Marriage Processetti (1821) Sicily

[Miss Blue]

Here are the three pages in question:

http://imgur.com/a/3tSEE

You can also find them on Antenati, images 68 and 69:

http://www.antenati.san.beniculturali.i ... ewsIndex=0

For context:

Martino was a projetto. He was born about 1794. This was part of his marriage packet. The marriage occurred in 1822 in Ispica, Sicily, and this document appears to be dated 1821.

I sat down with Google Translate last night because I don't speak/read Italian, and from what I could decipher, the gist is that there wasn't a birth act for Martino and he was appealing to the court to issue him one so he could get married.

I realize translating three pages is a big job, so I won't ask that, but if anyone could read through it and just pull out the major details (the problem and the resolution by the court), that would be fantastic.

Thank you so much for your help!

[erudita74]

If you look at the bottom of image 70, you will see a list of documents presented for the marriage. The first was the birth act of the bride, Giuseppa. The second was the judgment of approval expressed by the civil court of the Province of Siracusa dated Dec 1, 1821. The three pages which are totally handwritten constitute that judgment. Basically my understanding is that the parish priest indicated that it was improbable to prove the act of birth. There were no civil records in Sicily prior to 1820, so any act of birth would have been with church records. Since the parish priest didn't have, or couldn't locate the record, it appears that there was an act drawn up by a notary, in accord with articles 72 and 74 of the civil law to attest to the birth. This civil court was now passing judgment on the act which the notary had drawn up and concluded that they had sufficient justification, in the absence of the birth act, to approve the document drawn up by the notary.

Erudita

[Miss Blue]

If you look at the bottom of image 70, you will see a list of documents presented for the marriage. The first was the birth act of the bride, Giuseppa. The second was the judgment of approval expressed by the civil court of the Province of Siracusa dated Dec 1, 1821. The three pages which are totally handwritten constitute that judgment. Basically my understanding is that the parish priest indicated that it was improbable to prove the act of birth. There were no civil records in Sicily prior to 1820, so any act of birth would have been with church records. Since the parish priest didn't have, or couldn't locate the record, it appears that there was an act drawn up by a notary, in accord with articles 72 and 74 of the civil law to attest to the birth. This civil court was now passing judgment on the act which the notary had drawn up and concluded that they had sufficient justification, in the absence of the birth act, to approve the document drawn up by the notary.

Erudita

Thank you!

[erudita74]

You're very welcome.
Erudita