Translation Request - a marriage certificate, and a death certificate

Bill Kaczmarek

My first request for a translation -- so wonderful to think there is help out there!! :D Thanks!!

1) 1892 Marriage certificate from my gr grandmother, when everyone else on the page shows as Jungfrau:

disgraced or dishonored? And what German word is used here??

2a) Death cert for a 6 day old Veronica - below is the portion "Name and Status of the Deceased"

Veronica, daughter of [occupation??] Adalbert Plutowski and [Ehefrau?? / der??] Catherine nee Roztankowska, [??] on 9th July [ ?? ] daughter and [friend's??] [child without marriage????? ] has died = gestorben ist.

so, did the daughter have a daughter???

2b) below is "Notes"

I'm guessing "Starb ohne (getting?) der heilige Taufe" Which is wierd because there is also a Baptismal Cert which is indexed -- but I haven't seen the original - and only the mother's name appears, which is listed as "Veronica". Same time, and in the next town over.

So, did the daughter Veronica have a daughter that died? (And documents conflict as to if it was baptised in time or not?)

Strange, huh!? And does the "dishonored" or whatever is on the marriage record, maybe stem from having had this kid???

And why doesn't the 1892 Church Register include any bride and groom parents' names for anyone? All blank 😶

Sorry, it got to be more than a translation... I couldn't help myself :)

Thanks!!!

Bill

Robert Seal_1

Answer to (1): the word is "Unverehelicht" = unmarried. Given her age of 29, I suspect the scribe chose to use this word rather than call her a "Jungfrau".

sylviaelchinger1

Here's the transcription for #2a -

Veronica, Tochter des Einliegers Adalbert Plutowski und der Cath. geb. Roztankowska, wurde am 9ten /neunten/ Juli von einer Tochter entbunden, welche ohne Namen gestorben ist.

And the translation -

Veronica, daughter of the landless laborer Adalbert Plutowski and Cath. nee Roztankowska, was delivered of a daughter on the 9th /ninth/ of July, which died without being named.

NOTE - what's interesting about this entry is that Veronica is apparently unmarried, or else it would list her husband rather than her parents. In spite of this, the child isn't identified as unehelich, which the cleric would normally do with an unmarried mother. Maybe it's because the infant died at birth?

For #2b, it says "starb ohne Empfang der hl. [=heiligen] Taufe," which means "died without receiving holy baptism."

As for the 1892 marriage register, it's hard to tell what's going on there because the image is rather small and readability degrades upon enlarging. It would be better to post a link to the page so we can see what else is going on around this.

Bill Kaczmarek

Thanks both! If I may respond with some questions (and a comment):

re #1) I'd guess the "virgin" label isn't given due to her having had a kid, maybe more due to that, than to her being 29 y.o. ;-)

re "NOTE") The daughter lived 6 days. Does the name not come until baptism? Her age as 6 days is given at the link in the following paragraph

"BLOCKED" .... btw I tried to fix the record, to update the Relationships, and it is now BLOCKED. Did I break it? Is it possible to get it fixed? (I may have changed from type VITAL to type DEATH RECORD - I'm not sure what is up :( You should see the record at the bottom of this image: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSJ1-Q37D-3?view=index&action=view The URL that shows as BLOCKED, and with the wrong parents and names, is at https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6ZM2-8L3G Correct would be that the parent of the 6 day old girl is Veronica rather than Veronica's parents, as that Blocked record now reads.

Conflicting records of baptism? You point out that the death record states NO baptism. But there is a Baptismal record that seems to conflict. Can you see the image of it? I see only the Index, but it says the image is likely available at a research center: https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6ZMV-HJP9 It is from the town next door, and the same mother's name -- so I'm thinking it is the same baby. Any insights? "Deutschland, Preußen, Westpreußen, Katholische und Lutherisch Kirchenbücher, 1537-1981", , FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6ZMV-HJP9 : Tue Oct 31 12:25:58 UTC 2023), Entry for  and Veronica Plutowska, 1884.

Link you requested to Marriage Register: You said that, with a link, that you might have thoughts as to why none of the parents' names are listed, for brides' and grooms' parents. To me it seems very odd! Here's the link https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6ZM2-C925 "Deutschland, Preußen, Westpreußen, Katholische und Lutherisch Kirchenbücher, 1537-1981", , FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6ZM2-C92P : Tue Oct 31 23:56:24 UTC 2023), Entry for Simon Jacob Szelag and Veronica Plutowska, 10 Jan 1892.

FYI my gr grandma Veronica is GQRW-NGD https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/GQRW-NGD

Thanks so much!!! @sylviaelchinger1

Maile L

There is a known bug that hides records after you edit the indexed information.

sylviaelchinger1

OK, I just looked at the link for the marriage record, and this proves, once again, why it is so important to provide the link as well as more than just a snippet view of the record.

The marriage record is a 2-page spread, so the names of the bride and groom are listed on the left-hand page. So looking at the far-left column, Veronica's marriage is #1 in 1892. The blank columns that you circled on the right-hand page are only filled in if parents or guardians have to give their permission for the marriage to take place, for example if either of the parties was underage, which is not the case here. I found parents' names filled in on image 126 of the same film, so there were apparently times when it was done.

Re baptism and names, I think it depends on the local custom and the timeframe of the event. The name is conferred upon baptism, but the baptism may take place the same day as the birth, or up to a week later. I've seen civil registration records where the name of the infant is left blank, and then a note in the margin at a later date adds the name that was eventually given to the child. Also note that baptism is different than civil registration; after 1876, there may be both documents. I can't see the images on the links you provided, but next time I get to an FSC (not in the foreseeable future...) I'll try to remember to take a look at them.

Bill Kaczmarek

Thanks for all your help. It has been amazing! :D

One little thing that I'll push back on, where you write: "...are only filled in if parents or guardians have to give their permission for the marriage.... " But that doesn't hold water. The break in completing parents' names is pretty much right at the start of 1888. And Blanks are there for a number of 16 year olds. While parents' names are included for 41 and 38 year old brides. There must be something else behind it.

Thanks again!!

sylviaelchinger1

Clerical indfifference?