19th century Baptism/Birth Certificate

[Decimus Canus]

Could it be Consilio? If so, does it qualify the status of the marriage in some way? Could it mean that they satisfied the priest that they were legally married but were unable to produce a certificate or point to an entry in the register?

 

[voxlarsi]

It could be, but I think not. The dot seems to be quite a long way away from the rest of the letter in that case.
I still think it's consilii, as the priest obviously applied the dots after completing each word. Three consecutive dots would have been hard to apply sufficiently at the pace he seems to have been writing them.

 

[Mike_M2]

Mike, do you know what the parents did for a living?

I don't know exactly. Generally next 2 generations were farmers (I have a note from 1846 that confrim that fact) but:
In years 1795-1918 Poland was occupated by Germans, Austrians and Russians (Lubochnia and local area by the Russians). In 1830 there was extremely important for Poland huge national movement know as "the rising of november 1830". The rising collapsed and many Poles that participated in it (or not) lost their lands, many were downgraded etc. So it is possible (slightly but nobody knows) that in 1820 Joachim Michalski was e.g. a councilman and lost his position after uprising.
However the only fact is that his son (Joachim's) and grandson were farmers.

Could it be Consilio? If so, does it qualify the status of the marriage in some way? Could it mean that they satisfied the priest that they were legally married but were unable to produce a certificate or point to an entry in the register?

Hm...that's the point. In the archive (all the notes and information i've found there) I had also access to the book with acts of marriage. The fact is that I could not find the act of marriage of Joachim and Jadwiga (Hedvigia). But...I could simply miss it among dozens of other notes.
It seems to me that it might be consilio - though the last letter - "o" is questionable.
I'm going to visit the archive one more time on Tuesday and I'll do two things:
- I'll try to look for another note with such word and take a photo of it (there are many such notes in the book) and maybe we'll be able to decrypt it then.
- I will also look for the lacking act of marriage again

My last idea about mystery word:
- maybe Jadwiga (Hedvigia) was a widow? (maybe Joachim died when she was pregnant) - slightly probable but ...

To sum up: thanks very much to everyone involved - 99% of the text is done! Special thanks for Decimus Canus - man, it was an awesome effort from you - I'm really impressed. Not only the latin translation was brilliant but also ability to read this "ancient" text. I'm really grateful for help.

Edit: When I look at this word I share opinion of voxlarsi that we see "consilii" there. It seems to be the most suiting word from all we invented. And I also think that the last but one i's dot could coincide with "l". Of course we may be wrong .

 

[voxlarsi]

I don't know exactly. Generally next 2 generations were farmers (I have a note from 1846 that confrim that fact)

It does however seem peculiar that they would go from beeing counsilmen and whatnot and almost straight to farming. Did they own land themselves, or were they "renting"? We'll probably reach a more definite conclusion of the mystery word when you take those photos, anyway.

- maybe Jadwiga (Hedvigia) was a widow? (Joachim died when she was pregnant)

Hmm... That adds a new element to the solving here. Perhaps the mistery word would be a somewhat badly written cum sibi (by herself, i.e. alone)? Or did perhaps con become an ecclesiastical expression for cum? There were probably lots of people who died before seeing their children baptised, so if there were several notes with this word, it could be something in that direction.

But I still think it looks like consilii, indeed. Does anyone have an idea what it could mean besides what is already mentioned?

 

[Decimus Canus]

Mike, do you know what the parents did for a living? The mystery word could definitely be consilii (of the counsil, or something similar).

I don't think so. We have a number of examples of final "i": domini, baptisavi, Buchowski, Michalski, patrini. It's always a dotted downstroke. The difficult word ends in an open character ending with an upstroke. Compare this with the final "o"s in the first line. There's a certain inconsistency but the general form is the same. I'm reasonably confident it's consilio.

I think it's unlikely to be "of the council". If it were, surley it would attach to Joachim rather than Jadwiga? It's interesting that Mike hasn't been able to find the marriage entry so my guess (and it is only a guess) of "by advice" looks more likely. The priest is saying, "they advise me that they are lawfully married." Maybe.

