New Jersey. Genealogies 1600–1960 (FS Full-Text, image 161 of 1,338), VAN COURT §100 — the 14 children of Elias × Ann (Cooper) Van Court with baptism witnesses, PLUS a sponsorship-analysis paragraph asserting 'Elias² Senior and Ann (Cooper) Van Court were UNCLE AND AUNT of Samuel² and DAVID² CORYELL' and arguing she was aunt of Abraham² Coryell too. CORRECTED 2026-07-16 (Jenkins p.6 + Santos p.170 read): her aunt-hood is BY MARRIAGE — Abraham¹ Coryell married a Cooper or Van Court sister, per Samuel² Coryell's 1760 will — so Ann stays a COOPER; this does NOT make Daniel a born Coriell and does NOT explain the [pr.16] Y-match. See the top-of-entry resolution.

Transcription and notes

RESOLVED 2026-07-16 — Jenkins's own pp. 1–31 READ: the claim IS established earlier in her text, and it is a MARRIAGE tie, NOT "Ann born Coriell."

The "one remaining test — her own pp. 1–95" (see the VERDICT below) has now been run: the maintainer already held pp. 1–31 (imgs 62–92) all along, and the establishing text is on p. 6 (img 65). It changes the conclusion materially — and it is not the conclusion this entry hoped for.

What Jenkins actually establishes (p. 6, [verbatim]):

"…the hypothesis of their relationship is based largely upon the will of Samuel² Coryell, a tavern keeper of Bridgewater, Somerset County, New Jersey, which was made in 1760… Samuel² Coryell named as Executors of his estate his brother DAVID² CORYELL and his cousin Elias³ Van Court, whose mother, Ann Cooper, was a sister of Daniel Cooper, a first settler of Piscataway. (See Cooper, P.97.) …it becomes clear that they were uncle and aunt of Samuel² and DAVID² CORYELL and therefore brother-in-law and sister-in-law of their father ABRAHAM¹ CORYELL and that ABRAHAM¹ married either an older sister of Ann and Daniel Cooper or a sister of Elias² Van Court, Senior."

⇒ The claim is NOT unsourced after all — it rests on Samuel² Coryell's 1760 will, which names "cousin Elias Van Court" as co-executor/guardian. Footnote (129) is misplaced (as the maintainer suspected); the real anchor is the will + Jenkins's p. 6 reasoning.

BUT the reasoning yields the OPPOSITE of "Ann born Coriell." Jenkins herself cannot tell which side carries the blood: "ABRAHAM¹ married either an older sister of Ann and Daniel Cooper or a sister of Elias² Van Court, Senior." Under either branch: - Anne Cooper is a Cooper (Daniel's sister) — exactly as Monnette ([I.194]) and Jenkins's own COOPER §105 ([I.192]) state. - The Coryell tie is a MARRIAGE: Abraham¹ Coryell married into the Cooper (or Van Court) family. Ann is aunt of the Coryell brothers by marriage (their father's sister-in-law), NOT by Coriell blood. - ⇒ This CANNOT put a Coriell Y-chromosome into Daniel Cooper's male line. A Cooper woman marrying a Coryell man injects Coryell ancestry into the Coryell children (autosomally) — it does nothing to Daniel's paternal line. So this entry's and [pr.16]'s "Anne → born Coriell → Daniel born Coriell → matches the Big-Y" reading is contradicted by Jenkins's own primary reasoning.

Santos reads the SAME will and offers a third interpretation that dissolves the Cooper link entirely. Carile Santos's Coriell-Coryell worksheet p. 170 ((image held in the family archive), on disk): "Samuel Coryell's will was dated 1/17/1760; mentioned minor chdn., and leaves them to the guardianship of his brother David and his cousin Elias Van Court. Samuel's wife may have been a Van Court and Elias a brother in law." ⇒ a careful genealogist takes "cousin Elias Van Court" to run through Samuel's own wife (a Van Court) — in which case the tie is Van-Court-to-Van-Court and Ann Cooper is irrelevant to it. (Santos also flags "No source nor proof that these chdn. belonged to Samuel 2.")

⇒ NET (supersedes the "one remaining test is pp. 1–95" framing): the kinship claim is sourced — to Samuel² Coryell's 1760 will — but it describes a Cooper↔Coryell MARRIAGE alliance, not Coriell descent for Anne/Daniel. It corroborates Ann = Daniel's sister (a Cooper), and it does NOT support a Coriell Y-line for Daniel Sr. Do not cite [I.191] as evidence that Anne was born a Coriell. The Cooper-Coriell Y-DNA match ([pr.16]) remains unexplained by this material (its explanation must lie elsewhere — an earlier NPE, or a shared deeper paternal ancestor).

