Kirchdorf - baptism -1788 - Küentzi - unbaptized child and no death record?
The record is from FamilySearch Tauf-Rodel, Staatsarchiv Bern, K Kirchdorf 3, and is on page 165, year 1788, entry 25, for Barbara Küentzi.
The other record (first image) is from FamilySearch Toten-Rodel, Staatsarchiv Bern, K Kirchdorf 13, and is on page 77, year 1788, entry 32, for Barbara Küntzi.
I searched for Barbara Küentzi's (daughter of Hanns Küentzi) death record (see the first image which covers all of the deaths in 1788). Entry 32 is for Barbara Künzi (spelling of surname is a bit different). The date of death or burial (I don't know which one it is) of 28 Heumonat? (July) 1788, father's name (Abrahams), and age of 7 years old are not a match to the baptism record. So there is no death record for Barbara Küentzi in the baptism record.
The baptism record says "obÿt ante Bapt.=she died before baptism" and I'm especially interested in knowing if the note means the child was born alive and died before the Priest could perform the baptism or because there is no death record, could the child have been stillborn?
Thank you!
[entry] 25.
den 7ten Herbstmonat. obÿt ante Bapt.
Inf: Barbara Küentzi
P: Hanns Küentzi der Schifmann von Jaberg.
Maria Streit, von Kirchdorf.
T: Jost Trachsel, von Jaberg.
Barbara Krebs geb. Trachsel, von Kiesen? [looks like it could be Kiesen?]
Elisabeth Zug geb. Kün[sch?] [I used Surnames Register with "Kün* and Seeberg BE", but this is just a guess] von G[rass?]wÿl K. Seeberg. [I used Orstnamen with "Seeberg kantonBE" and the map shows Grasswil is located close to Seeberg, again this is just a guess! ].
[entry] 25
7 September 1788. She died before baptism.
Name of child: Barbara Küentzi
Name of parents: Hanns Küentzi the boat pilot [this translation works well too], citizen of Jaberg.
Maria Streit, citizen of Kirchdorf.
Name of Witnesses: Jost Trachsel, citizen of Jaberg.
Barbara Krebs nee Trachsel, citizen of Kiesen?
Elisabeth Zug nee Kün[sch?], citizen of G[rass?]wil, parish Seeberg.
Comments
-
Congratulations, Debra - you are becoming really proficient in using Familiennamenbuch and ortsnamen.ch to help with deciphering these records: no corrections!
You are also correct: no fitting death record. How to interpret the "obijt ante Bapt[ismum]" is more difficult, however: I have asked for help on https://www.geneal-forum.com/phpbb/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=32033. I don't think Barbara was stillborn, but could be wrong.
0 -
Thank you for sharing my question about the "note in the record" for others to discuss. And I appreciate your confirmation of the surname and places that were difficult to decipher.
As for me becoming proficient in using the genealogy websites, you get a lot of credit for answering my questions and sharing the website links with an example of how to use a */wild card when searching for surnames and places. Thanks again!
0 -
I don't think Barbara was stillborn, but could be wrong.
Referring to the last comment (by Stegri) in Geneal-Forum for "obijt ante Bapt[ismum]" which says:
"Einen Hinweis dafür, dass Taufeinträge wohl im Voraus notiert wurden, habe ich zufällig im Taufrodel von Rapperswil, 1628-1728, Seite 353, pdf 180 gefunden:". Translated on DeepL = I found a hint that baptismal entries were probably noted in advance by chance in the Taufrodel von Rapperswil, 1628-1728, page 353, pdf 180:
And the attached baptism "note" (image in Geneal-Forum): "Dis kind ist gestorben auf dem weg? d? man es zuni b.? Tauf getanragen", which I couldn't transcribe well but DeepL translated as: "dis child is died on the way d one it zuni b. Baptism done". I think the note probably says the child died on the way to the baptism.
After reading the discussion in Geneal-Forum, I agree with you that Barbara Küentzi was likely born alive (not stillborn). I think it's possible that the baptismal entry for her was noted in advance (like the example in Geneal-Forum) however Barbara died before the baptism was done. Although, if that was the case, it seems that her baptism entry would have been crossed out like the example in Geneal-Forum.
What do you think?
0 -
Dis Kind ist gestorben auf dem Weg da man es zur(?) H[eiligen] Tauf getragen.
The "zur" is not what I read (zuni, zum, ...?) - but nothing else makes sense.
This child died on the way whilst being carried to the Holy Baptism.
What does this imply? In this case the child was not stillborn - died on the way (to church?). In the reformed church children were supposed to be baptised only alive - but did pastors always adhere to this? Would he possibly baptise the child if the parents insisted ... and consequently the entry was not crossed out? I guess, we'll never know.
0 -
Thank you for translating the note and your comment!
I can see how the diagonal line that runs from the child's name to the first word of the note does not mean the entry was "crossed out", so maybe the line was there to just draw attention to the note? Your explanation of what the note implies is helpful: that obviously the child was not stillborn and later died. Perhaps the parents insisted that their deceased child be baptized. However as you pointed out, whether or not the priest actually baptized the child is not known.
For Barbara Küentzi, there is a baptism record which is not "crossed out", a note that says: "obÿt ante Bapt.=she died before baptism" which is (unlike the other baptism note) not specific about exactly when Barabra died e.g. on the way to the baptism, and no death record. I previously said that I think Barbara was born alive and her baptism record was probably noted in advance. Also, the note/record obviously doesn't say that the parents insisted on baptism of their deceased child.
Do you think that I can at least assume: Barbara was not stillborn, her baptism record was noted in advance, and she died before the baptism could take place?
0 -
Do you think that I can at least assume: Barbara was not stillborn, her baptism record was noted in advance, and she died before the baptism could take place?
I would say, this is safe to assume.
0 -
Thank you for the answer.
I appreciated the discussion and information in Geneal-Forum about "unbaptized deceased children". Especially learning about the beliefs during that time period including the child's burial and the unusual efforts of some parents (and priests) to ensure the baptism of their child. It was interesting to read.
Thank you very much for posting the question to help understand the note in the baptism record better!
0