 

[Decimus Canus]

The Adalbertum is also quite interesting. It looks too big for the space and there seem to be marks underneath it, as though something else was written there first and then overwritten. Another possibility is that the priest made the entry without the name or with a temporary name pencilled in as it hadn't been decided, then went back and filled it in later. Were the parents still arguing over it? Is that what the "x" is for in the margin?

 

[voxlarsi]

I don't think so. We have a number of examples of final "i": domini, baptisavi, Buchowski, Michalski, patrini.

Yes, in which neither are doubble "i", so we can't really be sure until we might find another example of it. Anyway, I just thought it looked like consilii, and it would of course make more sense if it was placed after Joachim. It could be consilio, but as mentioned, the dot seems to far away from the rest of the i.
I'm still pondering if it could be some variant of cum sibi. If you compare the li/b in the mystery word, there is a resemblance to the Lubochnia in the former scription http://i54.tinypic.com/2pt1lyq.jpg. Maybe the father was absent for some reason, and couldn't attend the baptism?

The Adalbertum is also quite interesting. It looks too big for the space and there seem to be marks underneath it, as though something else was written there first and then overwritten.

It seems so indeed, but if you look at the previous title, the same does not apply there; and there is an x there as well. Maybe the priest just ****ed up.

 

[Mike_M2]

Did they own land themselves, or were they "renting"?

Unfortunately that's the question. I know that in 1850s they were given quite big lands because of law transformation process...but questions: what were they doing earlier?, when did they come there? and what did they possess? do not have answers yet.

Perhaps the mistery word would be a somewhat badly written cum sibi

I found a website with examples and transcriptions of latin baptism acts from polish territories and none of these acts contained a word similar to our mystery word. But in some acts there were many two-word phrases with con and some other word although it seems to be a single word in this note.

The Adalbertum is also quite interesting.

Oh yes! Brilliant remark. It looks as if it is overwritten surely. Especially the last 3 letters. But...hm...I think that the polish priest might have problems with translating the name into latin and e.g. he wrote Adalbertus first and then improved the last letter. On the other hand the letter "f" in filium looks weird. In the note above this letter is written more precisely.

Is that what the "x" is for in the margin?

Surely nor. Look at this pic which I've already sent: http://i54.tinypic.com/2pt1lyq.jpg. My idea is that he might mark baptised boys with "X" and girls with "-" but I'm not sure.

 

[voxlarsi]

Surely nor. Look at this pic which I've already sent: http://i54.tinypic.com/2pt1lyq.jpg. My idea is that he might mark baptised boys with "X" and girls with "-" but I'm not sure.

It's a good idea, but if you take a look at the uppermost note, there was a girl named Josepha baptised, however, it's marked with an x. (It is not written famellam after her name, as with the rest of the girls. Does that mean anything?) Could it be some codes on whether they were catholics or lutheran?

 

[Mike_M2]

It's a good idea, but if you take a look at the uppermost note, there was a girl named Josepha baptised, however, it's marked with an x. (It is not written famellam after her name, as with the rest of the girls. Does that mean anything?) Could it be some codes on whether they were catholics or lutheran?

You're right about that Jospeha. I think I have to take some more pics from the book to draw some analogy.
There were pretty little lutherans on such lands. Next generations were catholics surely and I think that it is slightly probable that they were lutherans. Although the name "Joachim" isn't a common polish name and was rather rarely seen. This name suggests some german connections where lutheranism was more popular. Still to many theories and lacking facts - I have to get some new docs

 

[voxlarsi]

Many lacking facts, indeed . Would it possible for you to talk to a catholic priest who might know what we're dealing with? The customs of such baptising certificates seems to be of different practice, but maybe someone nearby might have seen that word (or those words) before. I'm really curious about this

 

[Decimus Canus]

You're right about that Jospeha. I think I have to take some more pics from the book to draw some analogy.

When you go back to the registry to access the records again it could well be worth asking if they have a specialist there who might be able to shed some more light on the entry, particularly as you now have the bulk of it interpreted and you have specific questions.