2026-07-18 — Jenkins pp. 1–31 FULLY re-read (Deats imgs 62–92); verdict UNCHANGED, and the direction is now explicit

A full read of Jenkins's front pages confirms and sharpens the above — she posits the marriage in the Coriell-man × Cooper-woman direction, which is the direction that cannot transmit a Coriell Y-chromosome to the Coopers: - p. 1 (img 60): "His [Abraham¹ Coriell's] wife was either a Van Court or a Cooper and the obtainable evidence favors the latter supposition." ⇒ Jenkins's own hypothesis is Abraham¹ Coriell married a COOPER woman — so any Cooper blood enters the Coryell line (autosomally), and the Cooper men keep a Cooper Y-line. This is the opposite of what the [pr.16] Big-Y needs. - The fold-out chart, p. 8a (img 68): column header "Ann Cooper (… Sister of Daniel Cooper; god mother of Joost³ (Abraham²) Coryell)" + "Abraham¹ Coryell m. (—) Cooper (?) Van Court (?)." ⇒ the chart itself files Ann as a born Cooper. - ⇒ The "fourth Coriell genealogy" is now read end-to-end where it touches us (pp. 1–8 reasoning + Cooper §105 + Van Court §100 + reference list), and at every point it treats the Coopers as a distinct family joined to the Coryells by marriage, never as born-Coriells. The tier-1 typescript-read is complete; it does not crack pr.2/pr.16. (Still unfilmed: the Van Court note p.99 and Coriell pp. 32–95 — but the establishing reasoning is on pp. 1–8, already read.) - 2026-07-20 — the whole typescript is now on disk (maintainer filled imgs 93–156 = pp. 32–95; only imgs 160–161 = pp. 99–100 still absent), and spot-reads CLOSE it. The gap pages are the migrating / Western branch: p.34 (img 95) = Abraham⁴ × Anna (Covert) Coryell's children b. 1795–1812 NJ→Seneca Co. NY→Michigan/Ohio; p.64 (img 125) = gen-8/9 descendants in Routt Co. Colorado / Kansas (ranchers, Denver Stock Show, 1874–1941). Zero founder-generation or Cooper-parentage content — as predicted, pp. 32–95 do not bear on Anne's/Daniel's parents. p.7 (img 66) sharpens the establishing reasoning, verbatim: "…the CORYELL brothers called upon their aunt Ann Cooper… to act as witness… it would seem that she was their mother's sister … therefore brother or sister of their mother, wife of ABRAHAM¹ CORYELL." ⇒ Jenkins's model is Abraham¹ Coryell married a Cooper woman (an older sister of Ann + Daniel) — so Ann is a blood-aunt of the Coryells on the Cooper side, which (a) keeps Anne a born Cooper, (b) makes the tie a Cooper-woman-marrying-in, and (c) cannot transmit a Coriell Y-line to the Coopers ⇒ does not explain [pr.16]. (One inferential person this posits: a third Cooper sibling = the unnamed wife of Abraham¹ Coryell. But it is Jenkins's inference and is contested — [I.187]'s DAR/Colonial-Wars sources give Abraham¹'s wife as Agnes Van Court, under which Ann is aunt only by marriage. Either way, no Coriell Y for Daniel.) ⇒ Jenkins is now fully read; pr.2/pr.16 not cracked. Do not re-pull. - And the Deats COOPER surname folder (DGS 008933523, imgs 1842–1850) is confirmed NULL for our Long Hill line (English Judge Thomas Cooper of PA + a Hanover-Twp/Morris-Co John Cooper of the [fam.6] orbit; see [I.192]). - ⇒ The single remaining record-tier lead is NGSQ 25 (1937):91 "Coriall Bible Record" (copyright-walled; NGS-member route) — everything else in Jenkins's NJ apparatus the catalog already holds at equal/better grade.

The one primary source still worth a look (LOWER priority now): Samuel² Coryell's 1760 will (dated 17 Jan 1760, Bridgewater / Somerset Co.; minor children; guardians = brother David² + cousin Elias Van Court). Santos p. 170 gives it secondhand + the "wife may be a Van Court" alternative; the actual will (Somerset Surrogate / NJ Prerogative) would show the exact "cousin" wording — but under every reading Ann stays a Cooper, so this can only tell us how Elias was Samuel's cousin. No need to pull Jenkins pp. 32–95 — the establishing was on p. 6. NGSQ 25:91 "Coriall Bible Record" drops in priority for the born-Coriell question (Jenkins's own logic answers it no), though it could still fix the Coryell brothers' own parentage.

