Very interesting dialogue. Seems it should be saved as reference material.
Thanks for not making it private

Sent from my iPhone
Tom Kukuk
612.309.7999


On Feb 5, 2013, at 12:22 AM, htcstech <htcstech@...> wrote:

> Sure, but it was just a bit of free thinking about name origins as he
> wanted to know which and why the alias occurred.
> As it was basically off topic, I went private as it wouldn't of helped
> anyone else. However I wrote briefly about the history of the Hajdu and
> that they originated from Southern old Hungary including Macedonia,
> Coratia, Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria. They were originally guerrilla
> fighters against the Turks and later the Hapsburgs, often anti-Catholic.
> They eventually became freemen (untaxed) and were later used on estates as
> armed, horse-riding private police or overseers. In social standing, they
> were a cut above the peasant farmers, although they were alienated in
> certain places as they would force the labourers to keep working. The main
> aspect of the Hajdus were in the revolutionary armies -The Kurucz and the
> Rakoczi, both armies were present in the area from the late 1600 to about
> 1711. Both disbanded and were left to their own fates, often settling in
> the area where they found themselves. So Hajducsek (Hajduczek) name was
> descriptive of their origins. They were probably very proud of this.
>
> Even more contentiously, Skop can be translated to Skopje, which provides
> the Macedonian/Croatian link. The Ottoman empire had control of Greece as
> well. Skop can refer to the Polish town and Hajdus were also used in Polish
> estates as guards.
> So I concluded that Skop was some form of remembrance by the Hajducsek
> family.
>
> Peter M.
> P.S. I've been wrong before.....
>
> On 5 February 2013 14:15, deeellessbee deeellessbee@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Peter, if it's something that can be shared, I too would be interested in
> > hearing your thoughts on Matthias' "alias madness". While I have the basics
> > of (the "why" of) the alias name down, it still sometime confuses me and I
> > still don't know which name was which in my family. So threads about
> > aliases always catch my eye and I am interested in learning as much as I
> > can about them.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Debbie
> >
> >
> > --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, htcstech wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Eric,
> > >
> > > "Does Hajducsek Andras maskep (otherwise) Skop mean that Skop had been
> > > dropped in favor of Hajducsek going forward? Might he have been born
> > simply
> > > as Andras Skop? Or might the use of Hajducsek have begun in previous
> > > generations?"
> > >
> > > The 'vel' in the 1795 record is Latin and translates to 'or' but also
> > has a
> > > meaning 'in particular'. So the priest at the time recorded the original
> > > family name as originally 'Hajducsek'. The 1847 record shows that 'Skop'
> > > and 'Hajducsek' were still linked, but no mention of 'Kuhar'. This shows
> > > that there is some consistency within the records, at least as far as the
> > > priest(s)/scribes were consistent. The 'Hajducsek' name appearing as
> > early
> > > as 1785 in the nearby village of Pol'ov cements that name as the
> > original.
> > > I'm presuming that there was no 'Skop' alias in that record?
> > > So we can't say that one name took over the other at this stage, but the
> > > family wanted to be known by both names, so you need to follow the Skop
> > and
> > > Hajducsek names from at least 1795 onwards.
> > >
> > > Joannes, son of Mathias, born in June 14th 1795 would of been 23 at the
> > > time of Andras's birth. Andras could be Joannes's son, or brother.
> > > As for Mathias's alias madness, I'll email you directly on possibilities.
> > >
> > > Peter M.
> > >
> > > On 5 February 2013 06:16, tkejuice1208 wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello all. After a year of some fairly intense research and a lot of
> > > > confusion, I am reaching out for assistance. The subject of the
> > research is
> > > > Andras Hajducsek from Saca, a village a short distance south /
> > southwest of
> > > > Kosice. The surname was not a popular one in Saca or the neighboring
> > > > villages of Mala Ida and Pol'ov so I do not believe that there was more
> > > > than one adult Andras Hajducsek of the same approximate age within my
> > > > window of research. Searching LDS records from Roman Catholic parishes
> > in
> > > > the area, I have only been able to locate marriage and death records
> > for
> > > > Andras. The marriage record from 1/28/1846 shows a 24 year old groom
> > and
> > > > his 20 year old bride Anna Krisztianko from Saca. This places his year
> > of
> > > > birth at 1821 or 1822. His death record on 1/24/1881 shows his widow
> > Anna
> > > > Krisztanko and lists his age at 63. This places his YOB at 1817 or
> > 1818. I
> > > > have not been able to locate his baptismal record despite searching RC
> > > > records in several area villages across all years 1815 â€" 1825.
> >
> > > >
> > > > My first thought is that Andras Hajducsek and family may have migrated
> > > > from another village but the surname, as far as I can tell, appears in
> > the
> > > > area as early as 1785 in Pol'ov. Still, I cannot document his birth and
> > > > parentage.
> > > >
> > > > I am worried that this research is being complicated by aliases. Andras
> > > > and Anna had a son (Andras) on 8/27/1847 in Saca. The name of the
> > father
> > > > was recorded as Hajducsek Andras maskep (otherwise) Skop. This
> > connection
> > > > to the Skop surname is further complicated by a possible relative from
> > the
> > > > late 1700's whose name was recorded as Mathias Skop, alias Kuhar vel (I
> > > > think it is "vel") Hajducsek on the record from 5/14/1795 that I have
> > > > linked to:
> > > >
> >
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1951-22646-26414-74?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-\
R7W:n1744020469
> > > >
> > > > I have always been confused by the use of the alias in terms of which
> > is
> > > > the old name and which carries forward, but the apparent use of three
> > > > surnames has created a nightmare. I have never seen three surnames
> > recorded
> > > > for 1 person and cannot begin to make sense of it.
> > > >
> > > > Since I don't know that Mathias and Andras were related, I am focusing
> > on
> > > > establishing the Hajducsek Skop connection. Does Hajducsek Andras
> > maskep
> > > > (otherwise) Skop mean that Skop had been dropped in favor of Hajducsek
> > > > going forward? Might he have been born simply as Andras Skop? Or might
> > the
> > > > use of Hajducsek have begun in previous generations?
> > > >
> > > > Can anyone explain Mathias and his alias madness???
> > > >
> > > > Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you!
> > > >
> > > > Eric Hajducsek
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks to all who have provided input.  These discussions are always very
interesting and I encourage additional input that may be of value.  To answer a
previous question, I have not yet seen the alias in reverse (Hajducsek, alias
Skop).

As the wheels continue to turn in my head, I thought of an event that may
trigger an alias.  Please let know if you can verify such an occurrence or
otherwise know this to be true.  The scenario is that unwed mother gives birth
to child "A" (illeg).  Child is baptized with mother's maiden surname.  Mother
marries and had additional children who carry the surname of the father.  Child
"A" has mother's maiden surname, but can be associated with the family
unit/household that bears the surname of the husband, therefore triggering the
alias by association.

Thoughts?

Tom,

That is a good idea, and there is no reason you or another ambitious member of
S-R can't do it. This is largely a self moderating, independent group, and we
volunteer moderators are here primarily to assure continuity, administer, and
occasionally moderate.

Any responsible member could take this thread, retain reference to post numbers
and authors so the original posts can be located in the future, and edit out all
of the extraneous material in the discussion, distilling the contributions to a
comprehensive, readable description of Aliases, and post it to the FILES section
of the forum. Perhaps keeping the original title _Alias Confusion_ would be
appropriate, perhaps not.

That is one way we could develop a good "community reference library" over time.
While we are currently in the process of culling out old individual posts in the
Files and Photos sections, the memory area is intended for community benefit,
and this would seem quite appropriate.

Do we have any volunteers for this topic?

Ron
PS. Does anyone have another favorite topic that was well discussed in the past,
that clarified a topic important to them and to the group, that would be willing
to go back and distill that to a readable , comprehensive topic?

This is posted as an idea from one member, with no implication that it is anyway
official guidance or policy.



