PolishOrigins Forum

 FAQFAQ    SearchSearch    MemberlistMemberlist    ProfileProfile    Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages    Log inLog in    RegisterRegister 
Latin records translations
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 212, 213, 214  Next
Author
Message
adame24



Joined: 02 Jan 2020
Replies: 21

Back to top
Post Posted: Wed Oct 06, 2021 1:12 am      Post subject:
Reply with quote

Hello Dave,

Can you help translate this record. I have most trouble deciphering the old handwriting. It should be Michael Czyz son of Antoni Czyz and Christina. Can you please let me know your PayPal so I can make a donation?



4-4-A.png
 Description:
 Filesize:  1.53 MB
 Viewed:  0 Time(s)

4-4-A.png


View user's profile
Send private message
dnowicki
PO Top Contributor


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Replies: 2289
Location: Michigan City, Indiana

Back to top
Post Posted: Thu Oct 07, 2021 3:32 pm      Post subject:
Reply with quote

adame24 wrote:
Hello Dave,

Can you help translate this record. I have most trouble deciphering the old handwriting. It should be Michael Czyz son of Antoni Czyz and Christina. Can you please let me know your PayPal so I can make a donation?


Hi,

A few preliminary remarks...This marriage record is a civil transcript which means that it is a copy made by a scribe who most probably was hired by the parish priest to produce a copy of the parish marriage register which was then submitted to the Austrian civil authorities to act as a civil marriage record. Scribes made mistakes when they made copies of the parish registers. An error in this transcript is the omission of the house number where the bride resided. Obviously it is not a critical detail but is a detail which could have filled in some background which would shed light on the life of the couple. The bride left her parents’ home and the newlyweds began their married life residing in the house of the groom’s parents.

The record is bilingual, mostly in Latin with parts in Polish. The parts in Polish deal with the legalities involved in the marriage. The bride was under the age at which she could be emancipated from parental control. Since only the priest understood Latin the parental consent needed to be obtained using Polish, the language all the other individuals named in the record understood. The words of the father of the bride as recorded in the register are most likely a legal fiction. Certainly the father gave his consent but it is likely that the priest simply asked him whether he was granting consent/permission and it is likely that the father expressed his consent by answering the question in the affirmative (In Polish: “Tak”).

A final comment...The year of the marriage, 1848, was a watershed moment in the history of a number of European Countries, including Austrian ruled Galicia. The time was known as “The spring of the nations” which reulted in a societal revolution in much of Europe. In Galicia, as well as the rest of the Austrian Empire, it was the year in which the peasants were emancipated from their feudal obligations. Granted that the emancipation did not magically change the relationship between the peasants and the landowners. Old ideas, attitudes and customs take time to change but the legal changes in the emancipation decree meant that legally the old feudal relationships were over.

Finally, to answer your PayPal question...Although I greatly appreciate your kind offer, I’ve never accepted personal payment for translations. In the past I’ve suggested that anyone who would like to show their gratitude could do so by making a donation to a charity which helps those in need or by making a donation to Polish Origins to help defray the expenses incurred in the operation on this forum.

The translation follows and all given names have been rendered into their Polish version.

Thanking you for your kind offer and wishing you continued successful researching,

Dave

The marriage record is entered in the columnar format and there are four major divisions of columns. The major divisions also are divided into sub-columns.

Top of Entry: 1848

Major Division #1
Dies et Mensis = Day & Month (of the wedding): 23 September

Major Division #2: SPONSUS = GROOM
Numerus Domus = Number of the House: From number (missing Roman Numeral) of the bride to number 7 of the groom.
NOMEN = NAME: Michał Cyż, the legitimate son of Antoni Cyż and Krystyna (née) Baczonka**, gardeners* in Siepietnica.
Religio = Religion
Catholica = Catholic: Checked
Aut alia = Or other: Blank
Aetas = Age: 24
Caelebs = Bachelor: Checked
Viduus = Widower: Blank

Major Division #3: SPONSA = BRIDE
NOMEN = NAME: Katarzyna, the legitimate daughter of Józef Koźicki and Maria née Kuźniarowicz, inhabitants of Żmigród
Religio = Religion
Catholica = Catholic: Checked
Aut alia = Or other: Blank
Aetas = Age: 18
Caelebs = Maiden/Bachelorette: Checked
Vidua = Widow: Blank

Major Division #4: TESTES = WITNESSES and their status/ condition of life/occupation:
NOMEN: NAME(S) Michał Dłuski; Marcin Solecki
CONDITIO: THEIR STATUS/CONDITION OF LIFE/OCCUPATION: blacksmith; steward

Notation in Cols.1 to 9 (in Polish): I signed for those who do not know how to write and witnessed the marriage Priest Antoni Dobrzański, pastor.
Notation in Cols. 10-16 (in Polish) “I grant permission to my underage daughter Katarzyna to enter into marriage with Michał Cyż, in testimony of which I sign: Józef Koźicki, father; witnesses as above.