(The 2026-07-15 "as footnoted, UNSOURCED" verdict below still stands on its own terms — footnote (129) genuinely does not support the claim — but it is now superseded as the entry's bottom line by this reading of Jenkins's establishing text.)

Data from the document [verbatim] (page 100., heading VAN COURT)

Children of Elias and Ann (Cooper) Van Court: (124) (127) (131) i. Thomas³, b. Feb. 8, 1717, bapt. Mar. 25, 1718, New Brunswick, N. J., witss. Octavo Coenraat, Cornelia and Cornelius Langevelt; d. before Mar. 1, 1729. ii. Elias, Jr., b. Apr. 21, 1719, bapt. Jul. 26, 1719; witss. Daniel Kurpur (Cooper), Abigail Sebring. iii. Moses, b. Oct. 20, 1720, bapt. Jan. 8, 1721; witss. Paulus and Susanna (Bettue?). iv. Jane, b. May 21, 1722, bapt. Jul. 8, 1722, witss. Hans Sebring; d. before Aug. 26, 1727. v. Daniel, b. Mar. 22, 1724, bapt. May 19, 1724. vi. Agnes, b. Mar. 8, 1726. vii. Jane, b. Aug. 26, 1727, bapt. Sept. 17, 1727; m. 1745, Richard Runyon. viii. Thomas, b. Mar. 11, 1729, bapt. Apr. 6, 1729. ix. (Ann, b. Aug. 27, 1730, twin; m. 1749, Benjamin Run-(yon). x. (Samuel, b. Aug. 27, 1730, twin; xi. Abram, b. May 28, 1732, bapt. Aug. 6, 1732, witss. Abram Bodeyn and Annet Bodeyn. xii. John, b. Mar. 7, 1734. xiii. Elizabeth (Elisabet), b. Dec. 20, 1735, bapt. Apr. 11, 1736. xiv. Maghiel (Michael), b. Jan. 6, 1739, bapt. 1738/9.

Naturally the sponsors were in almost all cases near relatives of the parents of the child. Often they were the parents of either the father or mother presenting the child, or brothers or sisters, with their wives or husbands; or sometimes representatives from both families participated in the christening. Under our observation we have the related families of the five Coryell brothers and Elias² Van Court, all excepting Samuel² Coryell having children baptized in the First Reformed Dutch Church of Raritan. Since we know that Elias² Senior and Ann (Cooper) Van Court were uncle and aunt of Samuel² and DAVID² CORYELL it is very significant, that Ann Cooper served as godmother for Joost³, baptized June 5, 1743, son of Abraham² and Catareyntje (Catrietie, Catyrntie, Tuyntie) Coryell. It strongly argues that she was aunt of Abraham² Coryell also, especially since Abraham² had sons Abraham³ and Moses³ with the same names as two of Ann's sons. Ann is also said ( ) to have been godmother for another (unnamed) ( ) child of Abraham² and Catryntje Coryell on January 5, 1743 and for a child of DAVID² and ELSJE CORYELL, named Elsie, baptized June 5, 1743, the same day as her cousin Joost³ above, but the last two baptisms have not been verified. (129)

Why this matters — and exactly how far it goes (interpretation)

The claim

The compiler states, as settled prior knowledge, that Elias² Van Court Sr and Ann (Cooper) Van Court were uncle and aunt of Samuel² and David² Coryell — and then argues that Ann was aunt of Abraham² Coryell too, from (a) her godmothering Joost³ and (b) a forename echo.

Why it is potentially decisive for [pr.2]

Ann is Daniel Sr's sister ([A.12]/[A.68]: Elias's 1750 will names "my brother in Law Daniel Cooper" as executor). If Ann's aunt-hood of the Coryell brothers is BY BLOOD, then Ann's sibling was their parent ⇒ Ann was born a CORIELL ⇒ so was her brother Daniel Sr — and pr.2's central question ("who was Daniel Sr's father?") collapses to "which gen-1 Coryell fathered Ann and Daniel?".

And that is exactly what the Y-DNA says, arrived at by a completely independent route. Chris Cooper's Big-Y places the line at E-BY145801, Sephardic Coriell/Curiel ([J.154]/[pr.16]); [p.3] already reasons that Daniel + Anne were "the orphaned children of a Coriell… whose widowed mother remarried a Cooper." This page reaches the same conclusion from Dutch Reformed baptism-sponsorship patterns, published decades before anyone could sequence a chromosome. Two methods with nothing in common converging on one answer is the strongest thing this catalog has ever had on pr.2.