--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, Tom Kukuk  wrote:
>
> Very interesting dialogue. Seems it should be saved as reference material.
Thanks for not making it private
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> Tom Kukuk
> 612.309.7999
>
>
> On Feb 5, 2013, at 12:22 AM, htcstech  wrote:
>
> > Sure, but it was just a bit of free thinking about name origins as he
> > wanted to know which and why the alias occurred.
> > As it was basically off topic, I went private as it wouldn't of helped
> > anyone else. However I wrote briefly about the history of the Hajdu and
> > that they originated from Southern old Hungary including Macedonia,
> > Coratia, Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria. They were originally guerrilla
> > fighters against the Turks and later the Hapsburgs, often anti-Catholic.
> > They eventually became freemen (untaxed) and were later used on estates as
> > armed, horse-riding private police or overseers. In social standing, they
> > were a cut above the peasant farmers, although they were alienated in
> > certain places as they would force the labourers to keep working. The main
> > aspect of the Hajdus were in the revolutionary armies -The Kurucz and the
> > Rakoczi, both armies were present in the area from the late 1600 to about
> > 1711. Both disbanded and were left to their own fates, often settling in
> > the area where they found themselves. So Hajducsek (Hajduczek) name was
> > descriptive of their origins. They were probably very proud of this.
> >
> > Even more contentiously, Skop can be translated to Skopje, which provides
> > the Macedonian/Croatian link. The Ottoman empire had control of Greece as
> > well. Skop can refer to the Polish town and Hajdus were also used in Polish
> > estates as guards.
> > So I concluded that Skop was some form of remembrance by the Hajducsek
> > family.
> >
> > Peter M.
> > P.S. I've been wrong before.....
> >
> > On 5 February 2013 14:15, deeellessbee deeellessbee@...> wrote:
> >
> > > **
> > >
> > >
> > > Peter, if it's something that can be shared, I too would be interested in
> > > hearing your thoughts on Matthias' "alias madness". While I have the
basics
> > > of (the "why" of) the alias name down, it still sometime confuses me and I
> > > still don't know which name was which in my family. So threads about
> > > aliases always catch my eye and I am interested in learning as much as I
> > > can about them.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Debbie
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, htcstech wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello Eric,
> > > >
> > > > "Does Hajducsek Andras maskep (otherwise) Skop mean that Skop had been
> > > > dropped in favor of Hajducsek going forward? Might he have been born
> > > simply
> > > > as Andras Skop? Or might the use of Hajducsek have begun in previous
> > > > generations?"
> > > >
> > > > The 'vel' in the 1795 record is Latin and translates to 'or' but also
> > > has a
> > > > meaning 'in particular'. So the priest at the time recorded the original
> > > > family name as originally 'Hajducsek'. The 1847 record shows that 'Skop'
> > > > and 'Hajducsek' were still linked, but no mention of 'Kuhar'. This shows
> > > > that there is some consistency within the records, at least as far as
the
> > > > priest(s)/scribes were consistent. The 'Hajducsek' name appearing as
> > > early
> > > > as 1785 in the nearby village of Pol'ov cements that name as the
> > > original.
> > > > I'm presuming that there was no 'Skop' alias in that record?
> > > > So we can't say that one name took over the other at this stage, but the
> > > > family wanted to be known by both names, so you need to follow the Skop
> > > and
> > > > Hajducsek names from at least 1795 onwards.
> > > >
> > > > Joannes, son of Mathias, born in June 14th 1795 would of been 23 at the
> > > > time of Andras's birth. Andras could be Joannes's son, or brother.
> > > > As for Mathias's alias madness, I'll email you directly on
possibilities.
> > > >
> > > > Peter M.
> > > >
> > > > On 5 February 2013 06:16, tkejuice1208 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > **
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello all. After a year of some fairly intense research and a lot of
> > > > > confusion, I am reaching out for assistance. The subject of the
> > > research is
> > > > > Andras Hajducsek from Saca, a village a short distance south /
> > > southwest of
> > > > > Kosice. The surname was not a popular one in Saca or the neighboring
> > > > > villages of Mala Ida and Pol'ov so I do not believe that there was
more
> > > > > than one adult Andras Hajducsek of the same approximate age within my
> > > > > window of research. Searching LDS records from Roman Catholic parishes
> > > in
> > > > > the area, I have only been able to locate marriage and death records
> > > for
> > > > > Andras. The marriage record from 1/28/1846 shows a 24 year old groom
> > > and
> > > > > his 20 year old bride Anna Krisztianko from Saca. This places his year
> > > of
> > > > > birth at 1821 or 1822. His death record on 1/24/1881 shows his widow
> > > Anna
> > > > > Krisztanko and lists his age at 63. This places his YOB at 1817 or
> > > 1818. I
> > > > > have not been able to locate his baptismal record despite searching RC
> > > > > records in several area villages across all years 1815 â€" 1825.
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > My first thought is that Andras Hajducsek and family may have migrated
> > > > > from another village but the surname, as far as I can tell, appears in
> > > the
> > > > > area as early as 1785 in Pol'ov. Still, I cannot document his birth
and
> > > > > parentage.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am worried that this research is being complicated by aliases.
Andras
> > > > > and Anna had a son (Andras) on 8/27/1847 in Saca. The name of the
> > > father
> > > > > was recorded as Hajducsek Andras maskep (otherwise) Skop. This
> > > connection
> > > > > to the Skop surname is further complicated by a possible relative from
> > > the
> > > > > late 1700's whose name was recorded as Mathias Skop, alias Kuhar vel
(I
> > > > > think it is "vel") Hajducsek on the record from 5/14/1795 that I have
> > > > > linked to:
> > > > >
> > >
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1951-22646-26414-74?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-\
R7W:n1744020469
> > > > >
> > > > > I have always been confused by the use of the alias in terms of which
> > > is
> > > > > the old name and which carries forward, but the apparent use of three
> > > > > surnames has created a nightmare. I have never seen three surnames
> > > recorded
> > > > > for 1 person and cannot begin to make sense of it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since I don't know that Mathias and Andras were related, I am focusing
> > > on
> > > > > establishing the Hajducsek Skop connection. Does Hajducsek Andras
> > > maskep
> > > > > (otherwise) Skop mean that Skop had been dropped in favor of Hajducsek
> > > > > going forward? Might he have been born simply as Andras Skop? Or might
> > > the
> > > > > use of Hajducsek have begun in previous generations?
> > > > >
> > > > > Can anyone explain Mathias and his alias madness???
> > > > >
> > > > > Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you!
> > > > >
> > > > > Eric Hajducsek
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Thank you Peter!