Notes: *hortulanus/gardener: a peasant who owned his cottage and sufficient land for a garden (& often some farm animals) but no farm fields.
**The suffix -onka was used for an unmarried female and signified “daughter of…” In this case her father’s surname was probably Bacza


Last edited by dnowicki on Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:04 am; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile
Send private message
adame24



Joined: 02 Jan 2020
Replies: 21

Back to top
Post Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2021 3:01 pm      Post subject:
Reply with quote

Dave,

Thanks again for your efforts. I will make a donation in your name. Can you help me decipher a few more names? I've gotten a start based on prior facts.

1. Cristina _______
2.
3.
4. Apolonia Czyz, widow of Gregorz Czyz. Daughter of Josephi Furmanek and Thecla Karaminska. Born in Lisowek, lives in Siepientica.
5.
6.
7. Martinus Czyz. Son of Antoni Czyz and Cristina ____. Born and lives in Siepientica.
8.



Names-2.png
 Description:
 Filesize:  1.91 MB
 Viewed:  0 Time(s)

Names-2.png


View user's profile
Send private message
Peterjoliver



Joined: 18 Sep 2021
Replies: 4
Location: South westren USA

Back to top
Post Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2021 11:44 am      Post subject: Latin translation
Reply with quote

There are a few words in this that are confusing me in the relationship/place names.I'm thinking this is still standard practice of the period to leave out parents names...? the original file is:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSV8-S9MS-T?i=309&cat=1049010



Screenshot from 2021-10-09 09-36-32.png
 Description:
carol and marriana marriage 24 aug 1785
 Filesize:  818.13 KB
 Viewed:  0 Time(s)

Screenshot from 2021-10-09 09-36-32.png


View user's profile
Send private message
dnowicki
PO Top Contributor


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Replies: 2289
Location: Michigan City, Indiana

Back to top
Post Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:18 pm      Post subject:
Reply with quote

adame24 wrote:
Dave,

Thanks again for your efforts. I will make a donation in your name. Can you help me decipher a few more names? I've gotten a start based on prior facts.

1. Cristina _______
2.
3.
4. Apolonia Czyz, widow of Gregorz Czyz. Daughter of Josephi Furmanek and Thecla Karaminska. Born in Lisowek, lives in Siepientica.
5.
6.
7. Martinus Czyz. Son of Antoni Czyz and Cristina ____. Born and lives in Siepientica.
8.


Hi adame24,

It would be most helpful if you could post each image separately. When they are posted together as one image it makes it difficult for me to see the letters clearly. That is not much of a problem with the Latin since I know what the words should be. However, it makes the reading of proper names difficult since the names are not familiar to me. I’ll do the records which I can see clearly but I ask that you re-post the remainder as separate images.

The given names will again be translated into their Polish version. I’m attaching a list of Latin given names with their Polish and English versions as a PDF. It is by no means exhaustive but includes names I’ve seen in my own personal research and in doing translations. I hope that you find it helpful.

A comment on the feminine suffixes -onka and -anka. They are rarely used in contemporary Polish but were popular during the 18th and the first half of the 19th Centuries. The father’s surname from which the feminine form is derived sometimes can be difficult to determine with certitude because the feminine form sometimes modifies the father’s surname for euphonic reasons. Thus the feminine Baczonka is probably derived from the masculine Bacza but that is not a certainty since working backwards sometimes admits of several possibilities.

Anyway, the images I was able to see clearly follow and I look forward to th re-posts of the remainder.

