Toppliste

Takk til dei tre som har kontakta meg så langt; ingen av dei hadde dessverre rett mannslinje til Anders, men derimot får vi tre nye spennande nordfjordingar på blokka 🙂 Og der er plass til fleire.

Somewhat embarrasing to present the following after Roy-Petters formidable translation from «Retstidende», but I have already said «a» by transcribing 65a and 66a, so – here's the «b», ‹limping and crawling›: [65a] 01 something like that, but the witness took it as a joke from him, referring 02 to the suspicion that has rested on him since the Kindes case. Once in the spring 03 after the defendant Steffen Æen was arrested% the defendant Erik was in the witnness' house and spoke 04 about various things and among them in such a way that the witness assumed it concerned 05 the suspicion against him regarding counterfeit money ( : if he explicitly mentioned this 06, however, the witness does not remember : ) on which occasion the witness said to him that the witness 07 looked at him and laughed: "I guess you're free" and he laughed and looked at the witness again 08 but the witness does not remember what expressions he used. Another time, earlier, 09 he expressed to the witness that he did not consider it a shame but rather a 10 "feat" [hard to translate, ‹proof of manhood›-ish] to make counterfeit money, but he did not exactly mention counterfeit 11 Money, but the witness could not understand his (??) differently than that was 12 what he referred to. – 13 Defendant Erik denies the last part of this witness's evidence, and does not remember being 14 asked by the witness if he was free in the money case, he does not remember either 15 to have asked the Witness to lend him some "Yellow". Confrontation was employed. 16 31st witness Anna Andersdatter Svelgene, 29 years old and reciding at Ullestad, 17 explains that for some time she worked for Knud Gjelle ( : Accused Erik's Place of Residence : ) 18 but learned, after special examination, nothing for information in this case. – 19 The last 5 witnesses confirmed their evidence with the oath of the law. – 20 Brynjel Aadsen Gjelle, questioned as the 10th Witness, explains on the occasion of the 16th Witness' 21 statement ( : in the documents Pag 28 : ) that the Witness was indeed with him, Erik and Aad here 22 at Wangen once %and% when the case against Aad Ullestad ( : who was sentenced to pay out 23 the Public a Sum which he had owed Erik and in which Execu- 24 tion was made for Erik's due court costs : ) came up, but the witness did not hear 25 the explained statements about him(?) or that the money should be extracted from the 26 Treasury again. - Aad Larsen Ullestad, questioned as the 24th Witness, explains himself in 27 agreement with the 10th witness regarding the conversation at Vangen. however, so that he 28 indeed heard Erik saying that the money was going to come back again, because %he% Erik was 29 in the process of appealing the judgment by which the witness was sentenced to pay %on% on 30 his behalf and the witness had already paid the money to the sheriff. – 31 Lund requested that the case be adjourned and that what happened described and communicated to him, in order to, if possible, 32 to refer it for Judgement, or observe what else he might find necessary. 33 Observed: The case is adjourned until August 3 first, morning at 7 here at this place. 34 Both defendants were again handed over to the custody officer. – Chr. Kruse 35[signatures] The rest of the page is another ‹case›. Continued here: https://www.digitalarkivet.no/rg50002319600069 [66a] 10 Continuing legal proceedings against Erik Gjelle and Steffen Æen 11 In 1844, on 3 August, this court case was continued at Wangens Courtroom by the same 12 Administrator as at the previous Session in the presence of the undersigned legal witnesses. 13 Thus! The referent Procr. Lund met and requested to be questioned in Court the present 14 Witness Godskalk Brynildsen Rondve on that occasion as the 29th witness thereto 15 gives. The [witness, it says, but makes no sense] otherwise noted that this witness after oral request 16 to the Sheriff has been summoned. Both defendants were presented 17 wit no restaints. [i.e.handcuffs etc.] Defendant Erik Gjelle was provisionally examined regarding the in the Session 18 of 11th last month. mentioned rumor concerning where the fake notes should have come from and explained that 19 the first time he heard this at Vangen was the same day when he after the end of the interrogation 20 was released from Jail, but from whom he heard it he does not remember, and later heard 21 he it as stated, by Erik Ronve ( : 29th Witness : ), but from others he knows 22 not having heard it, nor has he researched (?) it more closely. Otherwise, he had nothing further to explain to Information 23 about this rumor or its origin, and for his part he has neither 24 believed to be able to attach any credence to it, as he considers Sjur Hylle to be 25 more sensible than that he would concern himself with such a Deed, but on the contrary believes 26 he was able enough to do it since he both understood how to make Signets 27 and was literate. As the Accused, uninvited, expressed himself in this way about Sjur Hylles' abilities 28, he was asked whether it would then be necessary for %-% to understand Signet-making 29 to work the notes, on which occasion he replied that he could not 30 know, but according to what has been said it must be so. 31 Godskalk Brynildsen Ronve, 52, appeared as the 32nd witness, was prepared 32 for giving testimony and read the 29th witness's evidence, which correctness he 33 acknowledged, adding that he had again heard what was told by Knud Eriks- 34 sen Rio or Rokne ( : his daughter is married to defendant Erik's brother, Brynild : ) but 35 From whom this person had heard it, he did not say, and the witness who concidered such gossip 36 to be nothing but Rubbish, didn't ask about it either. From which reported Rumor has 37 its origin is completely unknown to the Witness. Haven't spoken to Erik Gjelle about this. Read, sworn and dismissed. – 38 The administrator had both defendants write according to dictation on a quarter-sheet paper in order to 39 give proof of their handwriting, first Steffen and then Erik, and then submitted one of 40 the present fake notes for them to copy the first line of the Context. They were 41 both ordered that their diligence be done, but it was clear that Erik set out to 42 exhibit a heavier and more untrained hand than his really is, without deviating from his in the previous 44 Session referred Application for a Police Officer post. – On presentation of 45 Steffen's handwriting Erik declared that he does not know about his penmanship, 46 but still believes, without being able to give any reason why, that Steffen, if he wanted to, 47 likely would have been able to write better, and noted %-% with regard to Application 48 for becoming a police officer, that he wrote at the behest of his father, who was then still alive, 49 three identical copies, and that his father chose the one he thought was 50 the best. Furthermore, the Administrator had to note that when Erik had arrived to 51 the context in the note and had written the letter "I" he pretended in the beginning 52 not understanding the next word "Følge" [meaning according to] and therefore mentioned another one instead. – 53 The reported paper, described on both sides, is to be attached to the act. – 54 33rd witness Ingeborg Brynjelsdatter Wangen, 44 years old and wife of the prison officer, 55 explains that some time after the Accused Erik Gjelle was released from Prison at the Interrogation 56 he came into their living room one day and asked for Steffen, «if it wasn't 57 here he lodged" and said "I should have spoken to him, but perhaps that is all the 58 same» ; he did not get Steffen, who was under arrest, to speak with him, but as he walked on the floor 59 and looking up at the ceiling, he spoke to himself and expressed himself as follows: "You behaved 60 as a Fool, Hautahaave, [Dumbass] Hautabanke(?)» and %-% also he mentioned Sjur 61 Hylle, but in what connection the witness does not remember. The wtiness didn't think 62 he was drunk. A Soldier ( : Niels Andersen Leidal : ) sat inside and heard the same thing, 63 but the witness's husband, the jailer, on the other hand, was sleeping. – Read aloud, acknowledged and 64 sworn. Defendant Erik declares that he has no recollection of being inside the jaillers livingroom 65 during the time in question using the explained expressions, and that if it 66 nevertheless happened, it must have been in drunkenness and without regard to Steffen or Sue, I will try to look up the last pages, but Roy-Petter always gets ahead of me! (sulking, sulking) Hoping the last sentence above ‹translates› as the joke it's ment to be 😉 [Bless you, RP! 🙂 ] One of the many things that are great about this Forum, is the cooperation between members. Trying to ‹solve› various problems, be it trancripts or whatever, together. The ‹Good Old Norsk Spirit Of Dugnad› 😉 I love it . . . 🙂 All the best