A FIFTH reason, added 2026-07-15 after reading the companion page — this compiler is caught fabricating a citation

Three images earlier ([I.192], COOPER §105) the same author writes that Daniel Cooper's "name appears as such in 'The First Settlers of New Brunswick' by Wm. H. Benedict, (1912)" and then quotes Benedict with the parenthetical "(among them Daniel Cooper)" inside the quotation marks. The catalog has read Benedict ([I.153]): his first settlers are Drake, Greenland, Longfield, Inian, Pridmore — "two on one side of the river and three on the other" is precisely those five — and he credits the ferry to John Inian. There is no Daniel Cooper in Benedict. The parenthetical is an interpolation the compiler inserted into a source that contradicts him.

⇒ We now have a measured instance of this exact author, on this exact family, silently inserting an unsupported claim into a cited source. That does not make the Coriell kinship claim false — a careless compiler can still be repeating something true he read elsewhere. But it materially lowers the prior on anything he asserts without a citation, and this page's central claim is precisely that: an uncited "Since we know…". ⇒ Reading footnotes (124)/(127)/(131)/(129) is no longer a nice-to-have; it is the precondition for believing this page at all.

Four reasons NOT to bank it yet

1. "Since we know…" is unsourced in the visible text. The whole edifice rests on a prior the compiler does not defend here. Footnote markers (124) (127) (131) (129) are present and unread — they are the resolver. Until they are, this is an assertion, not evidence.
2. "Uncle AND aunt" is symmetric and does not say which spouse carries the blood. If Elias's sibling married a Coryell, then Elias is the blood uncle and Ann is an aunt only by marriage — and the page then says nothing about Anne's birth family. The compiler's extra argument is meant to pin the kinship on Ann specifically, which is why it matters that the argument is weak (below).
3. The naming argument is weak and reversible. "Abraham² had sons Abraham³ and Moses³ with the same names as two of Ann's sons" — but influence could run either way, and the catalog can partly refute the inference: Ann's son Abram (b. 1732) was baptized with witnesses "Abram Bodeyn and Annet Bodeyn" (this very page) ⇒ that Abram looks named for a BODEYN, not a Coryell. Forename echo among Dutch NJ families is weak evidence at the best of times.
4. The compiler flags his own soft spots: "Ann is also said ( ) to have been godmother…" and "the last two baptisms have not been verified." Only the Joost³ 5 Jun 1743 sponsorship is asserted firmly — and the catalog already independently holds that one ([F.67]; [p.3] line 159, "Antie Van Coort sponsored Coryel × Catrietie's son Joost 5 Jun 1743"). ⇒ the new content here is the KINSHIP CLAIM, not the sponsorship.

What it does resolve

• It answers [L.143]'s open logic-tree. Carpenter (p.23) lays out that "my brother in Law Daniel Cooper" could mean (a) Elias's wife's brother, (b) Elias's sister's husband, or (c) a step relationship, and leaves it open. This page's author takes (a) as given and builds on it — and adds a Coriell dimension Carpenter never had.
• A 1719 Daniel-Cooper attestation inside [pr.63]'s gap — "witss. Daniel Kurpur (Cooper)" at Elias Jr's 26 Jul 1719 baptism. (Already held via [F.67]'s "Daniel Korpus"; this is an independent transcription of the same register line, and its gloss "(Cooper)" is the compiler's, not the register's.)
• A clean 14-child roster with witnesses — corroborates [F.67]/[F.197] and supplies the five unlocated baptisms [p.3] has been hunting (Agnes 1726, the 1730 twins, John 1734, Thomas 1717): this page gives birth dates for all five and shows Agnes (1726), the twins (1730) and John (1734) have NO baptism recorded — consistent with [pr.88]'s "illegible or lost leaves" finding, and it means their sponsors are unrecoverable from this source too.

THE LIVE HYPOTHESIS (maintainer, 2026-07-15): the reference NUMBER may simply be WRONG.

"Since neither of those sources seem to be correct, maybe the information came from a different source and just the reference is wrong?"

This is well-founded, not a rescue attempt. [I.192] independently proves Jenkins's apparatus is unreliable at the citation level — she interpolates "(among them Daniel Cooper)" into a Benedict quotation that contains no Cooper. A compiler who fabricates inside quotation marks can certainly mis-number a footnote. And the verdict below shows (129) footnotes the paragraph's context (Coryell brothers; Piscataway) — exactly what a misplaced or catch-all reference looks like.

