Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [S-R] Re: Latin translation on a birth record - help please

Expand Messages
  • lrrykck
    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.
    Message 1 of 12 , Feb 10, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      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-RN4:n1966565021_
      > (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
      > > > >
      > >  >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Julie Michutka
      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
      Message 2 of 12 , Feb 13, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        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
      • Judy
        Thanks for your reply, Julie.
        Message 3 of 12 , Feb 13, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          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
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.