Debbie


--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, htcstech  wrote:
>
> Sure, but it was just a bit of free thinking about name origins as he
> wanted to know which and why the alias occurred.
> As it was basically off topic, I went private as it wouldn't of helped
> anyone else. However I wrote briefly about the history of the Hajdu and
> that they originated from Southern old Hungary including Macedonia,
> Coratia, Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria. They were originally guerrilla
> fighters against the Turks and later the Hapsburgs, often anti-Catholic.
> They eventually became freemen (untaxed) and were later used on estates as
> armed, horse-riding private police or overseers. In social standing, they
> were a cut above the peasant farmers, although they were alienated in
> certain places as they would force the labourers to keep working. The main
> aspect of the Hajdus were in the revolutionary armies -The Kurucz and the
> Rakoczi, both armies were present in the area from the late 1600 to about
> 1711. Both disbanded and were left to their own fates, often settling in
> the area where they found themselves. So Hajducsek (Hajduczek) name was
> descriptive of their origins. They were probably very proud of this.
>
> Even more contentiously, Skop can be translated to Skopje, which provides
> the Macedonian/Croatian link. The Ottoman empire had control of Greece as
> well. Skop can refer to the Polish town and Hajdus were also used in Polish
> estates as guards.
> So I concluded that Skop was some form of remembrance by the Hajducsek
> family.
>
> Peter M.
> P.S. I've been wrong before.....
>
>
> On 5 February 2013 14:15, deeellessbee  wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Peter, if it's something that can be shared, I too would be interested in
> > hearing your thoughts on Matthias' "alias madness". While I have the basics
> > of (the "why" of) the alias name down, it still sometime confuses me and I
> > still don't know which name was which in my family. So threads about
> > aliases always catch my eye and I am interested in learning as much as I
> > can about them.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Debbie
> >
> >
> > --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, htcstech wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Eric,
> > >
> > > "Does Hajducsek Andras maskep (otherwise) Skop mean that Skop had been
> > > dropped in favor of Hajducsek going forward? Might he have been born
> > simply
> > > as Andras Skop? Or might the use of Hajducsek have begun in previous
> > > generations?"
> > >
> > > The 'vel' in the 1795 record is Latin and translates to 'or' but also
> > has a
> > > meaning 'in particular'. So the priest at the time recorded the original
> > > family name as originally 'Hajducsek'. The 1847 record shows that 'Skop'
> > > and 'Hajducsek' were still linked, but no mention of 'Kuhar'. This shows
> > > that there is some consistency within the records, at least as far as the
> > > priest(s)/scribes were consistent. The 'Hajducsek' name appearing as
> > early
> > > as 1785 in the nearby village of Pol'ov cements that name as the
> > original.
> > > I'm presuming that there was no 'Skop' alias in that record?
> > > So we can't say that one name took over the other at this stage, but the
> > > family wanted to be known by both names, so you need to follow the Skop
> > and
> > > Hajducsek names from at least 1795 onwards.
> > >
> > > Joannes, son of Mathias, born in June 14th 1795 would of been 23 at the
> > > time of Andras's birth. Andras could be Joannes's son, or brother.
> > > As for Mathias's alias madness, I'll email you directly on possibilities.
> > >
> > > Peter M.
> > >
> > > On 5 February 2013 06:16, tkejuice1208 wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello all. After a year of some fairly intense research and a lot of
> > > > confusion, I am reaching out for assistance. The subject of the
> > research is
> > > > Andras Hajducsek from Saca, a village a short distance south /
> > southwest of
> > > > Kosice. The surname was not a popular one in Saca or the neighboring
> > > > villages of Mala Ida and Pol'ov so I do not believe that there was more
> > > > than one adult Andras Hajducsek of the same approximate age within my
> > > > window of research. Searching LDS records from Roman Catholic parishes
> > in
> > > > the area, I have only been able to locate marriage and death records
> > for
> > > > Andras. The marriage record from 1/28/1846 shows a 24 year old groom
> > and
> > > > his 20 year old bride Anna Krisztianko from Saca. This places his year
> > of
> > > > birth at 1821 or 1822. His death record on 1/24/1881 shows his widow
> > Anna
> > > > Krisztanko and lists his age at 63. This places his YOB at 1817 or
> > 1818. I
> > > > have not been able to locate his baptismal record despite searching RC
> > > > records in several area villages across all years 1815 â€" 1825.
> >
> > > >
> > > > My first thought is that Andras Hajducsek and family may have migrated
> > > > from another village but the surname, as far as I can tell, appears in
> > the
> > > > area as early as 1785 in Pol'ov. Still, I cannot document his birth and
> > > > parentage.
> > > >
> > > > I am worried that this research is being complicated by aliases. Andras
> > > > and Anna had a son (Andras) on 8/27/1847 in Saca. The name of the
> > father
> > > > was recorded as Hajducsek Andras maskep (otherwise) Skop. This
> > connection
> > > > to the Skop surname is further complicated by a possible relative from
> > the
> > > > late 1700's whose name was recorded as Mathias Skop, alias Kuhar vel (I
> > > > think it is "vel") Hajducsek on the record from 5/14/1795 that I have
> > > > linked to:
> > > >
> >
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1951-22646-26414-74?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-\
R7W:n1744020469
> > > >
> > > > I have always been confused by the use of the alias in terms of which
> > is
> > > > the old name and which carries forward, but the apparent use of three
> > > > surnames has created a nightmare. I have never seen three surnames
> > recorded
> > > > for 1 person and cannot begin to make sense of it.
> > > >
> > > > Since I don't know that Mathias and Andras were related, I am focusing
> > on
> > > > establishing the Hajducsek Skop connection. Does Hajducsek Andras
> > maskep
> > > > (otherwise) Skop mean that Skop had been dropped in favor of Hajducsek
> > > > going forward? Might he have been born simply as Andras Skop? Or might
> > the
> > > > use of Hajducsek have begun in previous generations?
> > > >
> > > > Can anyone explain Mathias and his alias madness???
> > > >
> > > > Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you!
> > > >
> > > > Eric Hajducsek
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Eric,
In raising the question of the Alias or "do' name it is important to remember
that this was not a uniform practice over time and place, but varied until it
disappeared at the beginning of the 20th century.

That is, it was much more common in small communities that were partially
illiterate, oral cultures, and without possessing documents.  Their births,
deaths, and marriages were simply recorded by clergy in the church books
according to what the clergy either  'knew' or the people told them.  People did
not even remember their birthdays accurately,but they celebrated saint's days
which were known through the church calendar.

Aliases or name changes came about from the case you mention here but also  but
also following spousal deaths and remarriages. So children of first marriages
followed by a death of a father and a mother's remarriage often took on the name
of the second father with no formal procedure in place, just custom.  It just
became too difficult for neighbors to remember what to call which child.  My own
grandmother was married twice and the children of the first marriage took on the
name of her second husband without much question, though within the family we
knew the whole story and differentiated them with an alias.  Our grandmother's
entire family also had a third alias to differentiate it from from another set
of rather distant cousins who shared first names. This alias persisted even when
the original last name was no longer shared by women who had married and had
children.

Some aliases were taken on by which house one might move into. It was rare to
move into a house not inherited in some way so when it happened one might be
called by a name of a former family who occupied that home.   So a man might be
called by neighbors - John Smith  who lives in the Zobrak home - and eventually
just John Zobrak.

Some aliases were taken on by men who married a woman in another village and
went to live with her family. Since local villagers knew her family but not him,
he would just take on her family name.

Some aliases were taken on by men who married women of different class, or who
were owners or heiresses of land when the husband was not.

And while I have not found a case in church records, it seems not unlikely that,
just as in this country presently,  people sometimes take on an alias  by moving
and escaping a bad reputation.:)

Curt B.

--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "tkejuice1208"  wrote:
>
> Thanks to all who have provided input.  These discussions are always very
interesting and I encourage additional input that may be of value.  To answer a
previous question, I have not yet seen the alias in reverse (Hajducsek, alias
Skop).
>
> As the wheels continue to turn in my head, I thought of an event that may
trigger an alias.  Please let know if you can verify such an occurrence or
otherwise know this to be true.  The scenario is that unwed mother gives birth
to child "A" (illeg).  Child is baptized with mother's maiden surname.  Mother
marries and had additional children who carry the surname of the father.  Child
"A" has mother's maiden surname, but can be associated with the family
unit/household that bears the surname of the husband, therefore triggering the
alias by association.
>
> Thoughts?
>

Thank you Curt!
Your explanation summarises the alias events very well.
I have an oral history (told in 2012) where some branches of the family
were differentiated by nicknames, though still keeping the family name.
The first example was of 'Bartosi Marafko' who bought the land owned by
Bartos and the other, 'Olle Marafko' or 'Marafko Olle' where the maiden
name was used.
Neither became aliases or recorded in church books. It was and still is
used for identification in general conversation as a convenience.

You raise an interesting point about literacy.
Most of us have only the church archives to examine where considerable
spelling variations occurred. If the individual (let's say a marriage pre
1869) was literate and the scribe wrote the name incorrectly, would he have
an opportunity to read the entry and suggest correction? Were the entries
only for the perusal of the priests? Did tax officials have access to these
records?
It is difficult to find information regarding schooling from 1770 onwards.
I understand that there was an education revolution during the
industrialisation era of 1880 onwards, but prior to that I've only found a
few references to the advent of Lutheran schools and guilds and the
establishment of Catholic schools as a reaction to this as part of the
anti-reformation movement. I think much of this schooling had a lot to do
with the Estate owners. I know that Esterhazy (the Matyusfold Estate in
Galanta) built an orphanage which may have also included a school.
What is known about early schooling?

Thank you

Peter M.

On 7 February 2013 06:35, CurtB <curt67boc@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Eric,
> In raising the question of the Alias or "do' name it is important to
> remember that this was not a uniform practice over time and place, but
> varied until it disappeared at the beginning of the 20th century.
>
> That is, it was much more common in small communities that were partially
> illiterate, oral cultures, and without possessing documents. Their births,
> deaths, and marriages were simply recorded by clergy in the church books
> according to what the clergy either 'knew' or the people told them. People
> did not even remember their birthdays accurately,but they celebrated
> saint's days which were known through the church calendar.
>
> Aliases or name changes came about from the case you mention here but also
> but also following spousal deaths and remarriages. So children of first
> marriages followed by a death of a father and a mother's remarriage often
> took on the name of the second father with no formal procedure in place,
> just custom. It just became too difficult for neighbors to remember what to
> call which child. My own grandmother was married twice and the children of
> the first marriage took on the name of her second husband without much
> question, though within the family we knew the whole story and
> differentiated them with an alias. Our grandmother's entire family also had
> a third alias to differentiate it from from another set of rather distant
> cousins who shared first names. This alias persisted even when the original
> last name was no longer shared by women who had married and had children.
>
> Some aliases were taken on by which house one might move into. It was rare
> to move into a house not inherited in some way so when it happened one
> might be called by a name of a former family who occupied that home. So a
> man might be called by neighbors - John Smith who lives in the Zobrak home
> - and eventually just John Zobrak.
>
> Some aliases were taken on by men who married a woman in another village
> and went to live with her family. Since local villagers knew her family but
> not him, he would just take on her family name.
>
> Some aliases were taken on by men who married women of different class, or
> who were owners or heiresses of land when the husband was not.
>
> And while I have not found a case in church records, it seems not unlikely
> that, just as in this country presently, people sometimes take on an alias
> by moving and escaping a bad reputation.:)
>
> Curt B.
>
>
> --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "tkejuice1208" wrote:
> >
> > Thanks to all who have provided input. These discussions are always very
> interesting and I encourage additional input that may be of value. To
> answer a previous question, I have not yet seen the alias in reverse
> (Hajducsek, alias Skop).
> >
> > As the wheels continue to turn in my head, I thought of an event that
> may trigger an alias. Please let know if you can verify such an occurrence
> or otherwise know this to be true. The scenario is that unwed mother gives
> birth to child "A" (illeg). Child is baptized with mother's maiden surname.
> Mother marries and had additional children who carry the surname of the
> father. Child "A" has mother's maiden surname, but can be associated with
> the family unit/household that bears the surname of the husband, therefore
> triggering the alias by association.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

