Assenheim, Hessen - baptism in 1780 - Kopp family - transcription help
I have been helping my friend research her ancestor Anna Margaretha Kopp (born illegitimate in 1814 in Assenheim), daughter of Anna Margaretha Kopp (born in 1783). We know through researching the "mother" Anna Margaretha, that her parents were Johann Jacob Kopp and Catharina Maria Ehwald. We added Anna Margaretha (the mother) PID G57K-NJ7 to a tree in the FamilySearch database, which already has her parents, plus a few generations going back 😃! Fortunately, most of the ancestors in this tree each have dates and places, but for many of those born during the 1600s and 1700s, there are no sources yet (or sources with only an index) to verify whether the information is correct or not.
The baptism record is for a Johannes Kopp born in 1780 and baptized in Assenheim. I believe this record is a match for the Johannes Kopp in FamilySearch PID G91N-K3X, born around 1777 and died in Friedberg in 1842. The parents in the record, Johann Jacob Kopp and Catharina Maria, match the parents in the tree, except the mother in the record has no maiden name. There are two sources on the person page (index only) for a Johannes Kopp (marriage in 1817 and baptism of a child in 1818 both in Friedberg ). Johannes could have moved to Friedberg and I will try to find the images of those records including the death in 1842, to see if they mention that this Johannes Kopp was from Assenheim, which would give a tie-in to the baptism record in 1780.
I would appreciate help to transcribe and translate the last line of the baptism (entry 7). Also any corrections to my transcription. The link will take you to the image in "Sources" on the FamilySearch person page.
https://www.familysearch.org/memories/memory/200144189
Thank you!
den 23[ten] Juny [1780] Abends um 10 Uhr wurde dem Bürger und
Schreiner Jacob Kopp eigg? uxori Catharine Marie ein Sohn
zur Welt geboren und den 25t[en] d[ieses] M[onats] getauft den Nahmen Jo-
hannes empfienge er von Johannes Mäyer von Ossenheim
?
On June 23, 1780 at 10 o'clock in the evening, a son was born to the citizen and carpenter Jacob Kopp and his wife? Catharine Marie and on the 25th of this month he was baptized with the name Johannes ? Johannes Mäyer of Ossenheim ?
Respostas
-
The last line is: ledigen Standes ein Bauer seines Handwerks = unmarried, a farmer in his craft.
The word/abbreviation before uxori is probably eiusque = and his [wife].
1 -
I couldn't figure out the last line. Thank you, @Ulrich Neitzel for transcribing it and the translation!
After reading your comment, "… eiusque = and his [wife]", I noticed in entry 6 on the same page, the scribe wrote, "eiusq uxori", if I read it right. Then I took another look at entry 7 and now it looks like "eigq uxori" instead of "eigg uxori" which is how I read it before. Maybe the scribe spelled the word/abbreviation a couple of different ways. I think you are right, the word/abbreviation is probably eiusque. Thanks again.
Question: with your transcription of the last line, how would you translate the whole entry?
0 -
What looks like a "g" in the Latin words is often a shortcut for the common ending "-us". The "g" and the "q" in "eigq" are slightly different in that the "g" has a downward loop while the "q" has only a downward stroke. You can see in records #4, 5, and 7 that the scribe is very accurate with this difference.
My translation of the whole entry is this:
On June 23, 1780 at 10 o'clock in the evening, a son was born to the citizen and carpenter Jacob Kopp and his wife Catharine Marie and was baptized on the 25th of this month. He received the name Johannes from Johannes Mayer of Ossenheim, an unmarried farmer.
1 -
Ulrich, your translation of the whole record is helpful, thank you!
In records #4, 5, and 7, I can see the difference between the "g" and the "q" in "eigq". So, my first reading of the word as "eigg" was incorrect. After reading your explanation, I understand that the abbreviated words before uxori (in records #4, 5, 6, and 7) probably all have the same meaning of "and his". But the difference is, the word "eiusq" in #6 is probably written as only having the ending of the word "ue" abbreviated. Whereas, "eigq" in the other three records is probably written with two abbreviations: "g = us" and the ending of the word "ue". Is that correct?
0