The best candidates for the claim's REAL source — from her own list (pp. 106–107, imgs 167–168)

2026-07-20 — the on-disk reference list re-read (imgs 162–171 = pp.101–110); confirms the above + surfaces a THIRD Coriell Bible at NJHS

Reading the reference-list images already on disk ((image held in the family archive)) confirms the (123)–(131) transcription above verbatim and adds the earlier refs. Refs 102–120 (img 169, p.108) are all Western-branch family papers (Compendium of American Genealogy, Denver Post, Nebraska/Wisconsin histories, Coryell/Lyon/Bailey family records) — nothing NJ. But p.104 (img 165) carries the Coriell-source cluster, incl. a new one: - ref 59 = "Coriell Bible Record, #M2457, New Jersey Hist. Soc., Newark, N.J." — a THIRD Coriell Bible (distinct from ref 62/81/98 = the NGSQ 25:91 Bible, and ref 96 = Ira D. Coryell's Chicago Bible). This one is physically at NJHS Newark under catalog #M2457 — the same repository that holds the Cooper Bible ([B.57]) — so it is the most accessible of the three (no copyright wall like NGSQ; a NJHS reading-room / reference-request pull). A Coriell family Bible would document the Coryell brothers' own parentage (Abraham¹ + wife) and, if Abraham¹'s wife's maiden family is recorded, could touch the Cooper side. pr.2/pr.16 lead — request NJHS #M2457. - ref 58 = Middlesex County Wills, Book E, p. 44 (= the Elisha Coriell will, [A.117], held) · ref 61 = Clayton p.593 + Middlesex Deeds + "Court Proceedings, File 4364, Piscataway Twp." (cf. the "File 4363" at ref 79 — a court-case packet, unpulled) · ref 62 = the NGSQ 25:91 Bible. - None of this reopens the kinship question — I.191's bottom line stands (Jenkins's own p.6 = Anne is a Cooper, aunt by marriage). The NJHS Bible is a lead for the Coryell family's parentage / the [pr.16] Coriell line, not fresh evidence that Anne was born Coriell.

CONFIRMED REAL 2026-07-15 — the "Coriall Bible Record" exists at NGSQ 25 (1937):91

The NGSQ Consolidated Contents index (Dale H. Cook, plymouthcolony.net, covering Vols 1–90) lists it verbatim:

25 (1937):91 — Coriall Bible Record (no contributor named; a one-page item, immediately after Ergood's "Zorns-Sheppard Bible Record" 90–91 and before "Morong-Wilson Family Bible Records" 91–92)

Jenkins's reference (81 = 98) is ACCURATE — right journal, right volume, right page. The spelling is "Coriall" (why searches for Coriell/Coryell missed it), and FamilySearch independently catalogs "v. 25 (1937)." ⇒ the "wrong reference NUMBER" hypothesis is now concrete: her apparatus contains a genuine, record-tier Coriell Bible record that footnote (129) failed to point at. This is the single best candidate for the real source of the "uncle and aunt" statement, and the only record-tier Coriell source in her whole list. Do not over-read it either: a Bible record states births/marriages/deaths of the Coriall family, which could establish the Coryell brothers' parentage — but whether it names Ann (Cooper) at all is unknown until read. It is the best lead, not a confirmed answer.

Acquisition — UNDER COPYRIGHT (1937 ⇒ US PD not until 2033) (the maintainer's on-disk NGSQ stops at Vol 12/1923; Vol 25 is past the copyright wall). ROUTES CONFIRMED 2026-07-18 (Vol 25 = 1935–1938, so 1937 is in it):

• Denver Public Library (the maintainer is in CO) — DPL's Western History & Genealogy dept is a major genealogy depository (Colorado Genealogical Society's home); near-certain to hold NGSQ in print. The best free in-person route. (NARA-Denver is co-located for federal records.)
• HathiTrust (catalog 005781502) — catalogs NGSQ vols 1–50; pre-1964 periodicals are often full-view if copyright wasn't renewed → check whether v.25 is full-view (a free scan if so).
• Internet Archive — hosts NGSQ volumes (the 1913–17 vol is up); check for the v.25 / 1935–38 scan.
• LDS Family History Center — FS catalogs NGSQ (FS Library Record 39597); viewable at an FHC / FS affiliate library.
• NGS membership — instant digital PDF of the exact page (full 1912–present member archive); free public index at ngsgenealogy.org/ngsq/ngsq_archives. ⇒ Try HathiTrust/IA first (may be free full-view); else DPL in person or an FHC. Not a blind desk pull, but very obtainable.

