Thank you
Tom
Translate confusing sentence
Translate confusing sentence
My grandmother Concetta Scaravilli's birth certificate has a sentence I cannot translate. It is in the line that normally has the mothers name and information. Can someone help?
Thank you
Tom
Thank you
Tom
Re: Translate confusing sentence
dalla sua unione naturale con donna non marita ne`parenti ne` affini nei gradi che ostano al riconoscimento
from his natural union with a woman, not married, neither relatives nor kin in the degrees that prevent, or are obstacles to, the recognition
from his natural union with a woman, not married, neither relatives nor kin in the degrees that prevent, or are obstacles to, the recognition
Re: Translate confusing sentence
Do you think this means her mother and father were not married? Why isn't the mothers name recorded?
Thank You
Tom
Thank You
Tom
Re: Translate confusing sentence
Your questions are more complicated than you realize-
The natural father is the one who came forward to declare the birth and indicated to the registrar that the child’s birth resulted from his natural union with a woman who was not married (so they were not married to each other, at least from a civil law point of view,* and she wasn’t married to someone else). Also he declared that this woman was in no way related to him in any degree which would prohibit her from coming forward to acknowledge that the child was hers and being named as the child’s mother. So, for example, she wasn’t the widow of a deceased brother of his as, according to kinship laws, that would have made her a blood relative of his from the time of his brother’s marriage to her, and thus would have constituted an impediment to her coming forward to acknowledge her maternity. The natural mother simply chose not to come forward and be named, possibly to avoid having a child born out of wedlock bring shame to her and her family.
Now in some records of this type, the father is specifically labeled "a single man." I don't recall this record stating that but I think that, if he was already married to someone else, he would not have come forward to acknowledge his paternity of this child. By doing so, he basically accepted responsibility (financial and otherwise) for this child’s upbringing.
*It is possible though that Pasquale and the natural mother had previously married each other, but in a Church or religious ceremony. From the time of Italy’s unification (the process began in 1861 and was completed by the early 1870s), until the year 1929 (when Pope Pius XI and Mussolini signed the Lateran Accords, which legitimized church marriages in the eyes of the civil law), children born after a church marriage, but before a civil one, were not considered legitimate in the eyes of the civil law. But, since Pasquale came forward to acknowledge that he was the infant’s father, the child was already legitimate in the eyes of the civil law, which meant that there was no need for him and the natural mother to ever marry civilly. His daughter would be entitled to all civil benefits and have inheritance rights. So, it’s possible that his coming forward to acknowledge his paternity was a way for this couple to avoid the civil state forcing them to have a civil marriage to legitimize their children, particularly if they were deeply religious and had already married in the Church.
Anyway, these are some thoughts I have about the record. Possibly other voluteers on the forum will have other thoughts to add.
Erudita
The natural father is the one who came forward to declare the birth and indicated to the registrar that the child’s birth resulted from his natural union with a woman who was not married (so they were not married to each other, at least from a civil law point of view,* and she wasn’t married to someone else). Also he declared that this woman was in no way related to him in any degree which would prohibit her from coming forward to acknowledge that the child was hers and being named as the child’s mother. So, for example, she wasn’t the widow of a deceased brother of his as, according to kinship laws, that would have made her a blood relative of his from the time of his brother’s marriage to her, and thus would have constituted an impediment to her coming forward to acknowledge her maternity. The natural mother simply chose not to come forward and be named, possibly to avoid having a child born out of wedlock bring shame to her and her family.
Now in some records of this type, the father is specifically labeled "a single man." I don't recall this record stating that but I think that, if he was already married to someone else, he would not have come forward to acknowledge his paternity of this child. By doing so, he basically accepted responsibility (financial and otherwise) for this child’s upbringing.
*It is possible though that Pasquale and the natural mother had previously married each other, but in a Church or religious ceremony. From the time of Italy’s unification (the process began in 1861 and was completed by the early 1870s), until the year 1929 (when Pope Pius XI and Mussolini signed the Lateran Accords, which legitimized church marriages in the eyes of the civil law), children born after a church marriage, but before a civil one, were not considered legitimate in the eyes of the civil law. But, since Pasquale came forward to acknowledge that he was the infant’s father, the child was already legitimate in the eyes of the civil law, which meant that there was no need for him and the natural mother to ever marry civilly. His daughter would be entitled to all civil benefits and have inheritance rights. So, it’s possible that his coming forward to acknowledge his paternity was a way for this couple to avoid the civil state forcing them to have a civil marriage to legitimize their children, particularly if they were deeply religious and had already married in the Church.
Anyway, these are some thoughts I have about the record. Possibly other voluteers on the forum will have other thoughts to add.
Erudita
Re: Translate confusing sentence
Erudita, thank you for your great response. I don't want to complicate things but after I posted my question I did more research and found my grandmother's brother's birth record
. He was born before my grandmother and the mothers name is shown on the certificate. According to my father, who has past, the name on the brothers birth certificate is my grandmothers mother. From the documents and your detailed explanation I am not sure if she is in fact my grandmothers mother.