Nytt fra Slektshistoriewiki: Jeg har utarbeidet en lenkeoversikt over norsk navnerett, litteratur osv. som kanskje kan være til hjelp under slektsarbeidet: https://www.genealogi.no/wiki/index.php/Navnerett I utgangspunktet har jeg overført en del av innholdet fra min egen nettside https://www.hoelseth.com/navn/navn.html, da jeg tror det blir enklere å oppdatere oversikten i wikien, men har også lagt til en del litteratur som jeg tror er relevant for prosjektet. Det er bare å komme med tips til andre lenke- og litteraturhenvisninger, enten her eller direkte til wikiredaksjonen (se kontaktinformasjon i venstre marg på Slektshistoriewiki). Det er heller ikke sikkert at kategoriene blir endelige, artikkelen må ses på som et utgangspunkt med rom for tilføyelser og forbedringer. DTH

Uavhengig av kva som er rett innførsle ...: Innførsla gjeld nok jordfestinga - altså embetshandlinga der presten kastar jord på liket. Kyrkjeboka er eit register over embetshandlingar presten har utført. Famile og grannar tok seg av gravlegginga, vanlegvis utan prest. Så kom presten og utførte ritualet ein gudsteneste-dag seinare. Det var kanskje vanlegvis ikkje så lenge etterpå - men det kan ha vore det. Altså veit du berre at personen var død ein eller annan gong før jordfestinga. Og sidan du spør: ja, skiftet kan ha vore før jordfestinga.