All this talk about aliases reminded me of a surname variation in my own family.
One of my family lines has a surname of Janko but in some of the records it is
written as Jankovje.  It is almost certain the same family because the wife's
name is the same on all the records.  Could this be some diminutive ending? Is
there any significance to a "vje" ending?
CK

Thanks Curt, Peter and everyone else for your contributions.  The dialogue has
certainly helped me and will definitely help others prepare research strategies
aimed at overcoming the alias obstacle.  Please feel free to contact me
personally with related information.

All the best,

Eric Hajducsek



--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, htcstech  wrote:
>
> Thank you Curt!
> Your explanation summarises the alias events very well.
> I have an oral history (told in 2012) where some branches of the family
> were differentiated by nicknames, though still keeping the family name.
> The first example was of 'Bartosi Marafko' who bought the land owned by
> Bartos and the other, 'Olle Marafko' or 'Marafko Olle' where the maiden
> name was used.
> Neither became aliases or recorded in church books. It was and still is
> used for identification in general conversation as a convenience.
>
> You raise an interesting point about literacy.
> Most of us have only the church archives to examine where considerable
> spelling variations occurred. If the individual (let's say a marriage pre
> 1869) was literate and the scribe wrote the name incorrectly, would he have
> an opportunity to read the entry and suggest correction? Were the entries
> only for the perusal of the priests? Did tax officials have access to these
> records?
> It is difficult to find information regarding schooling from 1770 onwards.
> I understand that there was an education revolution during the
> industrialisation era of 1880 onwards, but prior to that I've only found a
> few references to the advent of Lutheran schools and guilds and the
> establishment of Catholic schools as a reaction to this as part of the
> anti-reformation movement. I think much of this schooling had a lot to do
> with the Estate owners. I know that Esterhazy (the Matyusfold Estate in
> Galanta) built an orphanage which may have also included a school.
> What is known about early schooling?
>
> Thank you
>
> Peter M.
>
> On 7 February 2013 06:35, CurtB  wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Eric,
> > In raising the question of the Alias or "do' name it is important to
> > remember that this was not a uniform practice over time and place, but
> > varied until it disappeared at the beginning of the 20th century.
> >
> > That is, it was much more common in small communities that were partially
> > illiterate, oral cultures, and without possessing documents. Their births,
> > deaths, and marriages were simply recorded by clergy in the church books
> > according to what the clergy either 'knew' or the people told them. People
> > did not even remember their birthdays accurately,but they celebrated
> > saint's days which were known through the church calendar.
> >
> > Aliases or name changes came about from the case you mention here but also
> > but also following spousal deaths and remarriages. So children of first
> > marriages followed by a death of a father and a mother's remarriage often
> > took on the name of the second father with no formal procedure in place,
> > just custom. It just became too difficult for neighbors to remember what to
> > call which child. My own grandmother was married twice and the children of
> > the first marriage took on the name of her second husband without much
> > question, though within the family we knew the whole story and
> > differentiated them with an alias. Our grandmother's entire family also had
> > a third alias to differentiate it from from another set of rather distant
> > cousins who shared first names. This alias persisted even when the original
> > last name was no longer shared by women who had married and had children.
> >
> > Some aliases were taken on by which house one might move into. It was rare
> > to move into a house not inherited in some way so when it happened one
> > might be called by a name of a former family who occupied that home. So a
> > man might be called by neighbors - John Smith who lives in the Zobrak home
> > - and eventually just John Zobrak.
> >
> > Some aliases were taken on by men who married a woman in another village
> > and went to live with her family. Since local villagers knew her family but
> > not him, he would just take on her family name.
> >
> > Some aliases were taken on by men who married women of different class, or
> > who were owners or heiresses of land when the husband was not.
> >
> > And while I have not found a case in church records, it seems not unlikely
> > that, just as in this country presently, people sometimes take on an alias
> > by moving and escaping a bad reputation.:)
> >
> > Curt B.
> >
> >
> > --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "tkejuice1208" wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks to all who have provided input. These discussions are always very
> > interesting and I encourage additional input that may be of value. To
> > answer a previous question, I have not yet seen the alias in reverse
> > (Hajducsek, alias Skop).
> > >
> > > As the wheels continue to turn in my head, I thought of an event that
> > may trigger an alias. Please let know if you can verify such an occurrence
> > or otherwise know this to be true. The scenario is that unwed mother gives
> > birth to child "A" (illeg). Child is baptized with mother's maiden surname.
> > Mother marries and had additional children who carry the surname of the
> > father. Child "A" has mother's maiden surname, but can be associated with
> > the family unit/household that bears the surname of the husband, therefore
> > triggering the alias by association.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Carl,
Not diminutive but possessive case.
The context would clarify
eg 'kotlarcik-ovje dom'.
Surname used as a pronoun here, but slovak grammar is not my forte.
Others should confirm.
 
But is it your person of interest?
cheers
A
 


>________________________________
> From: Carl <carl.kotlarchik@...>
>To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013 3:12 AM
>Subject: [S-R] Surname variations
>
>
> 
>
>All this talk about aliases reminded me of a surname variation in my own
family.  One of my family lines has a surname of Janko but in some of the
records it is written as Jankovje.  It is almost certain the same family because
the wife's name is the same on all the records.  Could this be some diminutive
ending? Is there any significance to a "vje" ending?
>CK
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Years ago I asked the members of Slovak-World to send my mom (Julia
Bolech Placko) emails -- for her 80th and again for her 85th
birthdays. She got a huge number of emails from you.

Mom died at the age of almost-95 a couple of years ago and I'm finally
getting around to going through her papers. She saved all the birthday
cards and letters that she received and I've just finished reading
them all. What nice notes from you -- in both Slovak and English.
Thanks, Helene, Frank, Dennis, Julia, and many more. What caring
people you are! Thanks again.

Anabeth Dollins

Thank you...my pleasure.

Dennis

--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, Anabeth Dollins  wrote:
>
> Years ago I asked the members of Slovak-World to send my mom (Julia
> Bolech Placko) emails -- for her 80th and again for her 85th
> birthdays. She got a huge number of emails from you.
>
> Mom died at the age of almost-95 a couple of years ago and I'm finally
> getting around to going through her papers. She saved all the birthday
> cards and letters that she received and I've just finished reading
> them all. What nice notes from you -- in both Slovak and English.
> Thanks, Helene, Frank, Dennis, Julia, and many more. What caring
> people you are! Thanks again.
>
> Anabeth Dollins
>

Yep, you are correct Alan.  I received several other messages saying that the
ending just meant "of the Jankos".   Thanks again for your reply and your
insight.
CK

--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "Carl"  wrote:
>
> Thanks Alan.  But it is not clear to me why that ending would have appeared on
the name of the father on a baptism record for his child.  The "vje" ending is
not used on any of the other names on that page of the church baptism records or
for that matter anywhere else that I have seen. I've always been puzzled by it.
> CK
>
> --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, Alan Antoska  wrote:
> >
> > Carl,
> > Not diminutive but possessive case.
> > The context would clarify
> > eg 'kotlarcik-ovje dom'.
> > Surname used as a pronoun here, but slovak grammar is not my forte.
> > Others should confirm.
> >  
> > But is it your person of interest?
> > cheers
> > A
> >  
> >
> >
> > >________________________________
> > > From: Carl
> > >To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
> > >Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013 3:12 AM
> > >Subject: [S-R] Surname variations
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > >All this talk about aliases reminded me of a surname variation in my own
family.  One of my family lines has a surname of Janko but in some of the
records it is written as Jankovje.  It is almost certain the same family because
the wife's name is the same on all the records.  Could this be some diminutive
ending? Is there any significance to a "vje" ending?
> > >CK
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

 
On a related note, my family is always shown as "Juskanic" except in a few
church records, where it's recorded as "Juskanyin".    Is the -yin ending
also something that's known or just a random permutation of the name?
 