Dave

1. Krystyna Baczonka (the same as yesterday’s marriage record).
4. You are correct but here are the Polish spellings of the names of Apolonia’s parents: Josephi Furmanek = Józef Furmanek; Thecla Karminska = Tekla Karmińska. (The diacritic marks on Polish letters are important. They change the way a letter is pronounced and actually are distinct letters in the Polish alphabet from their counterparts without the diacritical marks.)
7. Marcin Cyz, the legitimate son of Antoni Cyz and Krystyna Baczonka, gardeners in Siepietnica



GIVEN NAMES-LATIN, ENGLISH, POLISH.pdf
 Description:

Download
 Filename:  GIVEN NAMES-LATIN, ENGLISH, POLISH.pdf
 Filesize:  66.62 KB
 Downloaded:  9 Time(s)



Last edited by dnowicki on Sat Oct 09, 2021 10:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile
Send private message
dnowicki
PO Top Contributor


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Replies: 2289
Location: Michigan City, Indiana

Back to top
Post Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2021 10:11 pm      Post subject: Re: Latin translation
Reply with quote

Peterjoliver wrote:
There are a few words in this that are confusing me in the relationship/place names.I'm thinking this is still standard practice of the period to leave out parents names...? the original file is:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSV8-S9MS-T?i=309&cat=1049010


Hi Peter,

Thanks for posting the link. Unfortunately, it is necessary to go to a Family History Center or affiliate library to view the image. There are a few words which I cannot make out in the screenshot but fortunately they are not of prime importance.

Since the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had no system for keeping civil vital records ecclesiastical sacramental records were used as substitutes. Those records had priorities other than providing the names of the parents of the bride and the groom—not genealogical research friendly but that’s the reality of the situation. So you can expect not to find parents names in marriage records prior to the Partitions.

It is difficult to get a handle on the geography in the record because of the topography of the region along the Wisła (Vistula) River east of Włocławek. The region was essentially a sparsely developed and settled wasteland. A Rumunek (Rumunki in the plural) is described in Słownik geograficzny as a recent settlement on newly cleared land. The David Gilly map of South Prussia (1802) shows the topography quite clearly. Here is a link to the map: https://www.sggee.org/research/gilly_maps/south_prussia_map.html The region surrounding Włocławek is in A2 on the grid.

The only info regarding relationships contained in the record are that of the bride and the groom. It is possible that the priest was a relative of the bride or a long time friend of her family since the record mentions that he knew her since her birth. The witnesses could have been related to the couple or, more likely, not.

Anyway, here follows the translation.

Dave

Mursk Rumunek

In the Year of the Lord 1785 on the 24th day of the month of August, after the three banns had been proclaimed on festive days (i.e. Sundays & Holy days) within the solemnities of Masses to the people gathered together for the Divine Rites, and since no legitimate impediment had been uncovered, I, Father Rafal Turski, permanent supervisor of the of canons of St. Francis at Chelmno (illegible word), questioned Karol Rucinski, a bachelor, and Maryanna Ossowska, a maiden known (to me) since birth, both from Mursk Rumunek, and after having having received their mutual consent, solemnly joined them through words in the present* marriage in the presence of the witnesses the Noble** Michał Woyciechowski, Kajetan Olewski, Antoni Plantowski and other credible witnesses from various Rumunki within the parish of Kowal.

Notes: *de presente matrimonio/of the present marriage: The actual marriage rite as opposed to a rite of betrothal (de futuro matrimonio).
**Nobilis/noble: owner or leaseholder of a parcel of land.
View user's profile
Send private message
Magroski49
PO Top Contributor & Patron


Joined: 10 Nov 2008
Replies: 1749
Location: Joao Pessoa - Brazil

Back to top
Post Posted: 6 Days ago at 12:17 pm      Post subject: About a word in Latin
Reply with quote

Hello, David

The word 'juvenum' in marriage record (1787) must be understood as 'single/bachelor/not married' or as 'young man'?
If the groom was 41 or 48 years old, and not married before, would he be considered a 'juvenum'?

Thank you,
Gilberto
View user's profile
Send private message
Send e-mail
dnowicki
PO Top Contributor


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Replies: 2289
Location: Michigan City, Indiana

Back to top
Post Posted: 6 Days ago at 5:44 pm      Post subject: Re: About a word in Latin
Reply with quote

Magroski49 wrote:
Hello, David

The word 'juvenum' in marriage record (1787) must be understood as 'single/bachelor/not married' or as 'young man'?
If the groom was 41 or 48 years old, and not married before, would he be considered a 'juvenum'?

Thank you,
Gilberto



Hi Gilberto,

I trust that you and your family and friends remain in good health since we last communicated.

The short answer to your question is that in Latin Catholic marriage records the word juvenis (iuvenis) is used for the groom regardless of his age and it is used with the meaning “bachelor”.

