Translation of Marginal notation

[parkergambino]

Esteemed colleagues,

This is indeed a redundant request; it has not had any takers over in the Genealogy forum, perhaps because I made a story unnecessarily long. So here is the short version.

The document in question is the 1868 birth act of Antonio Citta Bertola:
https://antenati.cultura.gov.it/ark:/12 ... 36/w6eBAnQ

Originally the surname was recorded as Bertola. In 1892 it got changed to Citta, according to the marginal comments whose translation is requested.

If you need additional background for this task (or for curiosity), the link to the lengthier post is
https://www.italiangenealogy.com/forum/topic/55886

Thanks,

Parker

[Farassino]

Hello,

This is the transcription:

Annotazione.
Con sentenza del dì 20 aprile 1892 pronunziata dal Tribunale Civile e Penale di Termini Imerese, e il giorno 24 detto mese di aprile trascritta alla parte seconda del registro delle nascite di questo Comune il di contro atto è stato rettificato sopprimendo il cognome di Bertola e sostituendovi quello di Città.
Castelbuono li 24 aprile 1892.
L’Uffiziale dello Stato Civile (segue firma)
Il Segretario Comunale (segue firma)

NB (Nota Bene)
La di sopra annotazione è stata approvata dal Sig. Procuratore del Re di Termini Imerese con provvista del 10 giugno 1892.

This is the rectified birth act dated 24 April 1892 of Antonio Città requested by Antonio himself presenting a copy of the court ruling to the civil status officer.
https://antenati.cultura.gov.it/ark:/12 ... 62/5YzJZv3

[Farassino]

The reason for the rectification was, as one might have expected, the marriage of Antonio. Quite certainly at the moment of requesting his birth certificate he realised that he was registered with an incorrect surname.
Here’s the link to the marriage with Antonina Cucco on 30 June 1892.

https://antenati.cultura.gov.it/ark:/12 ... 89/wj3771D

Antonio dies on 17 may 1909 and Antonina on 14 March 1924 as written on the act.

[parkergambino]

Farassino,

Thank you for your efforts so far!

I am trying to determine whether Antonio Citta is part of my extended family. I'll be happy to draw you, or anyone else, further into this intrigue involving the use or non-use of compound names, by recapping here some findings that I reported in the Genealogy section recently.

I understand that Antonio requested at a rather late date that his surname be officially changed to Citta. But the question of why? lingers.

So far I have traced the compound Citta-Bertola surname back to five offspring of [Matteo Bertola/Citta & Vincenza Tortorici]. The 1883 death act for Matteo Citta indicates that his parents were unknown:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... =en&i=1229

So how did the surname Bertola slip into the records?

Matteo and Vincenza had five known children. According to the birth acts, the father is indicated as follows; in two of the documents, the paternal grandfather is identified as well:
-Antonia Bertola b:1858, father = Matteo Bertola
https://antenati.cultura.gov.it/ark:/12 ... dM?lang=en
-Giovanna Bertola b:1860, father = Matteo Bertola https://antenati.cultura.gov.it/ark:/12 ... 90/5VeRyaV
-Domenico Citta Bertola b:1865, father = Matteo Citta Bertola
https://antenati.cultura.gov.it/ark:/12 ... Xv?lang=en
-Antonio Bertola b:1868 (the one for which you provided translation)
father = Matteo Bertola *later changed to Citta; grandfather = Domenico
https://antenati.cultura.gov.it/ark:/12 ... 36/w6eBAnQ
-Anna Bertola b:1873, father = Matteo Bertola; grandfather = Domenico
https://antenati.cultura.gov.it/ark:/12 ... EK?lang=en

Anna continued the use of the Bertola surname (no trace of Citta) for her 1888 marriage:
https://antenati.cultura.gov.it/ark:/12 ... oW?lang=en

In the 1892 marriage document that you located, Antonio is indeed referred to as Antonio Citta. Yet in the birth document the following year for daughter Vincenza, both he and his daughter are referred to using the surname Citta Bertola.
https://antenati.cultura.gov.it/ark:/12 ... 50/0n3MklZ
The address #33 Via Benedettini is very close to my grandmother's birthplace at #25 Via Benedettini.

I also consider evidence from the naming tradition, admittedly flimsy, but maybe better than nothing.

Matteo is a name sprinkled through the assortment of various Castelbuono Bertolas. I have not identified any Matteo as being from either "my" Bertolas, or from the other Bertola lineages for which I have found no evidence of common ancestry. I would be curious to see the birth or marriage document for Matteo, husband of Vincenza Tortorici, but have not been able to locate either of these.

In contrast, the name Domenico occurs several times in lineages of "my" Bertolas, including one direct ancestor. There are also instances of earlier Domenico Bertola whose alignment is unknown.

My surname searching until recently has not included Citta as a target. Given how common it is, and its use as a catch-all for uncertain parentage, I have little faith that a massive re-investigation of vital record registers would yield any clarification of the situation, and cannot foresee having the resources to conduct such a search.

My hypothesis is that at some time during Matteo's life, new or controversial information came to light regarding his parentage. Perhaps this information was not accepted by everyone, and they adjusted (or not) their surname practices according to what they believed to be true.

I appreciate any finds of additional relevant documents. Speculative insights would also be welcome.

Parker

[carinamon]

The phrase itself doesn’t require translation unless you’re asking for it in a specific language.