Thanks.
David Colello


________________________________
  From: Carl <carl.kotlarchik@...>
To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2013 2:25 PM
Subject: [S-R] Re: Surname variations


 

Yep, you are correct Alan.  I received several other messages saying that the
ending just meant "of the Jankos".   Thanks again for your reply and your
insight.
CK

--- In mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com, "Carl"  wrote:
>
> Thanks Alan.  But it is not clear to me why that ending would have appeared on
the name of the father on a baptism record for his child.  The "vje" ending is
not used on any of the other names on that page of the church baptism records or
for that matter anywhere else that I have seen. I've always been puzzled by it.
> CK
>
> --- In mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com, Alan Antoska  wrote:
> >
> > Carl,
> > Not diminutive but possessive case.
> > The context would clarify
> > eg 'kotlarcik-ovje dom'.
> > Surname used as a pronoun here, but slovak grammar is not my forte.
> > Others should confirm.
> >  
> > But is it your person of interest?
> > cheers
> > A
> >  
> >
> >
> > >________________________________
> > > From: Carl
> > >To: mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com
> > >Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013 3:12 AM
> > >Subject: [S-R] Surname variations
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > >All this talk about aliases reminded me of a surname variation in my own
family.  One of my family lines has a surname of Janko but in some of the
records it is written as Jankovje.  It is almost certain the same family because
the wife's name is the same on all the records.  Could this be some diminutive
ending? Is there any significance to a "vje" ending?
> > >CK
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I speculate - could it be the scribe?
ie a stand in priest, school teacher or bad hair day.
Are all the page entries in the same hand writing, ink color?
Could the first name have been added after the family name - ie the scribe
could not immediately recall the baby's name?
Otherwise sorry, I am drained of ideas.
A
 

>________________________________
> From: Carl <carl.kotlarchik@...>
>To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Saturday, 9 February 2013 9:25 AM
>Subject: [S-R] Re: Surname variations
>
>
> 
>
>Yep, you are correct Alan.  I received several other messages saying that the
ending just meant "of the Jankos".   Thanks again for your reply and your
insight.
>CK
>
>--- In mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com, "Carl"  wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Alan.  But it is not clear to me why that ending would have appeared
on the name of the father on a baptism record for his child.  The "vje" ending
is not used on any of the other names on that page of the church baptism records
or for that matter anywhere else that I have seen. I've always been puzzled by
it.
>> CK
>>
>> --- In mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com, Alan Antoska  wrote:
>> >
>> > Carl,
>> > Not diminutive but possessive case.
>> > The context would clarify
>> > eg 'kotlarcik-ovje dom'.
>> > Surname used as a pronoun here, but slovak grammar is not my forte.
>> > Others should confirm.
>> >  
>> > But is it your person of interest?
>> > cheers
>> > A
>> >  
>> >
>> >
>> > >________________________________
>> > > From: Carl
>> > >To: mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com
>> > >Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013 3:12 AM
>> > >Subject: [S-R] Surname variations
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > 
>> > >
>> > >All this talk about aliases reminded me of a surname variation in my own
family.  One of my family lines has a surname of Janko but in some of the
records it is written as Jankovje.  It is almost certain the same family because
the wife's name is the same on all the records.  Could this be some diminutive
ending? Is there any significance to a "vje" ending?
>> > >CK
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>>
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I need help translating a comment on a birth record at the link below:

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN4\
:n1966565021

entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section


I can get the first part:  N 7 (birth order), married to Stephania Hurban 18
April 1910 and the 16 Dec 1943 date at the end, but I cannot figure out the part
in between.

Can anyone help me out?

Thanks,
Judy

Judy,
The second note is written in a different hand.

It says he was married again a second time to Genoveva Nemec~ek and that she was
born on 16 Dec 1843.  [not 1943].

The places of marriage are not given.

Curt B.

--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "Judy"  wrote:
>
> I need help translating a comment on a birth record at the link below:
>
>
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN4\
:n1966565021
>
> entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section
>
>
> I can get the first part:  N 7 (birth order), married to Stephania Hurban 18
April 1910 and the 16 Dec 1943 date at the end, but I cannot figure out the part
in between.
>
> Can anyone help me out?
>
> Thanks,
> Judy
>

Thanks Curt for trying to help me out.

That number does look like an 8, not a 9 as I originally thought.

But now with your suggested translation,I am confused.

The record in the link is a birth record of Joannes G from 1890.  If the date
written in the comments is 1843, then Genovena Nemec~ek already would have been
43 the year Joannes G was born...not a likely match.

Hmmmm????

Judy

--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "CurtB"  wrote:
>
> Judy,
> The second note is written in a different hand.
>
> It says he was married again a second time to Genoveva Nemec~ek and that she
was born on 16 Dec 1843.  [not 1943].
>
> The places of marriage are not given.
>
> Curt B.
>
> --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "Judy"  wrote:
> >
> > I need help translating a comment on a birth record at the link below:
> >
> >
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN4\
:n1966565021
> >
> > entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section
> >
> >
> > I can get the first part:  N 7 (birth order), married to Stephania Hurban 18
April 1910 and the 16 Dec 1943 date at the end, but I cannot figure out the part
in between.
> >
> > Can anyone help me out?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Judy
> >
>

Judy,
You are right, of course.  I puzzled quite a bit over this, but that is what the
Latin says.  As I look at it again, it is possible that the year 1843 really was
intended to be 1893 but was written carelessly, but both the 8 & 9 are sloppy or
perhaps the pen or ink are bad.  The second scribe certainly had inferior
handwriting.

Curt B.

but "Genoveva Nemec~ek nata...  Means just what it says: Genoveva was born...

--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "Judy"  wrote:
>
> Thanks Curt for trying to help me out.
>
> That number does look like an 8, not a 9 as I originally thought.
>
> But now with your suggested translation,I am confused.
>
> The record in the link is a birth record of Joannes G from 1890.  If the date
written in the comments is 1843, then Genovena Nemec~ek already would have been
43 the year Joannes G was born...not a likely match.
>
> Hmmmm????
>
> Judy
>
> --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "CurtB"  wrote:
> >
> > Judy,
> > The second note is written in a different hand.
> >
> > It says he was married again a second time to Genoveva Nemec~ek and that she
was born on 16 Dec 1843.  [not 1943].
> >
> > The places of marriage are not given.
> >
> > Curt B.
> >
> > --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "Judy"  wrote:
> > >
> > > I need help translating a comment on a birth record at the link below:
> > >
> > >
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN4\
:n1966565021
> > >
> > > entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section
> > >
> > >
> > > I can get the first part:  N 7 (birth order), married to Stephania Hurban
18 April 1910 and the 16 Dec 1943 date at the end, but I cannot figure out the
part in between.
> > >
> > > Can anyone help me out?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Judy
> > >
> >
>

I believe that they are referring to Genoveva Nemicek born or nee Melis and the
date of the second marriage for both of them.

Best regards,

Paul Horvat


-----Original Message-----
From: Judy <hogelj@...>
To: SLOVAK-ROOTS <SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Feb 10, 2013 11:52 am
Subject: [S-R] Re: Latin translation on a birth record - help please


Thanks Curt for trying to help me out.

That number does look like an 8, not a 9 as I originally thought.

But now with your suggested translation,I am confused.

The record in the link is a birth record of Joannes G from 1890.  If the date
written in the comments is 1843, then Genovena Nemec~ek already would have been
43 the year Joannes G was born...not a likely match.

Hmmmm????

Judy

--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "CurtB"  wrote:
>
> Judy,
> The second note is written in a different hand.
>
> It says he was married again a second time to Genoveva Nemec~ek and that she
was born on 16 Dec 1843.  [not 1943].
>
> The places of marriage are not given.
>
> Curt B.
>
> --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "Judy"  wrote:
> >
> > I need help translating a comment on a birth record at the link below:
> >
> >
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN4\
:n1966565021
> >
> > entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section
> >

> >
> > I can get the first part:  N 7 (birth order), married to Stephania Hurban 18
April 1910 and the 16 Dec 1943 date at the end, but I cannot figure out the part
in between.
> >
> > Can anyone help me out?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Judy
> >
>




------------------------------------

PLEASE STAY ON-TOPIC (GENEALOGY).  OFF-TOPIC ITEMS WILL BE BLOCKED.