The longer explanation is that the word is spelled either beginning with the letter “j” or the letter “i”. Classical Latin used the symbol “i” for the letter when it was being used as a vowel or, as is the case here, when it was being used as a consonant. After the Classical Era “i” was used for the vowel and “j” came to be used to symbolize the consonant, which is the case here. The word “juvenis” is an adjective (young) but here it is being used as a substantive (i.e. as a noun—young man/bachelor). This is the same thing which happens in Portuguese and Spanish where the adjective for young, which is the stem of the Latin (juven) modified for those two languages which are direct descendants of Latin. Thus, we have jovem and joven as adjectives meaning young but they too can be substantives which act as nouns. Thus jovem and joven as substantives do mean young man.

For the sake of accuracy, what you are reading as juvenum is most certainly juvenem, which is the Accusative Case (Direct Object) of juvenis. (Juvenum is not a case ending for juvenis.) The sentence probably uses the verb “coniunxi” (I joined together) with juvenem as the Direct Object of the verb or else juvenem follows a preposition such as “inter” (between) and is the object of the preposition.

The way the word is used with the meaning of “bachelor” is analogous to the way “virgo” is used for a bride. Virgo means virgin but not necessarily in the technical sense of a woman who has not had sexual relations. It is used with the meaning of “maiden” with the meaning of a woman who had not been married. Thus marriage records for an unmarried woman who earlier had given birth to a child out of wedlock as a “virgo deflorata” (a deflowered maiden).

Wishing you a good Spring season,

David
View user's profile
Send private message
JGwizdowski
PolishOrigins Patron


Joined: 26 Feb 2016
Replies: 205
Location: United States

Back to top
Post Posted: 5 Days ago at 10:13 am      Post subject: Request help with deciphering names...
Reply with quote

Greetings, Dave...
I would greatly appreciate some help in deciphering / verifying, the names on the attached birth record.

5th record down on the right hand page, April 26, 1682...
Infant name: Anna
Father: Stefan Gryza
Mother: Dorthea ???

As always, many thanks, and trust you are all well.

Joe



Anna Gryza b 1682.jpg
 Description:
Right hand page, 5th record down...
 Filesize:  982.24 KB
 Viewed:  0 Time(s)

Anna Gryza b 1682.jpg



_________________
"As long as we are remembered, we remain alive."
View user's profile
Send private message
Magroski49
PO Top Contributor & Patron


Joined: 10 Nov 2008
Replies: 1749
Location: Joao Pessoa - Brazil

Back to top
Post Posted: 5 Days ago at 1:36 pm      Post subject: Another word in Latin
Reply with quote

Dear Dave,

Thank you for your response and also for concerning about us.
Another case:
I have two Franciszek: one born in 1763 and the other in 1765. In a marriage record of a Franciszek in 1781 (parents names not mentioned), the groom is said to be "adolescentem". The one born in 1763 would be 18 years old, therefore of age; the other one, born in 1765, would be 16 years old, and that is a teenager (in portugues, adolescente).
Which of them do you think is the groom?

Thank you,
Gilberto
View user's profile
Send private message
Send e-mail
dnowicki
PO Top Contributor


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Replies: 2289
Location: Michigan City, Indiana

Back to top
Post Posted: 5 Days ago at 9:29 pm      Post subject: Re: Request help with deciphering names...
Reply with quote

JGwizdowski wrote:
Greetings, Dave...
I would greatly appreciate some help in deciphering / verifying, the names on the attached birth record.

5th record down on the right hand page, April 26, 1682...
Infant name: Anna
Father: Stefan Gryza
Mother: Dorthea ???

As always, many thanks, and trust you are all well.

Joe


Hi Joe,

The record does not give the mother’s maiden name. The date of the baptism and the names of the parents are as you wrote. Polish has two versions for the name Stephen—Stefan & Szczepan. The mother’s name is Dorothy in English and Dorota in Polish. The word after Dorothea—Cmetones—refers to both Stefan and Dorota and specifies their social/economic class/status. They were at the top of the hierarchy of peasants since they farmed enough land to be self-sufficient. I cannot read the name of the village where they lived. The sponsors aka godparents were Szymon (English: Simon) Wieczorek and Dorota (English: Dorothy) Jankowa, who is described with a Polish word—owczarka—which means either that she was a shepherdess or the wife of a shepherd.

You may find it worthwhile to read Piotr Zelny’s explanation of Property Inventories https://polishorigins.com/blog/property-inventories/ If you are fortunate enough to locate inventories from the 3rd quarter of the 17th Century for the parish the Gryza family lived it would be possible to learn about the land they worked and what feudal obligations they owed to the owner of the village where they resided. Even if you can’t locate the inventories you need Piotr’s excellent article helps one to understand what life was like for farmers before the Partitions.

