I finally got around to reading the post will answer.
Thank you for what you have discovered and passed on tome through this forum. I welcome the information.
My thank you is sincere and without sarcasm. I truly appreciate the information, although it goes without saying that I would have preferred to see the name Johnson as opposed to Boerum. However, Boerum I can deal with.
McCool stated - ".... But, I want to note that you somehow,......through no fault of your own, managed upon a truth. That is, that Johannes Van Siclen and Gertrude Lott did have a [previously undocumented] son Cornelius Van Siclen."
An educated guess based on a couple of known facts contained in the Eastling affidavits would be a more accurate description of my intuition and willingness to accept the truth in the affidavits as opposed to your - "despite the undulating mass of flotsam and jetsam in your misguided genetic scientology".
Using an estimated and calulated age of 95 for Cornelius Van Siclen - based on Fanny's statement in her affidavit that Cornelius's - "died at an extremely old age" -along with two Eastling letters which mentioned the age of Corenlius as being in the 90's, - and the affidavit testimony that Cornelius was a Revolutionary Veteran, I concluded from Waddel's Van Sickle genealogy that Cornelius may have descended from one of the Van Siclens mentioned by Waddel and probably born in the time frame of Johannes Van Siclen and Gertrude Lott's children. However, I certainly did not know that to be factual and I was making and educated guess based on the following calculation.
Using his estimated birth date 1755, calculated from his estimated age of 95, I found that the 1755 birth date placed him right in the ball park to be a sibling of Elsie, Abraham and others who were the children of Johannes Van Siclen and Gertrude Lott. Consequently, I suspected that there could be a missing child of Johannes Van Siclen and Gertrude Lott. Of course I never suspected that you would discover an "undocument son" of theirs. Assuming you have posted the truth and are not attempting to set me up for a Van Curen trap.
If the "undocumented son" of Johannes Van Siclen and Gertrude Lott is the Cornelius Van Siclen in the affidavits, which will place his estimated birth year, 1755 plus or minus, in the time frame of the children of Johannes Van Siclen and Gertrude Lott, then there is every reason to believe that Fanny and Ferdinand were correct when they testified that it was a well know fact in Maria and Luther's family that Cornelius was a Revolutionary Veteran. Additional confirmation as to the accuracy of the affidavits in regard to estimating Cornelius Van Siclen's age at his death - IN QUEBEC, CANADA.
To be able to now read that I may have been correct is quite satisfying. I interpret your phrase - "...that Johannes Van Siclen and Gertrude Lott did have a [previously undocumented] son Cornelius Van Siclen." - as an implied admission that you may not have had knowledge of the "undocumented son" prior to the introduction of the Eastling affidavits.
Whether that comment is right or wrong, it was good to hear from you, even with your sarcasm, that there was an "undocumented son" not recorded in Waddel - the only reference I used.
What I don't understand is why, if Cornelius Van Siclen's first wife had been Catherine Boerum, the deponents would remember their grandmothers name as Catherine Johnson. Far out as it may sound, perhaps the full name of Catherine Boerum was in fact Catherine Johnson Boerum or Catherine Boerum Johnson and the Boerum somehow got lost over the years. It seems conceivable that perhaps Johnson, for unknown reasons, was inadvertently left off whatever record you discovered containing the Boerum name but was later told to the children of Cornelius and Catherine Boerum/Johnson. It is obvious that whatever the reason may have been, it is the Johnson name that the deponents remembered.
I remain unequivocally convinced that the deponents knew their grandmother as Catherine Johnson. Boreum is a name lost to history for whatever reason.
I am now ready to accept as fact your discovery that the "undocumented son" Cornelius Van Siclen is probably the identical Cornelius Van Siclen in the Eastling affidavits. I have no difficulty with believing that the deponents grandmother's complete name could have been something like Catherine Johnson Boerum or Catherine Boerum Johnson or even Boerum by it self.I wouldn't pretend to know which if either is correct or why Boerum was dropped if it had been part of Catherine's name.
What is important, is that Catherine Boerum may indeed be the mother of Maria Van Siclen, and grandmother of the deponents. Until evidence is discovered which either proves or disproves your allegation about Catherine Boerum wife of Cornelius Van Siclen or until evidence is discovered which proves the name Johnson in the affidavits is incorrect what I will do is this.
I WILL SHOW IN THE EASTLING GENEALOGY CATHERINE JOHNSON'S NAME AS CATHERINE JOHSON A.K.A. BOERUM. I WILL ALSO INCLUDE AS SOURCE MATERIAL YOUR POST ABOUT YOUR DISCOVERY
Because Maria Van Siclen did not include her mothers name in Maria's Bible entries we have only the affidavits testifying to the name of Catherine Johnson. However the evidence gleaned from the calculated age of Cornelius Van Siclen which placed him in the Van Siclen lineage beginning with Johannes Van Siclen and Gertrude Lott and the additional fact that the undocumneted Cornelius Van Siclen's wife had a first name of Catherine is simply too strong to ignore and must be included in the genealogical record. Consequently, until one or the other surnames of Catherine is proven incorrect, she will henceforth be recorded as Catherine Johnson AKA Boreum.
Thank you once again for your assistance. I had given up on locating the parentage of Cornelius Van Siclen and although I am not going to set aside the name Catherine Johnson, I do freely admit that it could have beenJohnson Boerum or Boerum Johnson or even Boerum by itself.
I believe I will now add to the ancestry of Cornelius Van Siclen and Maria Van Siclen the parentage and siblings shown in Waddel.
Would you agree, until such a time as additional evidence surfaces which proves or disproves either the Johnson or Boreum name, that using AKA's for Boreum is a resonable approach. Would you recommend that I not include Cornelius's parentage, siblings plus his remainingancestry until more conclusive evidence surfaces at some future date?