 

[Imber Ranae]

Third line. I admit I'm struggling with the names. I'm hoping someone else might chip in soon.

Adlabertum filium Joachimi Michaluli et Hedvigia Marcyanowna Constia coniugum legitimorum

... Adalbertus, the son of Joachimus Michalulus and Hedvigia Marcyanowna Constia, lawfully married ...

The handwriting is pretty bad, but I'm almost certain it does say Michalski. It seems all the first names are Latinized, i.e. translated into their Roman equivalent with full inflexion, but the surnames remain in Polish and are indeclinable. Hence I believe it actually reads Hedvigie (for Hedvigiæ), which is what it has to be to be grammatical anyway.

I'm less sure about the word that follows the name, but I do have a hunch. There's a rare medieval word confilius which can variously mean "grandson" or "nephew" (like classical nepos) or even "godson". The female equivalent, which would be confilia, is seemingly even more rare. I can't really make out the last letter, but perhaps our mystery word is confilie? (genitive of confilia in agreement with Hedvigie Marcyanowna). I admit I'm not exactly sure how it should be understood here, though.

 

[Imber Ranae]

Yes, in which neither are doubble "i", so we can't really be sure until we might find another example of it. Anyway, I just thought it looked like consilii, and it would of course make more sense if it was placed after Joachim. It could be consilio, but as mentioned, the dot seems to far away from the rest of the i.

It looks to be the same letter as at the end of Hedvigi-x, doesn't it? For that reason I'm guessing the word is in apposition with that name.

Any form of the word consilium wouldn't make much sense here, especially since it would separate the name from the other appositive phrase conjugum legitimorum "legitimate spouses", which is in apposition with both names.

I'm still pondering if it could be some variant of cum sibi. If you compare the li/b in the mystery word, there is a resemblance to the Lubochnia in the former scription http://i54.tinypic.com/2pt1lyq.jpg. Maybe the father was absent for some reason, and couldn't attend the baptism?

This is a bit too much conjecture to apply to a collocation that wouldn't even be grammatical. It's unlikely that the priest, whatever his Latin aptitude may have been, would have used a dative with a preposition. No Latin preposition can ever take a dative object. A simpler error, like using cum se for the grammatical secum, would have been easier to explain.

 

[Decimus Canus]

Third line. I admit I'm struggling with the names. I'm hoping someone else might chip in soon.

Adlabertum filium Joachimi Michaluli et Hedvigia Marcyanowna Constia coniugum legitimorum

... Adalbertus, the son of Joachimus Michalulus and Hedvigia Marcyanowna Constia, lawfully married ...

The handwriting is pretty bad, but I'm almost certain it does say Michalski. It seems all the first names are Latinized, i.e. translated into their Roman equivalent with full inflexion, but the surnames remain in Polish and are indeclinable. Hence I believe it actually reads Hedvigie (for Hedvigiæ), which is what it has to be to be grammatical anyway.

Michalski: agreed.

Hedvigie: this certainly makes sense. It's common in medieval Latin for -e to be used as the 1st declension genitive ending. I'm still having difficulty actually seeing it as "e" in the handwriting though. If you look at the final letters of die and nomine the "e" is better formed and consistent. The upstroke also ends below the top of the letter. In this word the top of the upstroke is the highest point of the letter. In fact it looks more like his final "s"s than anything else. It's just possible, I suppose, that the priest was using Hedvigis as the genitive of Hedvig rather than Hedvigie as the genitive of Hedvigia.

I'm less sure about the word that follows the name, but I do have a hunch. There's a rare medieval word confilius which can variously mean "grandson" or "nephew" (like classical nepos) or even "godson". The female equivalent, which would be confilia, is seemingly even more rare. I can't really make out the last letter, but perhaps our mystery word is confilie? (genitive of confilia in agreement with Hedvigie Marcyanowna). I admit I'm not exactly sure how it should be understood here, though.

