Luca, after more searching of the records I have I believe that it is possible that Mattia was the first wife. I found a birth record dated 1820.

img138.imageshack.us/i...ariaca.jpg

And one from 1833 in which Mattia's age is listed as 38 and Giuseppe's is 48, I believe.

img34.imageshack.us/im...alvado.jpg

It seems that the ages listed on these documents are suspect, especially since illiteracy was so prevalent at the time. Of course this is just speculation until Mattia's birth record is found.

E' tutto molto confuso:
- Giuseppe è nato nel 1787 (abbiamo la trascrizione dell'atto di battesimo) quindi nel 1833 dovrebbe avere 46 anni ma la registrazione del battesimo del figlio ne riporta 48 (e quasi ci siamo), nel suo atto di morte del 1848, in cui dovrebbe avere 61 anni, ne sono riportati 52, e infine quando si sposa in seconde nozze nel 1841, e dovrebbe avere 54 anni, ne sono scritti addirittura 34 ( )
- Mattia muore nel 1839 e si dice che abbia 35 anni (quindi nata nel 1804), ma nel 1833, quando nasce il figlio, si dice che ha 38 anni (quindi nata nel 1795)
- poi c'è sempre quel documento che cita l'anno 1807 e che riporta l'estratto del suo battesimo (documento che si produceva solo in caso di matrimonio!)

I dubbi, purtroppo, restano.
L.

Help with another mystery!

img138.imageshack.us/i...ardoli.jpg

This appears to be the same person as above!!

img63.imageshack.us/im...ardoli.jpg

Just a question for Luca. I pulled both documents up at the same time to compare them and although one is 1791 and the other 1807 the wording after each date is somewhat different....is there any significant difference in the wording that might give a clue to why there are two documents?

Is it possible there was some sort of event and the same information was registered on two different dates?

I had a situation with my grandfathers birth record with him being born in 1889 and it was registered then but got registered again in 1907/08 when he was eligible for the military.

Just a thought

Queste sono le trascrizioni dei due atti:

img138.imageshack.us/i...ardoli.jpg
Il giorno 20 di Novembre 1791
Leonardo La Licata marito di Rosaria Piasca chiamata(!) Licata di anni 40, munito di tutti i sacramenti morì, e in questa chiesa sepolto
(vale soltanto per matrimonio)

img63.imageshack.us/im...ardoli.jpg
Il giorno 16 di agosto 1807, nona(!) indizione
Leonardo La Licata marito di Rosaria Piasca di questa (parrocchia) visse 58 anni e morì, senza sacramenti, e il corpo fu sepolto nella chiesa del Santissimo Cuore di Gesù
(vale soltanto per matrimonio)

Thank you Luca. One said she died with sacrements and the other says she died without sacrements so what does that mean? I know what sacrements are but why the difference? Also, what does it mean in the 1807 document, when it says the 9th annoucement? (Or am I translating the meaning wrong).

I hope you don't mind me asking a few questions Tom just trying to learn as I go.

L'indizione era un metodo di calcolo del tempo in uso fin dal 313 d.c. (in verità anche prima) e che è rimasto in uso per tutto il medioevo e (per ciò che riguarda i documenti della Chiesa Cattolica) fino al 1800 e oltre: it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indizione
I sacramenti (confessione ed estrema unzione) venivano impartiti alla persona malata che si presumeva stesse per morire ma in caso di morte improvvisa (ad esempio un infarto) non era ovviamente possibile.

BillieDeKid wrote:

One said she died with sacrements and the other says she died without sacrements so what does that mean?

Non "she" ma "he", i due documenti riguardano la morte di due Leonardo La Licata (probabilmente due omonimi e, cosa stranissima, sposati con due donne con lo stesso nome e cognome ).
L.

Ok, now I understand about the sacrement(s)! Thank you for explaining.

Yes, Leonardo must have married two women with the same name....that is very weird. And a side note for you.....I love it when you use ahahhaha!!

Not just two Leonardo's but two Rosaria's! Whoever the first Leonardo was he must have had many sons who had many sons, etc. as there are so many Leonardo Licata's! The Licata's in this post are only possible relatives. I am trying to find a connection that will link them. The line that I can say is related with certainty stops with Vincenzo Licata who was born about 1782 and was a contemporary of the Giuseppe Licata who is listed earlier with the conflicting baptismal dates (1787 and 1807) but I don't think they were brothers,maybe cousins. Finding the first born son in each instance would go a long way in problem solving; however, having access to records earlier than those offered on LDS microfilm would be invaluable.

I've encountered other anomalies with regard to ancestors who lived in San Giuseppe which I have not posted yet.

And, no, Elizabeth, all questions are contributions to better understanding. A different perspective is always helpful, so ask away.

tjbrn wrote:

...was a contemporary of the Giuseppe Licata who is listed earlier with the conflicting baptismal dates (1787 and 1807) ...

Giuseppe's date of birth is at the moment the only thing that is not in conflict with others. The problem about 1807 only regards an Hypothetical first marriage of Giuseppe that you didn't find yet.
L.

Circumstantial evidence points to Mattia Amato as being Giuseppe's first wife, the one I suspect the 1807 date refers to but I would have to have access to church records to prove that. So far I have been able to document 11 children from the marriage of Giuseppe and Mattia as well as 1 more with Giuseppe's second wife Nicolina Alfano.

tjbrn wrote:

So far I have been able to document 11 children from the marriage of Giuseppe and Mattia ...

What's the year of birth of the first child? And the last?
L.

1815 to 1842. The child born in 1842 was from the marriage with Nicolina Alfano.

The first four children were girls with the first born girl named Rosaria. The second female was named Maria--Mattia Amato's mother was Maria Gagliano. The fifth child was a male and named Leonardo. The number 7 child is a boy who is named Matteo Filippo; Mattia Amato's father was named Matteo. It is possible there were more children born before 1815 and likely that if any were male they died fairly early. It remains circumstantial but it seems that Mattia Amato was Giuseppe's first wife.

Considerando l'età dichiarata per Mattia al momento della sua morte (35 anni --- circa ---) è molto probabile che la bambina nata nel 1815 sia la prima figlia di Mattia e Giuseppe. Rimane il dubbio di quel documento datato 1807, quando Giuseppe aveva già 20 anni, età adatta per sposarsi, mentre Mattia era ancora una bambina troppo piccola.
Vabbé, ma tanto è solo un ramo collaterale, forse non vale la pena scervellarsi troppo.
L.