⇒ NEXT (ranked): (1) obtain NGSQ 25:91 "Coriall Bible Record" (NGS-member route); (2) Jenkins's own pp. 1–95 (imgs 62–156) for where "we know" is established; (3) Monnette 4:635; (4) NGSQ ref 96 (Ira D. Coryell's Bible, Chicago) if 25:91 disappoints.

But hold the frame: a misnumbered footnote is a hypothesis, not a finding. The claim remains unsourced until something is actually found to support it — and it must not be cited meanwhile.

VERDICT 2026-07-15 — AS FOOTNOTED, THE CLAIM IS UNSOURCED. Both legs of (129) were read, and NEITHER mentions Cooper or Van Court.

The maintainer supplied both books the same day. Both are read. Ref (129) does not support the kinship claim at all.

Structurally confirmed, not eyeballed: a case-insensitive sweep of Snell's 1,130 pp finds only two "van cou" strings in the entire book (PDF 117, PDF 806) — neither on PDF 291.

⇒ What (129) actually footnotes is the CONTEXT, not the claim: Snell supplies the Coryell brothers' identity (the "five Coryell brothers" / ABRAHAM¹→DAVID² framing); Clayton supplies the Piscataway setting. Neither supplies Anne.

⇒ Therefore "Since we know that Elias² Senior and Ann (Cooper) Van Court were uncle and aunt of Samuel² and DAVID² CORYELL" is UNSOURCED. It is not a citation — it is Jenkins's back-reference to her own earlier text ("as established above"), and the establishing, if it exists at all, must sit in her Coryell sections, pp. 1–95 (film imgs 62–156; the maintainer holds 62–92 = pp. 1–31).

Status of the claim: from "bombshell" → "a 1942 Nebraskan's uncited assertion." It is not refuted — she may have read it somewhere, and her sponsorship reasoning is not silly. But nothing behind it has survived contact, and the compiler is independently caught fabricating a Benedict citation ([I.192]). Do not cite [I.191] as evidence for Anne's parentage. The one remaining test is her own pp. 1–95.

What the whole exercise DID buy (all recorded in [I.193] / below): an independent Ten Eyck corroboration for [p.1521] that weighs against [B.82]; the Huguenot-vs-Sephardic tension for [pr.16]; and a fully traced reference apparatus showing that every NJ source Jenkins used, this catalog already holds at equal or better grade.

RESOLVED 2026-07-15 (earlier the same day) — the footnotes were read. The claim rests on TWO 1880s COUNTY HISTORIES, not a record.

The maintainer pulled the front matter, the reference pages and the cover. Everything is now identified.

The source — NOW DEFINITIVELY IDENTIFIED (FS Books catalog, 2026-07-18): the JENKINS 1942 typescript

Jenkins, Philomene — Coriell – Coryell : Coryell ancestry of Levi L. Coryell, Senior and Levi Leland Coryell, Junior (Lincoln, Nebraska, 1942) — FS Books identifier 170430, 109 p.; subjects listed by FS include Coriell / Coryell / Bartholomew / Cooper / Gilbert / Smalley / Shotwell / Van Court families. (FS: "Due to copyright restrictions, this book cannot be viewed online" — consistent with a 1942 imprint.) This is the source of this entry, [I.192], and the reference list at p.109.

CORRECTION 2026-07-18 — the img-171 cover is a DIFFERENT, SEPARATE book. The bound-cover label at img 171 — "The Descendants of Judge Emanuel Coryell of Nichols, Tioga County, New York" — is NOT the Jenkins typescript; it is a distinct work by Hilke, Charlotte Coryell (1922– ), FS Books id 214300, 72 p. (subjects Coryell/Barstow/Drake/Everett/Lounsbury/Travis/Wilson), filed immediately after Jenkins in the Deats/HCHS Coryell folder (which is why img 171 — right after Jenkins's p.109 references — shows the Hilke cover). (Earlier passes here conflated the two into one "1942 typescript"; they are two separate Coryell genealogies bound together in the folder.)

⇒ The Cooper/Van Court content is Jenkins 1942 (a Nebraska Coryell descendant's compilation), held in the CORYELL FAMILY folder of the Deats/HCHS surname file (DGS 008933522). Not [I.44] Santos / [I.48] Ingham / [I.155] Avotaynu — a fourth Coriell genealogy, and one [pr.2] never consulted. Judge Emanuel Coryell (the Hilke book's subject, and also central to Jenkins) = the catalog's [A.18] (1748 will) and the "Immanuel" of [I.36]'s brother-in-law reading.

Film map (offset confirmed: IMAGE = PAGE + 61): front matter img 52–61 · pp.1–31 = img 62–92 · p.96 "CORIELL - CORYELL" = img 157 · p.97 COOPER §105 ([I.192]) = img 158 · p.100 VAN COURT §100 (this entry) = img 161 · References pp.108–109 = img 169–170 · cover = img 171.