I’m quite well and hope that you and your family are too.

Dave


Last edited by dnowicki on 4 Days ago at 1:58 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile
Send private message
dnowicki
PO Top Contributor


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Replies: 2289
Location: Michigan City, Indiana

Back to top
Post Posted: 5 Days ago at 9:39 pm      Post subject: Re: Another word in Latin
Reply with quote

Magroski49 wrote:
Dear Dave,

Thank you for your response and also for concerning about us.
Another case:
I have two Franciszek: one born in 1763 and the other in 1765. In a marriage record of a Franciszek in 1781 (parents names not mentioned), the groom is said to be "adolescentem". The one born in 1763 would be 18 years old, therefore of age; the other one, born in 1765, would be 16 years old, and that is a teenager (in portugues, adolescente).
Which of them do you think is the groom?

Thank you,
Gilberto


Dear Gilberto,

Either the 16 year old or the 18 year old Franciszek could have been the one in the marriage record. The Latin word adolescens, adolescentis m. does mean a young man, an adolescent, a teenager but in Sacramental records, just like juvenis, it is used with the meaning “bachelor”. The problem in determining which of the two young men fits better based on the word springs from Catholic Church Canon Law in general and the canons regarding marriage in particular. The early Church basically accepted Roman Law and made it its own. In Roman Law a person was considered to have reached the age of reason at age seven and a man or a woman reached their majority at age twenty-one. Until age 21 both boys and girls were considered “adolescentes” based only on age. Then comes the really important stuff—The canonical age at which a person could enter into marriage arrived with puberty, which was considered to be 14 for boys and 12 for girls. This was true until the 1917 Code of Canon Law went into effect. The 1917 Code raised the ages to 16 for boys and 14 for girls, unless civil law in a particular country set a higher age. The present Code, promulgated in 1983 by Pope John Paul II kept the ages as in the 1917 Code. So today, unless civil law requires a higher age, Catholics can validly marry at age 16 for boys and age 14 for girls. Of course other factors like national customs, parental expectations, etc. also come into play.

In 1781 both of the Franciszeks were by age considered adolescents and if they married, they were considered “adolescentes” in the sense of bachelors who wanted to enter into marriage. Even though either could have been the groom in 1781, I would think that the Franciszek born in 1763 would be the more likely candidate, although he had not reach his majority until age 21. My reasoning is based on the marriages of my ancestors going back to the third quarter of the 17th Century. No groom was less than 20 years old when he married. Brides were usually near the same age as the groom or two or three years younger. This theory is not scientific but it seems to fit well with a young man’s place and role in his birth family when his parents were farmers.

I’m sorry that I can’t be more definite but I think that is the best we can do without more specific information about the groom.

Sometimes definite answers refuse to come easily in genealogy.

Until later,

David
View user's profile
Send private message
Magroski49
PO Top Contributor & Patron


Joined: 10 Nov 2008
Replies: 1749
Location: Joao Pessoa - Brazil

Back to top
Post Posted: 4 Days ago at 8:09 am      Post subject: Re: Another word in Latin
Reply with quote

dnowicki wrote:
Magroski49 wrote:
Dear Dave,

Thank you for your response and also for concerning about us.
Another case:
I have two Franciszek: one born in 1763 and the other in 1765. In a marriage record of a Franciszek in 1781 (parents names not mentioned), the groom is said to be "adolescentem". The one born in 1763 would be 18 years old, therefore of age; the other one, born in 1765, would be 16 years old, and that is a teenager (in portugues, adolescente).
Which of them do you think is the groom?

Thank you,
Gilberto


Dear Gilberto,

Either the 16 year old or the 18 year old Franciszek could have been the one in the marriage record. The Latin word adolescens, adolescentis m. does mean a young man, an adolescent, a teenager but in Sacramental records, just like juvenis, it is used with the meaning “bachelor”. The problem in determining which of the two young men fits better based on the word springs from Catholic Church Canon Law in general and the canons regarding marriage in particular. The early Church basically accepted Roman Law and made it its own. In Roman Law a person was considered to have reached the age of reason at age seven and a man or a woman reached their majority at age twenty-one. Until age 21 both boys and girls were considered “adolescentes” based only on age. Then comes the really important stuff—The canonical age at which a person could enter into marriage arrived with puberty, which was considered to be 14 for boys and 12 for girls. This was true until the 1917 Code of Canon Law went into effect. The 1917 Code raised the ages to 16 for boys and 14 for girls, unless civil law in a particular country set a higher age. The present Code, promulgated in 1983 by Pope John Paul II kept the ages as in the 1917 Code. So today, unless civil law requires a higher age, Catholics can validly marry at age 16 for boys and age 14 for girls. Of course other factors like national customs, parental expectations, etc. also come into play.