To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SLOVAK-ROOTS/

To unsubscribe from this group, go to
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/SLOVAK-ROOTS
-or- send  blank email to SLOVAK-ROOTS-unsubscribe@...! Groups
Links







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Paul,
You're probably right.  THe date her is probably 1943, and referring to the
marriage and not her birth.  That would make them in their mid fifties of age at
the time of the second marriage and her a likely widow.


Curt B.

--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, sunysa@... wrote:
>
>
> I believe that they are referring to Genoveva Nemicek born or nee Melis and
the date of the second marriage for both of them.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Paul Horvat
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Judy
> To: SLOVAK-ROOTS
> Sent: Sun, Feb 10, 2013 11:52 am
> Subject: [S-R] Re: Latin translation on a birth record - help please
>
>
> Thanks Curt for trying to help me out.
>
> That number does look like an 8, not a 9 as I originally thought.
>
> But now with your suggested translation,I am confused.
>
> The record in the link is a birth record of Joannes G from 1890.  If the date
> written in the comments is 1843, then Genovena Nemec~ek already would have
been
> 43 the year Joannes G was born...not a likely match.
>
> Hmmmm????
>
> Judy
>
> --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "CurtB"  wrote:
> >
> > Judy,
> > The second note is written in a different hand.
> >
> > It says he was married again a second time to Genoveva Nemec~ek and that she
> was born on 16 Dec 1843.  [not 1943].
> >
> > The places of marriage are not given.
> >
> > Curt B.
> >
> > --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "Judy"  wrote:
> > >
> > > I need help translating a comment on a birth record at the link below:
> > >
> > >
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN4\
:n1966565021
> > >
> > > entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section
> > >
>
> > >
> > > I can get the first part:  N 7 (birth order), married to Stephania Hurban
18
> April 1910 and the 16 Dec 1943 date at the end, but I cannot figure out the
part
> in between.
> > >
> > > Can anyone help me out?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Judy
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> PLEASE STAY ON-TOPIC (GENEALOGY).  OFF-TOPIC ITEMS WILL BE BLOCKED.
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SLOVAK-ROOTS/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, go to
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/SLOVAK-ROOTS
> -or- send  blank email to SLOVAK-ROOTS-unsubscribe@...! Groups
> Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Curt & Paul,

Thanks so much for the help.

Judy

--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "CurtB"  wrote:
>
> Paul,
> You're probably right.  THe date her is probably 1943, and referring to the
marriage and not her birth.  That would make them in their mid fifties of age at
the time of the second marriage and her a likely widow.
>
>
> Curt B.
>
> --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, sunysa@ wrote:
> >
> >
> > I believe that they are referring to Genoveva Nemicek born or nee Melis and
the date of the second marriage for both of them.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Paul Horvat
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Judy
> > To: SLOVAK-ROOTS
> > Sent: Sun, Feb 10, 2013 11:52 am
> > Subject: [S-R] Re: Latin translation on a birth record - help please
> >
> >
> > Thanks Curt for trying to help me out.
> >
> > That number does look like an 8, not a 9 as I originally thought.
> >
> > But now with your suggested translation,I am confused.
> >
> > The record in the link is a birth record of Joannes G from 1890.  If the
date
> > written in the comments is 1843, then Genovena Nemec~ek already would have
been
> > 43 the year Joannes G was born...not a likely match.
> >
> > Hmmmm????
> >
> > Judy
> >
> > --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "CurtB"  wrote:
> > >
> > > Judy,
> > > The second note is written in a different hand.
> > >
> > > It says he was married again a second time to Genoveva Nemec~ek and that
she
> > was born on 16 Dec 1843.  [not 1943].
> > >
> > > The places of marriage are not given.
> > >
> > > Curt B.
> > >
> > > --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "Judy"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I need help translating a comment on a birth record at the link below:
> > > >
> > > >
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN4\
:n1966565021
> > > >
> > > > entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> > > > I can get the first part:  N 7 (birth order), married to Stephania
Hurban 18
> > April 1910 and the 16 Dec 1943 date at the end, but I cannot figure out the
part
> > in between.
> > > >
> > > > Can anyone help me out?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Judy
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > PLEASE STAY ON-TOPIC (GENEALOGY).  OFF-TOPIC ITEMS WILL BE BLOCKED.
> >
> > To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SLOVAK-ROOTS/
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, go to
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/SLOVAK-ROOTS
> > -or- send  blank email to SLOVAK-ROOTS-unsubscribe@! Groups
> > Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

Judy, how about a couple other thoughts?

I am surely no expert and can only provide insight from attempting to
translate similar records for my own Slovak roots.
     *   Not sure what "N7" refers to in the notes; birth order seems an
unlikely  fact to record; I've never seen that recorded on any other record
other than  US census records
     *   Surely appears to be a marriage to Stephania Hurban on 18 April
1910
     *   The last entry, again a different hand, appears to also mention a
marriage  to Genoveva Nemecek but the unfortunate year leads you to one of
two  conclusions
     *   Genoveva was either 47 years his senior (seemingly unlikely)
     *   Or the date is 16 Dec 1943 which is a plausible last entry
     *   However, I am having trouble with another possible translation:
     *   matrimonium inict cum Genvoveva Nemecek nata rue lis 16 Dec  1943"
     *   Slap that into a translator and you get:  The beginning of your
marriage with a daughter 16 Dec 1943 Genvoveva Nemecek "  (as if he  brought a
daughter from a previous marriage into the second one... surely  not that
he married one).

Hope this is of some help to you.

Tom



In a message dated 2/10/2013 2:27:06 P.M. Central Standard Time,
curt67boc@... writes:




Judy,
You are right, of course. I puzzled quite a bit over this, but  that is
what the Latin says. As I look at it again, it is possible that the  year 1843
really was intended to be 1893 but was written carelessly, but both  the 8 &
9 are sloppy or perhaps the pen or ink are bad. The second scribe
certainly had inferior handwriting.

Curt B.

but "Genoveva  Nemec~ek nata... Means just what it says: Genoveva was
born...

--- In  _SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com_
(mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com) ,  "Judy" wrote:
>
> Thanks Curt for trying to help me out.
>
> That number does look like an 8, not a 9 as I originally thought.
>
> But now with your suggested translation,I am  confused.
>
> The record in the link is a birth record of Joannes  G from 1890. If the
date written in the comments is 1843, then Genovena  Nemec~ek already would
have been 43 the year Joannes G was born...not a likely  match.
>
> Hmmmm????
>
> Judy
>
> ---  In _SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com_
(mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com) ,  "CurtB" wrote:
> >
> > Judy,
> > The second note is  written in a different hand.
> >
> > It says he was married  again a second time to Genoveva Nemec~ek and
that she was born on 16 Dec 1843.  [not 1943].
> >
> > The places of marriage are not  given.
> >
> > Curt B.
> >
> > --- In _SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com_
(mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com) ,  "Judy" wrote:
> > >
> > > I need help translating a  comment on a birth record at the link
below:
> > >
> >  >
_https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN\
4:n1966565021_
(https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN\
4:n1966565021)
>  > >
> > > entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section
> > >
> > >
> > > I can get the first  part: N 7 (birth order), married to Stephania
Hurban 18 April 1910 and the 16  Dec 1943 date at the end, but I cannot figure
out the part in between.
>  > >
> > > Can anyone help me out?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Judy
> > >
>  >
>






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks for your interpretation of the Latin.  This priest seems to add quite a
few additional bits of information, so I always try to figure out what they
mean.


As far as the N# notes...During this period of time the priest consistently
notes the birth order number with either what looks like the N in my original
record or with what looks like "pr#." Since he notes first born children with
"primog" comments, I assume that "pr#" is an abbreviation for "primog" meaning
"born + the birth #."  For the family I am following, the numbering perfectly
matches the children's birth order, so I am sure that is what the N7 means. 
I've been through many birth records covering a few centuries and have never
seen another scribe do that.