The footnotes (p.109, img 170) — verbatim

123. Genealogies of the First Settlers of the Passaic Valley, Littel, 1851, p. 90. 124. Somerset County Hist. Quart., Vol. 2, pp. 209-10-11-12-14-15-16-299-301. 125. First Settlers of New Brunswick, W.H. Benedict, 1912, New Jersey Hist. Soc. Proceedings, 3rd Ser., Vol. VII, pp. 1, et seq. 126. Report of Historian of State of New York, 1896, Vol. I, p. 531, et seq. 127. First Settlers of Piscataway and Woodbridge, New Jersey, O.E. Monnette, Book 4, p. 635. 128. Will of Elias Van Court, Liber E, p. 449, State Department, Trenton, N.J. 129. Hist. of Hunterdon & Somerset Co's., N.J., Snell, p. 268; Hist. of Union & Middlesex Co's., N.J., Clayton, p. 590. 130. Somerset County Hist. Quart., Vol. 2, pp. 300, 304, 305. 131. New Brunswick Church Records, N.J.H.S. Proceedings, N.S., Vol. II, p. 206.

The verdict

(129) carries the Coriell-kinship paragraph — and it is TWO 1880s COUNTY HISTORIES (Snell; Clayton), not a record. So the decisive question — does "Since we know…" cite a record or another compiler? — answers another compiler, twice over. This is NOT record-grade, and [I.191] must not be cited as though it were.

Everything else she used for New Jersey is secondary too, and three of her nine references are already in the catalog at equal or better grade: (123) = [I.4] Littell · (125) = [I.153] Benedict (the very source [I.192] catches her misquoting) · (128) = [A.12]/[A.68] Elias's will (she cites the recorded copy, Liber E p.449 — we hold it at manuscript grade). Jenkins had no NJ record access: her primary material is all Nebraska/Kansas/Colorado family papers (refs 103, 104, 105, 107, 109, 112, 116, 118, 120) — i.e. the Western branch's records, not Anne's.

⇒ The Coriell claim degrades from "a bombshell needing verification" to "a 1942 Nebraskan's inference from two published county histories." It remains interesting — she was reasoning from real sponsorship patterns, and she may have read something real in Snell/Clayton — but the [pr.16] Y-DNA convergence is no longer independent corroboration in the way it first appeared: her chain of custody to any NJ record runs through books the catalog can simply read for itself.

(124) + (130) TRACED THE SAME DAY — they are the BAPTISM DATA, not the kinship source. We already own the volume.

SCHQ Vol. 2 is on disk: (image held in the family archive) (354 pp; text layer partly alive; already cited by [M.27]–[M.30], [C.22], [L.13c]). Offset: BOOK PAGE = PDF PAGE − 15 (PDF 237 carries the running head "222 Somerset County Historical Quarterly"). ⇒ Jenkins's book pp. 209–216 = PDF 224–231; book pp. 299–305 = PDF 314–320.

Its own index (PDF p.341) reads: "Coriell, 214, 215, 216, 221, 222, 300, 301, 302, 304, 305" — which matches Jenkins's (124) [pp. 209-10-11-12-14-15-16-299-301] and (130) [pp. 300, 304, 305] almost exactly. So what she took from SCHQ Vol. 2 is now identified: it is the published transcript of the First Raritan DRC baptism + marriage registers, e.g.

(PDF 224 = book 209) "July 26. Van Koort, Lyas and wife, Enni—Elyas. Witnesses : Daniel Korpur ; Abiegel Sebring." ⇒ the very 1719 baptism this page cites as "witss. Daniel Kurpur (Cooper), Abigail Sebring" (PDF 231) "Van Koort, Leyyes and Ante—Abram. Witnesses : Abram Bodeyn and wife, Annatt." ⇒ her item xi (PDF 318 = book 303) "Van Court, Elyas and wife, Antye—Maghiel." ⇒ her item xiv ([p.1521]; his 3 Apr 1739 baptism is already held via [M.47]) (PDF 319 = book 304) "Coryell, Emanuel and wife, Sara—Neeltye." ⇒ Judge Emanuel Coryell's own child — (and book 304 is exactly what her (130) cites)**

⇒ This CONFIRMS the verdict above. Her Van Court child-list is SCHQ Vol. 2's Raritan register transcript — which the catalog holds at better grade ([F.67] = the register itself; [F.197] = the manuscript scans). Nothing in (124)/(130) speaks to kinship. ⇒ (129) — Snell p.268 + Clayton p.590 — is the ONLY candidate source for "uncle and aunt of Samuel² and David² Coryell", and it is two county histories.