Still confused.
Thanks again for your time.
Tom
Still confused.
Thanks again for your time.
Tom
Re: Translate confusing sentence
Tom
So sorry that this situation is so complicated and confusing.
If the natural mother eventually came forward and recognized your grandmother as her daughter, then there should be a document which indicates this info (an amended birth record with the natural mother's name recorded on it, or an act of recognition). Normally it was a town notary who did the amending, but this could have happened years after your grandmother's year of birth. If the recognition did occur, then there is usually also an annotation to that effect, in the margin, or in in the body, of the original birth record, indicating that the recognition had taken place and the date. There isn't any such info with your grandmother's birth record.
So, at the moment, you need to search for some document which will prove that the mother of the two children was the same person. A civil marriage record for Pasquale and your grandmother's natural mother, even years later, would help with the name of your grandmother's mother, but it probably will not be the same name as the mother who appears on the so-called brother's birth record, since the brother was born so many years earlier than your grandmother and there's a mother's name listed on his birth record.
I also see that part of the double surname is dropped in your grandmother's record. Are you absolutely sure that the fathers in both records are the same person? They do have different occupations, for one thing, but that is not to say that he could not have changed occupations some 7 years later.
Erudita
So sorry that this situation is so complicated and confusing.
If the natural mother eventually came forward and recognized your grandmother as her daughter, then there should be a document which indicates this info (an amended birth record with the natural mother's name recorded on it, or an act of recognition). Normally it was a town notary who did the amending, but this could have happened years after your grandmother's year of birth. If the recognition did occur, then there is usually also an annotation to that effect, in the margin, or in in the body, of the original birth record, indicating that the recognition had taken place and the date. There isn't any such info with your grandmother's birth record.
So, at the moment, you need to search for some document which will prove that the mother of the two children was the same person. A civil marriage record for Pasquale and your grandmother's natural mother, even years later, would help with the name of your grandmother's mother, but it probably will not be the same name as the mother who appears on the so-called brother's birth record, since the brother was born so many years earlier than your grandmother and there's a mother's name listed on his birth record.
I also see that part of the double surname is dropped in your grandmother's record. Are you absolutely sure that the fathers in both records are the same person? They do have different occupations, for one thing, but that is not to say that he could not have changed occupations some 7 years later.
Erudita
-
liviomoreno
- Master
- Posts: 7032
- Joined: 13 Feb 2004, 00:00
- Location: Rome, Italy
- Contact:
Re: Translate confusing sentence
Age is not always precise:
in 1888 Pasquale Scaravilli Invelinato declares to be 30 years old
in 1895 Pasquale Scaravilli declares to be 33 years old (should be 37...) and the second surname is not there.
I would not bet that they are the same person
in 1888 Pasquale Scaravilli Invelinato declares to be 30 years old
in 1895 Pasquale Scaravilli declares to be 33 years old (should be 37...) and the second surname is not there.
I would not bet that they are the same person
Re: Translate confusing sentence
Tom
Here's a link to another child born to the same Pasquale (as listed in Concetta's birth record) from his natural union with a woman not named. Maria Gaetana was born Jan 1, 1899. As in Concetta's birth record, there is no number on the house on via Sirene, and Pasquale was a pastore (shepherd), as in Concetta's record.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
Here's a link to another child born to the same Pasquale (as listed in Concetta's birth record) from his natural union with a woman not named. Maria Gaetana was born Jan 1, 1899. As in Concetta's birth record, there is no number on the house on via Sirene, and Pasquale was a pastore (shepherd), as in Concetta's record.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
-
liviomoreno
- Master
- Posts: 7032
- Joined: 13 Feb 2004, 00:00
- Location: Rome, Italy
- Contact:
Re: Translate confusing sentence
And here the age matches with the one in Concetta's record.erudita74 wrote: ↑21 Dec 2018, 17:40 Tom
Here's a link to another child born to the same Pasquale (as listed in Concetta's birth record) from his natural union with a woman not named. Maria Gaetana was born Jan 1, 1899. As in Concetta's birth record, there is no number on the house on via Sirene, and Pasquale was a pastore (shepherd), as in Concetta's record.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
Re: Translate confusing sentence
Here's another Gaetana but born on March 18, 1900. Here the father Pasquale is a villico and not a pastore. He is age 40, the birth took place on via Sirene, as in the other records (no number on the house), but the mother's name is given as Grazia Caputo. I tried to find a marriage record for Pasquale and this Grazia Caputo, and looked through all of the marriages from 1898 to 1910, and there's no record there. So while this may be the same woman not named in the other records, there's still no proof of this.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
Re: Translate confusing sentence
Tom
If you're certain that the 1888 birth record you found for Antonino is definitely your grandmother's brother, and that his mother's name is correct on that record, then you can eliminate Grazia Caputo as the woman not named in the record you believe is for your grandmother in 1895. The reason I say this is that I found a number of birth and death records which list Grazia Caputo as the mother. In the 1891 birth of one of their children, the husband's second surname is given. So, although he is also a Pasquale, and has a double surname, the one surname is different from that of your Pasquale.
