Birth Record Translation: Aniello Clemente

[tikibar22]

Need some help with the translation of info on this birth record for Aniello Clemente #113 Left page, also interested in what the notes in the margin say. Thanks everyone!
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1951-32042-5290-44?cc=2043434&wc=MM1H-F2V:1028453745

[erudita74]

Need some help with the translation of info on this birth record for Aniello Clemente #113 Left page, also interested in what the notes in the margin say. Thanks everyone!
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1951-32042-5290-44?cc=2043434&wc=MM1H-F2V:1028453745

Here's the translation. I am confused by the document, so possibly another translator like Livio or Tessa will get a chance to look it over too.

The record is Dated Dec 17, 1872 at 7 P.M. in the town of Bagnoli Irpino. Appearing at the town hall was midwife, Angela Frasca, the daughter of deceased Vincenzo. She was age 75. She reported that at 6 on the 16th of the current month, in her own house at #18 Strada Municipio, a male infant was born to Maria Marano, the daughter of deceased Filippo Marano. Maria was the wife of Vincenzo Clemente, and they were both peasant/farmers in this town. It was this infant whom the midwife was presenting at the town hall and to whom the parents intended to give the name Aniello. Witnesses were Giambattista Abbiente, the son of deceased Raffaele, age 40, and Lorenzo Calderone, age 50, the son of deceased Antonio. Both were peasant/farmers living in this town. The informant and witnesses were illiterate and did not sign the document.

As to the notation-this is where the confusion comes in.
It states that, with an act of notary Luigi Eugenio Cione of Bagno di Irpino, on Sept 21, 1892, Aniello Clemente was recognized and legitimized as the son of spouses Vincenzo Clemente and Mariangiola Marano.

So I am confused because, in the body of the birth record itself, it appears that the parents of the infant were already married, although I don't see anything in the record which indicates why the father of the infant did not make the presentation himself. So was the mother's first name in the record in error-since it is Maria in the record and Mariangiola in the notary's act some 20 years later? I really don't know and hope one of the other translators on the forum will give their opinion on this, as I don't want to give you incorrect info. I don't see anything in the record itself which would indicate that the infant was born illegitimately.
Erudita

[adelfio]

Yes it is confusing Erudita
In Aniello Clemente's marriage publication it shows his father Vincenzo lived in a different town and his wife Maria lived in Bagnoli maybe they weren't together no more that's why they recognized him as there child for the marriage consent
PG LINK
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/T ... 2050764809

Marty

[erudita74]

Yes it is confusing Erudita
In Aniello Clemente's marriage publication it shows his father Vincenzo lived in a different town and his wife Maria lived in Bagnoli maybe they weren't together no more that's why they recognized him as there child
PG LINK
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/T ... 2050764809

Marty

Marty
The marriage publication is from 1891 during the period of the mass male migration, when many men left Italy and Sicily for the Americas, and left their wives and children behind in Italy. So the fact that the father was a resident in NY, while the mother was a resident in the town in Italy, does not mean that the parents were permanently separated in the sense that they no longer considered themselves a married couple. It just means that the father probably came to this country to scout out the possibility of relocating his family here or to make some money to send back to his family in Italy with the intention of only staying in the U.S. long enough to achieve that goal and possibly not to permanently relocate here. I don't think the marriage publication in any way helps with the confusion created by the notation in the margin of the birth record.
Erudita

[adelfio]

The only reason I suggested that situation is the written part of the marriage publication showing instead of coming back for the wedding he just sent his consent from a notary in New York

Marty

[erudita74]

The only reason I suggested that situation is the written part of the marriage publication showing instead of coming back for the wedding he just sent his consent from a notary in New York

Marty

Marty

I've seen many marriage records over the years where the father did not get back to Italy for a child's marriage because he was in North or South America at the time. The other thing that bothers me is that the act of recognition is from 1892, a year after this marriage publication. I would like to see a copy of that record, if it is available, to see what info is in it and whether it sheds any light on the situation.