Judy


--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, takukuk@... wrote:
>
> Judy, how about a couple other thoughts?
>
> I am surely no expert and can only provide insight from attempting to
> translate similar records for my own Slovak roots.
>     *   Not sure what "N7" refers to in the notes; birth order seems an
> unlikely  fact to record; I've never seen that recorded on any other record
> other than  US census records
>     *   Surely appears to be a marriage to Stephania Hurban on 18 April
> 1910
>     *   The last entry, again a different hand, appears to also mention a
> marriage  to Genoveva Nemecek but the unfortunate year leads you to one of
> two  conclusions
>     *   Genoveva was either 47 years his senior (seemingly unlikely)
>     *   Or the date is 16 Dec 1943 which is a plausible last entry
>     *   However, I am having trouble with another possible translation:
>     *   matrimonium inict cum Genvoveva Nemecek nata rue lis 16 Dec  1943"
>     *   Slap that into a translator and you get:  The beginning of your
> marriage with a daughter 16 Dec 1943 Genvoveva Nemecek "  (as if he  brought a
> daughter from a previous marriage into the second one... surely  not that
> he married one).
>
> Hope this is of some help to you.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> In a message dated 2/10/2013 2:27:06 P.M. Central Standard Time,
> curt67boc@... writes:
>
>
>
>
> Judy,
> You are right, of course. I puzzled quite a bit over this, but  that is
> what the Latin says. As I look at it again, it is possible that the  year 1843
> really was intended to be 1893 but was written carelessly, but both  the 8 &
> 9 are sloppy or perhaps the pen or ink are bad. The second scribe
> certainly had inferior handwriting.
>
> Curt B.
>
> but "Genoveva  Nemec~ek nata... Means just what it says: Genoveva was
> born...
>
> --- In  _SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com_
> (mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com) ,  "Judy" wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Curt for trying to help me out.
> >
> > That number does look like an 8, not a 9 as I originally thought.
> >
> > But now with your suggested translation,I am  confused.
> >
> > The record in the link is a birth record of Joannes  G from 1890. If the
> date written in the comments is 1843, then Genovena  Nemec~ek already would
> have been 43 the year Joannes G was born...not a likely  match.
> >
> > Hmmmm????
> >
> > Judy
> >
> > ---  In _SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com_
> (mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com) ,  "CurtB" wrote:
> > >
> > > Judy,
> > > The second note is  written in a different hand.
> > >
> > > It says he was married  again a second time to Genoveva Nemec~ek and
> that she was born on 16 Dec 1843.  [not 1943].
> > >
> > > The places of marriage are not  given.
> > >
> > > Curt B.
> > >
> > > --- In _SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com_
> (mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com) ,  "Judy" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I need help translating a  comment on a birth record at the link
> below:
> > > >
> > >  >
>
_https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN\
4:n1966565021_
>
(https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN\
4:n1966565021)
> >  > >
> > > > entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I can get the first  part: N 7 (birth order), married to Stephania
> Hurban 18 April 1910 and the 16  Dec 1943 date at the end, but I cannot figure
> out the part in between.
> >  > >
> > > > Can anyone help me out?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Judy
> > > >
> >  >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Judy

 primogenitus would mean first born child.



 My ancestral v illiage of Gbely is very close to yours.

 I've seen this word used in the later 1800s.

 I've never seen the N prefix but also during the later 1800s there is a tiny
number in the column for the given name.

 Knowing the birth orders of children in this time period that were in my
lineage, the numbers do match up.

 I have seen an N prefix with house numbers in this time period, so could it
just refer to "number"?
maybe the latin word for number also begins with an N???
larry

----- Original Message -----


From: "Judy" <hogelj@...>
To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 4:13:15 PM
Subject: [S-R] Re: Latin translation on a birth record - help please

Thanks for your interpretation of the Latin.  This priest seems to add quite a
few additional bits of information, so I always try to figure out what they
mean.


As far as the N# notes...During this period of time the priest consistently
notes the birth order number with either what looks like the N in my original
record or with what looks like "pr#." Since he notes first born children with
"primog" comments, I assume that "pr#" is an abbreviation for "primog" meaning
"born + the birth #."  For the family I am following, the numbering perfectly
matches the children's birth order, so I am sure that is what the N7 means.
 I've been through many birth records covering a few centuries and have never
seen another scribe do that.  

Judy


--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, takukuk@... wrote:
>
> Judy, how about a couple other thoughts?
>  
> I am surely no expert and can only provide insight from attempting to  
> translate similar records for my own Slovak roots.
>     *   Not sure what "N7" refers to in the notes; birth order seems an
> unlikely  fact to record; I've never seen that recorded on any other record
> other than  US census records
>     *   Surely appears to be a marriage to Stephania Hurban on 18 April
> 1910
>     *   The last entry, again a different hand, appears to also mention a
> marriage  to Genoveva Nemecek but the unfortunate year leads you to one of
> two  conclusions
>     *   Genoveva was either 47 years his senior (seemingly unlikely)
>     *   Or the date is 16 Dec 1943 which is a plausible last entry
>     *   However, I am having trouble with another possible translation:
>     *   matrimonium inict cum Genvoveva Nemecek nata rue lis 16 Dec  1943"
>     *   Slap that into a translator and you get:  The beginning of your  
> marriage with a daughter 16 Dec 1943 Genvoveva Nemecek "  (as if he  brought
a
> daughter from a previous marriage into the second one... surely  not that
> he married one).
>
> Hope this is of some help to you.
>  
> Tom
>  
>  
>  
> In a message dated 2/10/2013 2:27:06 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
> curt67boc@... writes:
>
>  
>  
>  
> Judy,
> You are right, of course. I puzzled quite a bit over this, but  that is
> what the Latin says. As I look at it again, it is possible that the  year
1843
> really was intended to be 1893 but was written carelessly, but both  the 8 &
> 9 are sloppy or perhaps the pen or ink are bad. The second scribe  
> certainly had inferior handwriting.
>
> Curt B.
>
> but "Genoveva  Nemec~ek nata... Means just what it says: Genoveva was
> born...
>
> --- In  _SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com_
> (mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com) ,  "Judy" wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Curt for trying to help me out.
> >  
> > That number does look like an 8, not a 9 as I originally thought.  
> >
> > But now with your suggested translation,I am  confused.
> >
> > The record in the link is a birth record of Joannes  G from 1890. If the
> date written in the comments is 1843, then Genovena  Nemec~ek already would
> have been 43 the year Joannes G was born...not a likely  match.
> >
> > Hmmmm????
> >
> > Judy
> >
> > ---  In _SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com_
> (mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com) ,  "CurtB" wrote:
> > >
> > > Judy,
> > > The second note is  written in a different hand.
> > >
> > > It says he was married  again a second time to Genoveva Nemec~ek and
> that she was born on 16 Dec 1843.  [not 1943].
> > >
> > > The places of marriage are not  given.
> > >
> > > Curt B.
> > >
> > > --- In _SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com_
> (mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com) ,  "Judy" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I need help translating a  comment on a birth record at the link
> below:
> > > >
> > >  >
>
_https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN\
4:n1966565021_
>
(https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN\
4:n1966565021)
> >  > >
> > > > entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section  
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I can get the first  part: N 7 (birth order), married to Stephania
> Hurban 18 April 1910 and the 16  Dec 1943 date at the end, but I cannot
figure
> out the part in between.
> >  > >
> > > > Can anyone help me out?
> > > >  
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Judy
> > > >
> >  >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the SLOVAK-ROOTS
group.

   File        : /1828 Hungarian Land Census Indices of Villages and Surnames.pdf
   Uploaded by : tkejuice1208 <tkejuice1208@...>
   Description : 1828 Hungarian Land Census Indices of Villages and Surnames

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SLOVAK-ROOTS/files/1828%20Hungarian%20Land%20Censu\
s%20Indices%20of%20Villages%20and%20Surnames.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.html
Regards,

tkejuice1208 <tkejuice1208@...>

As others have pointed out, it appears to be a notation and date of his second
marriage. The Latin reads, "Matrimonium iniit cum Genoveva [Nemicek?] nata
[Melis?] 16 Dec [1943?]," translation: He married Genoveva Nemicek, maiden name
(literally, "born") Melis, on 16 Dec 1943. "Nata" is referring to her birth
name, not her birth date.

~ Julie Michutka
jmm@...


On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:49 PM, Judy wrote:

> I need help translating a comment on a birth record at the link below:
>
>
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN4\
:n1966565021
>
> entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section

Thanks for your reply, Julie.


--- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, Julie Michutka  wrote:
>
> As others have pointed out, it appears to be a notation and date of his second
marriage. The Latin reads, "Matrimonium iniit cum Genoveva [Nemicek?] nata
[Melis?] 16 Dec [1943?]," translation: He married Genoveva Nemicek, maiden name
(literally, "born") Melis, on 16 Dec 1943. "Nata" is referring to her birth
name, not her birth date.
>
> ~ Julie Michutka
> jmm@...
>
>
> On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:49 PM, Judy wrote:
>
> > I need help translating a comment on a birth record at the link below:
> >
> >
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-14324-47616-89?cc=1554443&wc=M9MJ-RN4\
:n1966565021
> >
> > entry #58 for Joannes G - comment section
>

On Jan, 26, 2013, I joined Slovak-Roots, and you folks from S-R found
the baptism record of my paternal grandfather, FERENCZ  TRISCSIK  (FRANK
TRISCIK) Sabinov , Jarovnice

Because of that fantastic find, I now have found about 15 other
birth/baptism, marriage and death records of at least 8 members of my
family. I am new to the group and have some questions re: translations,
name/word spellings & interpretation about specific records. Most of my
questions are to re-assure me  that I am on the right track and reading
records correctly because this is the first time I have read genealogy
records in another language & sometimes the penmanship's is illegible..




Below are 7 records that I have questions about and would appreciate it
if someone could review, correct my spelling and translation errors and
add anymore info I did not see so I can verify the relationships to my
grandfather.  # 6 is the most confusing so feedback would be welcomed.

I know that 7 entries are a lot, but giving me help on whatever you can
would be great.  I thought maybe having these all at once would give a
more complete picture of what I have found so far.




One more thing...I would also like some help in finding the birth/ death
record of NEJTUSZ TRISCSIK, my great grandfather, but cannot find it
yet.  I believe he was born between 1850-1853, because he married his
1st wife in 1874 when he was 24, his 2nd wife in 1876 when he was 25 and
his 3rd wife in 1890 he was 37.  I am looking through the records in
Sabinov , Jarovnice because all his records but 1 or 2 list Jernye 68 as
his address. I've gone through most of the records in that area for
1850-51but cannot find 1852.




Thanks again for any help you can give me.  I am learning a lot, and
reading all the posts and discovering such interesting things about my
Slovak ancestors.  It's wonderful to have such a supportive group.




Bette



1.  FERENCZ  TRISCSIK Birth: 01 Oct 1879  male Parents: Triscsik,
Nejtusz  & Ondercso, Anna, Jernye 68,



Godparents:  Vuoivjzki ??, György and Adamcso, Juliana ? How do you
spell György's last name?

Entry #33 at

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18045-83550-12?cc=1554443&wc=\
M9MJ-TSS:n1550137223
<https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18045-83550-12?cc=1554443&wc\
=M9MJ-TSS:n1550137223>







2.  NEJTUSZ TRISCSIK age 24, Jernye 68, married on Oct. 26 1874 to
ERZSEBET MERECZICZKI age 22 Jernye 10 (before he married Ferencz's
mother Anna Ondercso).

?Are his parents named Gyorgy Triscsik and Marianah with no maiden name
given?

?Are her parents Andras MERECZICZKI & Marianah with no maiden name
given?

? Is Marianah a Catholic confirmation name given to a lot of women at
that time?

Entry #12 at

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18045-84070-19?cc=1554443&wc=\
M9MJ-TSS:n1550137223
<https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18045-84070-19?cc=1554443&wc\
=M9MJ-TSS:n1550137223>




3.  DEATH of ERZSEBET  TRISCSIK, Neje (wife of) Triscsik, Nejtus Jernye
10 ,age 23, Cause of death: maternity, giving birth ("Veteles"
is miscarriage in Hungarian ) March 30, 1875, buried April 1 in Mocsolya

If my translation is correct, Erzsebet died giving birth to a child.
I've  looked in baptisms / deaths on, before and after her DOD and
couldn't find baptism or death records for a child born to Erzsebet
and Nejtus Triscsik.  If  the baby died without being baptized, maybe
that is why there is no baptism record, but you would think there would
be a death record.  They had been married 5 months maybe it was
miscarriage???

Entry #8 at

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-266-12344-34609-56?cc=1554443&w\
c=M9MJ-TS9:2065591440
<https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-266-12344-34609-56?cc=1554443&\
wc=M9MJ-TS9:2065591440>




4.ANNA ONDERCSO, Birth: 7 May 1856, parents Joames c and Maria Lukacs
both r.c. Mocsolya #1,

Godparents:  Andreas Lukacs & Elisaberta? Sp??Haresar Harescr

Entry # 20

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-266-12344-35762-36?cc=1554443&w\
c=M9MJ-TS9:2065591440
<https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-266-12344-35762-36?cc=1554443&\
wc=M9MJ-TS9:2065591440>



5 . NEIJTUSZ TRISCSIK married on 28 Feb 1876, (BD 1851?)TRISCSIK
NEIJTUSZ , age 25, BD 1851  (Jernye 68 and ANNA ONDERCSO, age 20, (BD
1856) Daughter of Janos and Marian Ondercso, Mocidolany 35 .  Witnesses,
Jakabesin, Janos  and T?rovaly, Matyas.  Parents of Nejtus Triscsik not
listed because this is his 2nd marriage.  He is listed as
"orvegy"or widower.

In the second to the last column, does it say that this is his 2nd
marriage?

Entry # 2 at

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18045-84005-96?cc=1554443&wc=\
M9MJ-TSS:n1550137223
<https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18045-84005-96?cc=1554443&wc\
=M9MJ-TSS:n1550137223>







6. Death 27 April 1890, ONDERCSO ERZSEBET,--TRISCSIK, NEJT , Neje (wife
of) Cause: Jaundice, age 35  Jernye 68  The mother of my grandfather,
Nejtus Triscsik,  and his 4 siblings, was listed as Anna Ondercso, not
Erzsébet Ondercso, wife of Netusz Triscsik . Her age of 35 is right
for her bd of May 7, 1856)  Was she Anna Erzsebet Ondercso or just an
error by the scribe?

Netusz Triscsik was married 3 X's and Anna Ondercso was his 2nd
wife.  His 1st and 3rd  wives were both named Erzsebet (see #'s 2 &
7 ) and he had a daughter named Erzsebet Triscsik, bd 15 Nov, 1876.

(I am searching to confirm that she is Elizabeth (Lizzie) Trescik Turak
who lived in PA and Iowa near Ferencz Triscsik (Frank Trisik)in 1905
-1917.)

Entry #15

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18045-83365-15?cc=1554443&wc=\
M99C-FVL:n1550137223
<https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18045-83365-15?cc=1554443&wc\
=M99C-FVL:n1550137223>







7.Marriage 2 June 1890,  Triscsik, Nejt age 37 (BD 1853?) Jernye 68 and

Novodnj, ERZSEBET ,Age 24, (BD 1865?)  Mocidolany 14  Parents: Janus
Novodnj and Erzsebet S???? Can't read mom's maiden name

Witnesses Trisco , Janus  and Triscsik, Mikaly

Entry # 4

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18045-83516-14?cc=1554443&wc=\
M99C-FVL:n1550137223
<https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18045-83516-14?cc=1554443&wc\
=M99C-FVL:n1550137223>






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

After working through the 1869 census for my family, I am wondering about the
homes and everyday lives of that time. Which goup would be the most appropriate
to ask questions about this topic?

Probably Slovak World. A lot depends on the region you are talking about as
there's a big difference between the East and West. I got a fair bit of
information of different times (mainly early to mid 1800's) via English
armchair travelogues that I found scattered across the web. It's not as
easy as one would think as there appears to be a gap (or poor research on
my part) between 1850 and 1880.
I did do a bit on the creation of the local judiciary as one of my
ancestors was an 'Esküdt', a locally voted in civic official position
lasting for 12 months. In my (western) village there were a total of three
(including a county appointed judge) that handled minor trangressions but
more importantly decided on which fields to be made fallow, which commons
to be for stock feeding (cows were moved from house to pasture), land
boundaries, assistance with taxing, appointing watchmen, news heralds,
establishing goods prices for local consumption, markets and generally
everyday life including church duties and so on. Now post 1869, this slowly
changed into a more formalised municipal style organization as power moved
from Noble estate owners to a centralised civic authority. It certainly
meant that there was a lot of local organisation and support.
FYI: My favourite was the news herald who would walk the street, beat his
little drum and announce the news!

Peter M.

On 14 February 2013 09:53, Judy <hogelj@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> After working through the 1869 census for my family, I am wondering about
> the homes and everyday lives of that time. Which goup would be the most
> appropriate to ask questions about this topic?
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]