Search for content in message boards

Willem Ottensz b. ca 1440

Replies: 4

Re: Willem Ottensz b. ca 1440

Posted: 1 Feb 2013 4:25PM GMT
Classification: Query
Well actually i have done a lot of research on this person.

First we need a bit of history of the van Arkel family... The family was very wealthy and owned a massive amount of land in the midst of the netherlands and in france (Bar Pierrepont), also they were first in line to inherit the lands of van Cleef.. So Jan van arkel (Otto the bastard van arkel's dad) declared himself a lord... the lords of Holland and Gelre didn't like that and war broke out.. the rest of the story you can find here : http://nl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkelse_Oorlogen
At the end, the van Arkels lost and were stripped of most of their lands (holland an gelre divided it between themselves) and got stripped of their titles and apart from a daughter and a couple of bastard children the van Arkel line died out...

The reason people think (including me) that Willem Ottensz is the son of Otto the bastard van Arkel is because of a couple of points...
First of all this document which proves Otto had a son called Willem :
Een huis en hofstede (1645: met boomgaard) en 2½ morgen in het gerecht Deil, enerzijds: Floris van Beesd (1578: boven: erven Herbaren de Cock met Bakelbos), anderzijds: Gijsbert Pieck van Beesd (1578: de heren van het klooster Jerusalem te Culemborg).
29-12-1466: Otto de bastaard van Arkel met ledige hand, AGH., inv.nr. 151 fol. 74.
19-6-1476: Willem, zoon van Otto, bastaard van Arkel, bij dode van zijn vader, AGH., inv.nr. 718 c. Asperen fol. 11v

http://www.hogenda.nl/wp-content/plugins/hogenda-search/down...

Also, Willem Ottensz had siblings who were burgers of utrecht, we know Otto also lived atleast a part of his life there since he is buried there.

The 3rd point is that willem Ottensz (Ottensz means Otto's son, Ot is just a shorter version of Otto) owned a massive amount of land in the land of van Arkel that they were allowed to keep/rent and was very wealthy, he even was ordered to build a watchtower with 3 holes.

The 4th point was his son Claes Willem Ottensz' spouse... The van Afferden were of lower nobility at that time... her granddad was ambtman of rheden (the one who takes the counts place when he is not there) and his dad was ontvanger-generaal(the head of all the finances and taxes) of the county of Gelre, his dad again was mayor of the city of Gelre... We know she was a servant of the Ottensz family, but not the kind of peasant servant...
it was common at that time to send your daughter to work as a servant for some time to another noble family to teach them woman things and manners, like boys were sent to other nobles to have them educated and trained as a knight.
So the van Afferden were not exactly poor or low status, so they would have never let her marry just a simple commoner...

The 5th point is the act of inheritance of Claes Willems Ottensz...
I've never seen it for myself but it was very richly decorated and stately looking according to some sources...

And finally the 6th point is that Willems father is sometimes called Ot the miller... a miller was in that time(and long after) a synonim of bastard in dutch

Well still i don't know for certain, but everything points in the direction of Willem Ottensz being Otto the bastard's son... :)
SubjectAuthorDate Posted
Fleinsborg 17 Jan 2009 4:41PM GMT 
jan1713 17 Jan 2009 4:51PM GMT 
Fleinsborg 17 Jan 2009 5:12PM GMT 
jan1713 17 Jan 2009 5:41PM GMT 
1_maurice191 1 Feb 2013 11:25PM GMT 
per page

Find a board about a specific topic