Erudita

[adelfio]

The only reason I suggested that situation is the written part of the marriage publication showing instead of coming back for the wedding he just sent his consent from a notary in New York

Marty

Marty

I've seen many marriage records over the years where the father did not get back to Italy for a child's marriage because he was in North or South America at the time. The other thing that bothers me is that the act of recognition is from 1892, a year after this marriage publication. I would like to see a copy of that record, if it is available, to see what info is in it and whether it sheds any light on the situation.

Erudita

RECORD PG LINK
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/T ... 2050764809


Marty

[erudita74]

The only reason I suggested that situation is the written part of the marriage publication showing instead of coming back for the wedding he just sent his consent from a notary in New York

Marty

Marty

I've seen many marriage records over the years where the father did not get back to Italy for a child's marriage because he was in North or South America at the time. The other thing that bothers me is that the act of recognition is from 1892, a year after this marriage publication. I would like to see a copy of that record, if it is available, to see what info is in it and whether it sheds any light on the situation.

Erudita

RECORD PG LINK
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/T ... 2050764809


Marty

Marty

Aniello was only 18 and therefore considered a minor at the time of his marriage which meant that he needed the consent of both parents, if they were both alive. So the fact that the father went to a notary in NY to get a notarized copy of his consent still does not clarify anything, at least to me it doesn't.

Erudita

[adelfio]

Well guess the only way to verify if the info on the birth record is correct is to get the marriage record of Vincenzo Clemente and Maria Marano

Marty

[erudita74]

Well guess the only way to verify if the info on the birth record is correct is to get the marriage record of Vincenzo Clemente and Maria Marano

Marty

Marty
The marriage records for the early 1870s are not online-only marriage publications. I went through the 1871 publications and came up empty handed. Now looking at 1872, but again marriage publications don't prove that a marriage actually took place, so I'm not sure that this is worth the effort.
Erudita

[erudita74]

Just one thing I meant to add earlier. If a woman was unwed, then the birth of her child may have taken place in the home of the midwife, which is where I believe the birth took place in this instance.

Without additional online records to unravel this mystery though, I think the situation may just remain that-a mystery.

Erudita

[Sabino]

Allora, non c'è nessun mistero.

I genitori di Aniello CLEMENTE nato il 16-12-1872 (sedici = 16 ) avevano contratto matrimonio dopo la nascita del loro primo figlio.

Vincenzo CLEMENTE e Maria Gaetana ( è il notaio che avevo riportato il nome Mariangela ) MARANO si sono sposati il 14-01-1874 quindi dopo la nascita di Aniello e non sapevano che dovevano effetuare il riconoscimeto di legittimazione.

Cosa ignorata fino agli obbligi di leva di Aniello CLEMENTE.

Questo spiega perché il riconoscimento è stato fatto solamente nel 1892 e con atti notarili.

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/T ... 2050764809

L'atto di riconoscimento del padre n° 48-27 è del 10-08-1892 e fu trascritto il 21-09-1892 ( 21-09-1892 = annotazione a margine dell 'atto di nascita di Aniello CLEMENTE ). A notare che l'anno riportato su questa trascrizione n° 6 per il matrimonio fu errato poiché la data del matrimonio è il 14-01-1874 non 1875.

L'atto di riconoscimento della madre n° 39-26 è del 16-07-1892 e fu trascritto il 20-09-1892, atto n° 5.

Vincenzo CLEMENTE resideva a New York nel 1892 e già alla nascita della sua figlia Emilia Maria Luigia CLEMENTE nata il 5-08-1890, Vincenzo non si trovava in Italia.

[Sabino]

L'atto di matrimonio non è on line ma ecco la pubblicazione n.107 del 28-12-1873


https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/T ... 2050764809


Je vous laisse la joie très chers amis réunis de traduire de l'italien à l'anglais.


Bien le bonjour !

[erudita74]

Grazie a Sabino, mistero svelato!

Thanks to Sabino, the mystery is solved. As soon as I have free time, I will explain what Sabino has discovered, unless another translator on the forum has the time to do it before I can get to it.

Grazie mille/Merci beaucoup, Sabino.
Erudita

[Sabino]

Prego
De rien Erudita