I did find a death record for a Concetta, daughter of the same parents as your grandmother's brother. She died at age 2 in 1893. As in the brother's birth record, the father Pasquale was a villico, and the death took place in the house on via Sirene. The death occurred on Nov 8, 1893.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
Now to the problem- The birth record for this deceased child seems to be the following:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
The record reads the same way as the 1895 birth record that you had located for Concetta: born from a natural union with Pasquale, the mother not recognizing the child and not named, etc. BUT, in this record, Pasquale is a pastore or shepherd, as in the 1895 birth record, and not a villico/farmer. Yet, the double surname is correct, as is the street name, via Sirene. *It just seems odd to me that the mother would be named in the child's death record and not in its birth record. So maybe the 1891 and 1895 Concetta birth records are not yours.
That's pretty much all I can do with this for the time being.
Erudita
If you're certain that the 1888 birth record you found for Antonino is definitely your grandmother's brother, and that his mother's name is correct on that record, then you can eliminate Grazia Caputo as the woman not named in the record you believe is for your grandmother in 1895. The reason I say this is that I found a number of birth and death records which list Grazia Caputo as the mother. In the 1891 birth of one of their children, the husband's second surname is given. So, although he is also a Pasquale, and has a double surname, the one surname is different from that of your Pasquale.
I did find a death record for a Concetta, daughter of the same parents as your grandmother's brother. She died at age 2 in 1893. As in the brother's birth record, the father Pasquale was a villico, and the death took place in the house on via Sirene. The death occurred on Nov 8, 1893.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
Now to the problem- The birth record for this deceased child seems to be the following:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
The record reads the same way as the 1895 birth record that you had located for Concetta: born from a natural union with Pasquale, the mother not recognizing the child and not named, etc. BUT, in this record, Pasquale is a pastore or shepherd, as in the 1895 birth record, and not a villico/farmer. Yet, the double surname is correct, as is the street name, via Sirene. *It just seems odd to me that the mother would be named in the child's death record and not in its birth record. So maybe the 1891 and 1895 Concetta birth records are not yours.
That's pretty much all I can do with this for the time being.
Erudita
Re: Translate confusing sentence
WOW so much conflicting info. I did more searching and here is the results.
My grandmothers maiden names are Concetta Scaravelli and Rosaria Saraniti. Antonino Scaravelli is Concetta's brother. They all resided in the USA. Here is the kicker, Concetta, Antonino, and Rosaria are half brother and sisters. They have the same mother, Fortunata Spitalieri, but different fathers. Rosaria's father died before she was born. I was told all this by my parents and grandparents many years ago. I have included Rosaria and Antonino's birth records that show they have the same mother. I did a search for a marriage certificate for Pasquale and Fortunata Spitalieri with no results so I am still unsure of what I have. The plot thickens.
Thanks
Tom
My grandmothers maiden names are Concetta Scaravelli and Rosaria Saraniti. Antonino Scaravelli is Concetta's brother. They all resided in the USA. Here is the kicker, Concetta, Antonino, and Rosaria are half brother and sisters. They have the same mother, Fortunata Spitalieri, but different fathers. Rosaria's father died before she was born. I was told all this by my parents and grandparents many years ago. I have included Rosaria and Antonino's birth records that show they have the same mother. I did a search for a marriage certificate for Pasquale and Fortunata Spitalieri with no results so I am still unsure of what I have. The plot thickens.
Thanks
Tom
- Attachments
-
-
Re: Translate confusing sentence
Thank you, I have her marriage certificate. I can't find one for Pasquale Scaravelli and Fortunata Spitalieri who are Concetta's parents. Her birth record and their marriage is the mystery.
Thanks again
Tom
Thanks again
Tom
Re: Translate confusing sentence
Tom
Do you have Fortunata's first marriage record?
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=2043496
Unfortunately missing years of records, as I'm sure you know. making it difficult to find her marriage to Pasquale
Still no luck, even with a marriage publication for them.
The following though may be a brother of Pasquale based on Giuseppe's parents' names in the records. You may want to keep these on the back burner, in case-
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
sending you a PM, Tom
Do you have Fortunata's first marriage record?
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=2043496
Unfortunately missing years of records, as I'm sure you know. making it difficult to find her marriage to Pasquale
Still no luck, even with a marriage publication for them.
The following though may be a brother of Pasquale based on Giuseppe's parents' names in the records. You may want to keep these on the back burner, in case-
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... cc=1946858
sending you a PM, Tom
