Saturday, December 12, 2015

Mianna: or, don't just scan the page for a given name!


My ancestor Anna Šperka was the second wife of Mathias Brosch.

His first wife was also named Anna.

They were married in the Místek parish on 16 January 1725. Her father was the late Joannes Gach from upper Hodonovice.

She died 2 June 1737 at age 36. This gives her an approximate birthdate of 1701.

I guessed that she was born in Hodonovice, the village of her father.

When I checked the parish records, I scanned the pages for an entry for an "Anna" born sometime between 1700-1701 to a Joannes Gach. I found nobody.

So then I broadened the search to include 1699-1702 and still no "Anna" born to any Joannes Gach.

Then I searched for any Gach's. I found several Gach's, and also several born to Joannes Gach of Hodonovice.

The person I was looking for wasn't Georgius who was born in 1699 to Joannes Gach and Anna.

It also wasn't Magdalena born in 1702 to Joannes Gach and Anna.

When I looked through the 1700-1701 years, I noticed an entry for, "Mianna" born to Joannes Gach and Anna in Hodonowitz.

This is not a common surname. As you can see above the Mianna, there is a Marianna. I wondered if this was perhaps a diminutive form of Marianna? If so, why does an internet search lead to nearly no results for any given name of "Mianna" except modern day creations of Myanna?

I feel 95% confident that this is actually the Anna I am looking for, and that the parish priest writing this down accidentally wrote Mianna instead. Or maybe when they asked for her name, she said, "mý Anna," aka, "My Anna."



Friday, December 4, 2015

Ancilla


I found this record where my ancestor is described as "honesta ancilla." I had not ever seen that before, so I thought I'd blog about it.

Here's my transcription:

4 Augustus [1744]
hujus copulatus honestus Georgius Jurassek adolescens colonus ex Ribarzeritz et honesta ancilla Elisabetha Francisci Sperka propria filia ex Starzitz testes Mathias Wesselka ex Chlebowitz a honestus adolescens Joseph Sperka ex Starziz

Here's a translation:

On the 4th of August [1744] were joined in matrimony the honorable young Polish farmer man Georgius Jurassek from Ribarzevitz [?] and the honerable maiden Elisabetha the own daughter of Francisci Sperka of Starzicz. 
Witnesses: Mathias Wesselka of Chlebowitz and the honerable young man Joseph Sperka of Starzicz

I wonder what the person keeping this record meant between the lines when he chose the word "ancilla." This girl was 20 at the time of her marriage, which was actually a little bit young, but definitely not unheard of. A more common marriage age for women in Moravia in the mid 1700's through mid 1800's was 24, the age of maturity. Before this age, women had to have their father's permission to marry. It was also common for young men to be even a bit older, around 25-30.

The age at first marriage for Moravian Czechs seems to decrease towards the end of the 19th century. I think the industrial revolution that came to this area with the 1827 construction of the Vitkovice steel mill had an impact on this statistic. It would be interesting to study that in the future.

For now, I'm wondering what this guy meant by, "ancilla." I haven't seen the writer of this record use that word other places, but it could just be that he decided to use that word because...he did. Edit: as I scanned the surrounding records, I noticed that he uses this word fairly frequently; maybe there isn't a hidden meaning.

I tend to think that there is a layer of meaning that is lost when you translate texts from their first language. The writer of this record, presumably the priest or the priest's clerk, was educated in Latin but let's face it, it wasn't his mother tongue; that was either Czech or German. I think it's more likely that he chose this word because of some additional meaning than because it was just a word hanging out in his vocabulary.

Here are my hypotheses:
  • Elisabetha looked really young, so he described her as an "ancilla"
  • Elisabetha was considered young (20 years, 3 months, and 1 day) at the time of this marriage. He described her as "ancilla" because she had not yet reached the age of maturity
  • The world "ancilla" actually describes Elisabetha's job; she was literally a maid, or in Czech, a děvečka. If this were true, she would have been working under a contract on someone else's farm. Perhaps this job was what put her in contact with a Pole? Not polonus, but colonus!
I don't have any answers. They all seem plausible. 


Tuesday, September 15, 2015

Theory on the Origin of the #

The Wikipedia article about the # sign has its own shaky theories about the origin of the symbol, but I'm finding that there's a striking resemblance between the shape of a German Current capital "N" and the #, a scribble that has evolved to mean "Number." Tell me with a straight face that you don't also notice the resemblance here.

And is it no mistake that N and # stand for "Number?" I think not. Too many striking similarities, in my opinion.


But what do I know. 

Tuesday, February 3, 2015

I'm Back! Genealogy Goals and Projects for 2015!

Hey! I'm alive! And now that I'm officially 6 weeks postpartum (as in, my life is returning to normal again!) it's time to resume this blog!

I took an almost year-long hiatus from this blog because I was working on family present. Teehee. And here she is! Miss Cora Madeline Challis!

















Weird that they posted in opposite chronological order, but whatever.

My goal for 2015 is to write on this blog every week, rather than every day. However, of course when the muse to write is present, I won't restrict her!

I want to become a Board Certified Genealogist. This will be my THIRD year extending my application. I can't believe I haven't completed it yet! Ugh! At least last year I did have an awesome excuse. Being pregnant means all of my kids' nap times suddenly become my shared nap times, because I'm so exhausted. I don't get morning sickness (neither did my mom or grandma apparently), but that doesn't mean being pregnant is a walk in the park.

Because it surely isn't.

I have other personal goals, like taking my family back 7 generations on all of the lines, and getting more names prepared to do proxy LDS temple work (such as baptisms for the dead). I'd like to take clients again because that was extremely fun.

However, that will have to be on pause until I can officially be a Certified Genealogist. I've learned that taking on clients whilst working on my application is definitely more than I can do at a time.

So! Two big genealogy goals. Blog and get certified. I think I can do it!