What is now cheap and decisive

1. Read Snell p. 268 and Clayton p. 590. These are standard, digitized 1880s county histories, neither catalogued. They are the entire evidentiary basis of the claim. Clayton is one image away — the 2026-07-15 FS sweep already surfaced "588 HISTORY OF UNION AND MIDDLESEX COUNTIES, NEW JERSEY" and p.590 (Somerset #9 / Middlesex #10). If Snell/Clayton state the Cooper–Coryell kinship and cite a record, pr.2 opens. If they don't, [I.191] collapses to Jenkins's own inference and the matter is closed.
2. (127) Monnette, First Settlers of Piscataway and Woodbridge, Book 4 p. 635 — not catalogued despite Monnette being cited in ~28 catalog files. Piscataway + Woodbridge is exactly Daniel Sr's and Anne's ground.
3. (124)/(130) Somerset County Hist. Quart. Vol. 2, pp. 209–216 + 299–305 — not held (the catalog has SCHQ Vols IV [I.179], VII [I.180], VIII [M.30]). Cited for the Van Court children.
4. (131) New Brunswick Church Records, NJHS Proc. N.S. Vol. II p. 206 — zero catalog hits; cf. [F.182].

Superseded — the earlier "where to look" plan (kept for the record)

1. Read footnotes (124), (127), (131), (129) — they are what "Since we know…" rests on, and after [I.192] caught this compiler fabricating a Benedict citation, they are the precondition for believing any of it. If they cite a record (a will, deed, or register naming the relationship), pr.2 breaks open. If they cite another compiler, it is one more undefended tradition. - WHERE THEY ARE — the numbers are a NUMBERED SOURCE LIST at the END of the typescript, not per-page footnotes. Evidence: p.96 carries (104), p.97 (123)/(125), p.100 (124)/(127)/(129)/(131) — non-sequential by page ⇒ a master list of 131+ entries. Offset: page 96 = img 157 and page 97 = img 158 ⇒ IMAGE = PAGE + 61. So p.110 ≈ img 171, p.130 ≈ img 191, p.150 ≈ img 211. ⇒ browse IGN 008933522 forward from ~img 162 until the typescript ends (the next surname folder-tab marks the boundary — cf. the 'CORSON' tab at img 5). Likely under 40 images. Neither end of the roll helps: img 1336 = 'CONTINUED ON ANOTHER ROLL', and the front is folder tabs.
2. Read the whole CORIELL–CORYELL typescript (it precedes p.96 — work backwards to its start). It is a fourth Coriell genealogy, unread by this catalog, and it should name ABRAHAM¹'s parents and siblings — Ann's alleged father and Ann herself. This is now the single highest-value unread document for [pr.2].
3. The cheap channel already exists: HCHS. The originals are at the Hunterdon County Historical Society, whose librarian Pam Robinson ([email removed]) is a proven $5 channel — she delivered the Sisser Van Court file 2026-07-10 ([pr.95]). HCHS holds BOTH the Sisser papers and the Deats Collection. ⇒ ask her for the typescript's reference list + its Coriell section, and while there, whether the Deats Collection has a COOPER folder ([pr.95] already has its Cooper + Cross Sisser files pending).
4. Then test against [pr.2]'s standing negative: the 2026-07-10 re-read found "no orphaned 'Anne,' no Coriell father d. ~1700" — but that was [I.44] Santos + [I.48] Ingham + [I.155], NOT this typescript. So the two do not strictly contradict; this is simply a source pr.2 never consulted. That raises its value: it is a Coriell genealogist's own view of the Cooper connection, and the earlier negative does not cover it.

Cross-references

• p.3 Anne Cooper Van Court (the subject; her maiden name = [pr.2]'s crux) · p.25 Elias Van Court Sr · p.1 Daniel Cooper Sr · p.1521 Michael Van Court (child xiv)
• pr.2 Daniel Sr father search · pr.16 Cooper-Coriell Y-DNA (item C3 = "mine the sponsorship web" — this is that) · pr.63
• F.67 (the Raritan register itself — independent transcription of these baptisms) · F.197 · I.189 (child iii, Moses) · L.143 (the brother-in-law logic-tree this speaks to) · A.12/A.68 (Elias's 1750 will) · I.36 (the "Immanuel" brother-in-law reading) · A.18 (Emanuel Coryell 1748 will) · A.73 (David Coriell — cf. "DAVID² CORYELL" here)