet born at that time. If the photo is correctly dated to 1913, Grandpa was seven years old

There is no indication of where the photograph was taken, but it was probably somewhere close to home, if not on the Peter P farm itself.

***
Thanks to Abe and Alice Buller for providing the photograph and to Dad for supplying it to the Buller Time blog.

Polish/Prussian Bullers: Jeziorka 3

Thus far (here and here) we have discussed the founding of Jeziorka in 1727 by thirteen Mennonite families who leased the land associated with the newly established village from Frau Hedwig von Steffens-Wybczyriski. The initial leases were for forty years and could be renewed, if the two sides agreed on terms.

We have also discovered that Bullers lived in Jeziorka nearly from its beginning and through most of the eighteenth century. Hans Buller (Przechovka church book 341) and his wife raised six children there in the 1730s and later. After that, George Buller (PCB 375) and his family lived there and were even listed in the 1772 Prussian land register and the 1776 census of Mennonites.

A portion of Jeziorki (Jeziorka) today, looking to the northwest.

One might wonder, however, why neither Hans 341 nor any of his sons is listed in either the 1772 or the 1776 lists. There is an explanation for that. Peter J. Klassen provides the context:

Tensions … arose with the local landlord, a Polish noble who demanded that Mennonite settlers on his lands perform the same scutage services provided by Polish settlers. For Mennonites, who had come as free persons and not as serfs, this seemed a novel and extraordinary request. A number … began to look for better opportunities elsewhere. In 1764, delegates from Jeziorka went to Berlin to explore settlement possibilities. Such a move would mean leaving Polish jurisdiction and moving to lands ruled by Frederick II. One of the king’s officials, Franz Balthasar Schonberg von Brenkenhoff, was charged with bringing new settlers to the Netze (Noted) River region, near Driesen in Brandenburg.… When he invited Mennonites to settle there, they accepted. In 1764, twenty-eight Mennonite families received settlement rights, with specified privileges. They were granted religious freedom, exemption from military service and the swearing of oaths, and each received forty morgen of land. Later they also received permission to establish and maintain their own schools. In the spring of 1765, thirty-five families arrived at their new home; the twenty-eight from Jeziorka had been joined by others from Przechowka and Schönsee. Several treks eventually brought some 166 Mennonites to the area. (Klassen 2009, 86–87)

Without going into too much detail, note that, near the end of the lease term the Jeziorka landlord decided to change the terms, presumably on the renewal of leases. Some Mennonites leasing the land did not want to accept those terms, so they explored other options. Eventually, at the invitation of Franz Balthasar Schonberg von Brenkenhoff, a representative of the Prussian king Frederick II, a group of families from the area moved roughly 120 miles southwest to the Netzebruch, a “boggy wetland along the lower course of the Netze/Noteć river” (Hege 1957). The red line in the map below shows the relation and distance between the Schwetz area and the Netzebruch.

As Klassen states, the thirty-five families moved in 1765, which would seem to have been two years before the end of the initial forty-year lease. Several explanations seem possible: the leases began in 1725 rather than 1727; the two parties agreed on some sort of early termination terms; the original lease holders sold the remaining years on the lease to other Mennonites, who would then be in a good position to renew the leases. Which of these explanations is correct (if any) is unknown.

The fact that George 375 appears on the 1772 and 1776 censuses proves that he was not one of those who left. The observation that neither Hans 341 nor none of his sons appears on the censuses might imply that they were among the group that left. However, that cannot be known, since at present we do not have evidence that they lived in the villages of the Netzebruch. Perhaps Hans 341’s family leased other land in the Schwetz/Przechovka area.

We do know that some Bullers made the trek southwest, since the 1767 lists of families from the two main villages in the Netze area give us their names. According to table 4 in Adalbert Goertz’s “From Jeziorka, Prussia to Russia in 1804” webpage (see here), Peter Buller and his wife plus their four children (two sons and two daughters) lived in the village of Brenckenhoffswalde, while George and his wife and their one son and one daughter lived in Frantzthal. We cannot know with absolute certainty who this Peter and this George were, but based on our survey of Georges from Przechovka in the previous post, I would put my money on brothers George 350 and Peter 351 in the scan from the church book below.

Their departure from the Schwetz area might explain why such scant information is included for them: the church book was composed at least twenty years later, and little more than their names and their father’s name was known. I say “little more” because the church book contains one more hint.

The standard entry in the church book lists a person’s name, parentage, date and location of birth, date of baptism, and information related to the person’s marriage: when, who, and where. The last column (the where) has entries for George and Peter.

If you are viewing this on a computer rather than a phone or tablet, you should be able to see that the top entry reads FrThal; the second is less clear, but it appears to begin with a B and end with Wald. In other words, George was married in FrThal = Frantzthal in the Netze area, and Peter his brother was married in B??Wald = Brenckenhoffswalde in the same locale.

These are the two Bullers who show up on Adalbert Goertz’s list of names, which reminds us once again that our larger, extended family constantly grew and spread even before our more immediate forebears settled in Molotschna.

This Jeziorka trilogy of posts probably does not relate to any of our direct ancestors (although we cannot say that for certain), but it does give us a window into the lives of our larger family through most of the eighteenth century. We will return to other Bullers in the Przechovka area in the near future, since there are many more of our family to identify and get to know. Before we do that, however, we have an important loose end to tie up. Stay tuned!

Sources

Hege, Christian. 1957. Netzebruch (Poland). Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Available here.

Klassen, Peter J. 2009. Mennonites in Early Modern Poland and Prussia. Young Center Books in Anabaptist and Pietist Studies. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Zijpp, Nanne van der, and Richard D. Thiessen. 2014. Jeziorka (Kuyavian-Pomeranian Voivodeship, Poland). Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Available here.