In 1781 both of the Franciszeks were by age considered adolescents and if they married, they were considered “adolescentes” in the sense of bachelors who wanted to enter into marriage. Even though either could have been the groom in 1781, I would think that the Franciszek born in 1763 would be the more likely candidate, although he had not reach his majority until age 21. My reasoning is based on the marriages of my ancestors going back to the third quarter of the 17th Century. No groom was less than 20 years old when he married. Brides were usually near the same age as the groom or two or three years younger. This theory is not scientific but it seems to fit well with a young man’s place and role in his birth family when his parents were farmers.

I’m sorry that I can’t be more definite but I think that is the best we can do without more specific information about the groom.

Sometimes definite answers refuse to come easily in genealogy.

Until later,

David


Dave,
Once again, thank you for your help. It is always a pleasure to go beyond a simple translation and learn about the context of a given era.

Regards,
Gilberto
View user's profile
Send private message
Send e-mail
Magroski49
PO Top Contributor & Patron


Joined: 10 Nov 2008
Replies: 1749
Location: Joao Pessoa - Brazil

Back to top
Post Posted: 4 Days ago at 8:15 am      Post subject: Age required to be a a godfahter
Reply with quote

Dave,

I have an ancestral who appeared as a godfather in two baptismal records; one in 1718 and another in 1700.
My assumption is that a man must be of age in order to be a godfather. Therefore, he was born in 1682 or even earlier. Is my assumption correct?
Thank you.

Gilberto
View user's profile
Send private message
Send e-mail
dnowicki
PO Top Contributor


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Replies: 2289
Location: Michigan City, Indiana

Back to top
Post Posted: 4 Days ago at 2:00 pm      Post subject: Re: Age required to be a a godfahter
Reply with quote

Magroski49 wrote:
Dave,

I have an ancestral who appeared as a godfather in two baptismal records; one in 1718 and another in 1700.
My assumption is that a man must be of age in order to be a godfather. Therefore, he was born in 1682 or even earlier. Is my assumption correct?
Thank you.

Gilberto


Hello Gilberto,

A man or a woman could be a baptismal godparent/sponsor before reaching the age of majority (21). The requirements were and are that the person had been baptized and had made their First Confession and First Holy Communion. Prior to the reforms of Pope Pius X in 1910 in which he lowered the minimum age for First Communion to the age of reason (7 years old) it was customary for a person to receive their First Communion between the ages of 12 to 14. So after age 12 to 14 a person was able to be a baptismal godparent/sponsor. Your ancestor who was a godparent in 1700 could have been born a few years later than what you calculated—as late as 1688, but also could have been born considerably earlier.

For my ancestors who lived in the parish of Słupy (near Szubin in Kujawsko-Pomorskie) Easter Duty lists survived from the late third quarter through the fourth quarter of the 18th Century. These lists only included parishioners who had made their First Confession and Communion and thus were required to fulfill their “Easter Duty” of going to Confession and Communion during the Easter season. The youngest of my ancestors who appeared on an Easter Duty list appeared in the 1782 list and since he was born on 7 September 1769 he would have been 13 years old in 1782 and would have been qualified to be a godparent from that time on.

I don’t know if you were following posts on the forum in March, April & May of this year. Zenon posted a five part article by Piotr Zelny on property inventories
https://forum.polishorigins.com/viewtopic.php?p=55978#55978 You may find Piotr’s excellent article worth reading as it does provide much information about the lives of our ancestors prior to the Partitions. If you would be able to locate inventories from the places where your ancestors lived you could possibly find specific details about the land they worked and their feudal obligations to the owner of the village where they lived—all things which put flesh on the bare bones of dates of birth, marriage and death.

I hope our current discussion provides you with new avenues to research.

Dave
View user's profile
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PolishOrigins Forum Index -> Research in Poland All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 212, 213, 214  Next Page 213 of 214

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB ©

© 2021 COPYRIGHTS BY THE OWNER OF POLISHORIGINS.COM