It's a medial "s", not an "f". There are a number of known "f"s in the script. In every case the top and bottom loop both run anti-clockwise and there is a small loop to the left of the letter before the final stroke. The long medial "s"s all have a narrow anti-clockwise top loop with a wider clockwise bottom loop leading into a final upstroke. I'm sure it's either consilio or consilis which would be incorrect Latin.

 

[Decimus Canus]

Any form of the word consilium wouldn't make much sense here, especially since it would separate the name from the other appositive phrase conjugum legitimorum "legitimate spouses", which is in apposition with both names.

Consilio can mean "by counsel" or "by advice". What is by counsel? It can only be the fact that they are legally married. "I am satisfied they are married because in the absence of documentation I have made enquiries." I think that's still the best theory.

 

[cinefactus]

It's a medial "s", not an "f". There are a number of known "f"s in the script. In every case the top and bottom loop both run anti-clockwise and there is a small loop to the left of the letter before the final stroke. The long medial "s"s all have a narrow anti-clockwise top loop with a wider clockwise bottom loop leading into a final upstroke.

He does seem to write the long "s" this way, and his "f"s differently. The "f" in Albertum filium, however is very similar to the one which is unclear.

 

[Decimus Canus]

It's a medial "s", not an "f". There are a number of known "f"s in the script. In every case the top and bottom loop both run anti-clockwise and there is a small loop to the left of the letter before the final stroke. The long medial "s"s all have a narrow anti-clockwise top loop with a wider clockwise bottom loop leading into a final upstroke.

He does seem to write the long "s" this way, and his "f"s differently. The "f" in Albertum filium, however is very similar to the one which is unclear.

No it isn't. Both large loops run anti-clockwise and there is a small loop to the left of the letter before the final stroke. In the problem word the bottom loop is formed clockwise as with every other medial "s".

 

[Mike_M2]

Would it possible for you to talk to a catholic priest who might know what we're dealing with?

it could well be worth asking if they have a specialist there who might be able to shed some more light on the entry

Unfortunately it's impossible because the priest who is the host of the archive knows little about the latin. And he is the only person working there. If there was somebody to ask for help (anywhere) I would ask

I couldn't visit the archive this week (as I have written earlier) for it was closed but if everything goes all right I'll be there on Tuesday.

I found polish genealogical website and I asked for help an "expert" in latin documents. It looks that he didn't find the solution. He said it may be "consulis" - council-man (when I look at the pic it seems to be improbable). And he added that at first glance he saw "consibi" what could be equivalent to "sibi invicem". What do you think about that?

which would be incorrect Latin

It's almost sure that some incorret latin is used there. Why? - Priests used some common patterns to write such acts. If there was some extraordinary case they had to use their knowledge which was surely doubtful.

It can only be the fact that they are legally married. "I am satisfied they are married because in the absence of documentation I have made enquiries."

Well maybe but this explanation doesn't convince me. In those times people did not carry documents with themselves (e.g. marriage acts) and I think that such case was common. And many children were baptised not in the same church where the parents got married. Nevertheless I have to look for the act of marriage first to ensure myself.

And the last remark but interesting! In XIX century in Poland the priest worked as a "priest" and as a "clerk". And all the documents/books were duplicated. In the XX century the "priest's" books were taken to the archives of the church and others were taken to the national archives (actually I'm researching the archives of the church). I found in the database where is the twin of the book with this act of baptism. It's obvious that if I get the picture of the twin note we could probably solve the problem quickly. But...it's not so easy - I would have to visit another town (not so far, but I'm not going to go there actually). Maybe I'll have to but this will be the last move .

Cinefactus thanks for some new clues.

EDIT: one more thing: the surname of Phillipus is decrypted: it is "Żelaszczyk" (I see that you don't know the first letter - this is one of polish unique characters 8) ).

 

[voxlarsi]

And he added that at first glance he saw "consibi" what could be equivalent to "sibi invicem". What do you think about that?

Interesting... I think it looks very much like consibi, so if it means something, I think that could be it. Although, I don't really see the relevance here, as the same word does not appear anywhere else in the list.