Vart forstyrra av deltagelse i et 60-årslag i går, men her er det som dukkar opp i lenka du viser til: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/121253158/

hei Art. Dei mange trådane/ordskifta du har hatt her før i vinter viser - at etternamnet Bervin i Noreg/Skandinavia er brukt av ulike familier utan tilknytning til kvarandre. - at du ikkje har noko grunnlag for å knyte namnet ditt til Skandinavia. Altså at dette ikkje er dine slektningar.

originalen er omtala under "om transkripsjonen" https://www.digitalarkivet.no/source/100381/documentation/3220 Dette er "Designasjon [liste, register] over alle de umyndiges arvemidler ..." - altså ikkje det komplette skiftet. Det står ein avskrivarmerknad ("E:") om at dette er "skifte mens arvelateren lever". Då må skiftet vere etter Marte (ikkje mannen - som ikkje kan vere i live når ho er enkje). "Myndling" er ein som har formyndar, altså "de umyndige" - eller dei tre Torsteinsdøtrene som er "Børn". Dei er arvingar og umyndige, og "hovudpersonar" i denne "designasjonen". Torsten er altså farbror til desse tre - han er formyndar for nr. 2 i lista - altså Berte (enkja Marte er nr.1). Torger er morbror til dei tre og formyndar for nr. 3 - dotter Marte. Hovel er bror til dei tre, evt. halvbror (same farsnamn). Han må vere myndig, og han er formyndar for nr. 4 - Gunhild. Det står ikkje noko her om Hovel også er arving i skiftet (han kan ha ei anna mor). Det kan stå i skiftet - dersom det finst.

Forslag: Øverst venstre side, Dom. misericord. (8. mai 1698) Gulbrand Olbergs h.? https://media.digitalarkivet.no/view/7473/254

And in the best "spirit": Angj. and Anj, – which I believe is definitely the same abbreviation just ‹typed› [typo-ed 😉] differently, always, in my experience, refers to Angjeldende – the ‹Person in question›; the defendant/accused. Reg.

May I just shout a resounding: No, you are not! 🙂 This is an intriguing case and – at least for me – a welcome opportunity to pursue an interesting story, written by a skilled ‹hand›. Rather than messing around trying to understand incredibly messy scribes; e.g. trying interpreting one single incomprehensible word. [Wich is often the case]. So – Sue, Thank you 🙂 All the best

Sue, I will send you pictures from the book in a mail. It is so interesting to read the full text of the witness in this case. I found the appeal to supreme court, and since the apprehension is described I am jumping a bit forward with a Google translate from Danish (I think Angj. means Concerning, and Anj. is the person/subject in question): : https://www.nb.no/items/346572dee5dcf7a309e906b573d61bde?page=111&searchText=%22steffen%20olsen%22~1 Norsk retstidende (årlig : trykt utg.). 1845 Vol. 10. (1st session in 1845) The 22nd of January Lnr. 17 Adv. Rolfssen, Actor against 1) Erik Aadsen Gjelle and 2) Steffen Olsen Æen. By order of the southern Bergenshuus County of 11th June B. A., Angj. No. 1 indicted for Making counterfeit banknotes and Attempting to publish the same, and Angj. No. 2 for equal crime or complicity in it, and by judgment before the Hardanger and Voss Jurisdiction of 13th August next became No. 1 for counterfeiting of banknotes according to the penal code?? Cap. 11 § 10 considered with 10 years penal servitude and No. 2 for intended publication of counterfeit banknotes (Capt. 5 § 4 letter a) with penal labor for 2.5 years. By the judgment of the Bergen Provincial Court of September 30th, however, No. 1 was acquitted of the Justice's further charges and criminal proceedings for No. 2 reduced to 2 years. The factual circumstances of the case are essentially as follows: When Steffen Olsen had gone to Bergen on 31 May B. A. to travel to America from there, he was dismissed by the Sheriff in question, partly because he had not paid his creditors, and partly because The co-defendant, Erik, had made statements that he (Steffen) had incorrect goods with him, which the deponent assumed must be counterfeit money, for the fabrication of which Erik had previously been prosecuted. Steffen was also found with three fake Tidal Ten-daler notes, which he threw away during the attack. At the beginning, Steffen denied having been in possession of these, but admitted it immediately during the interrogation. He states that, at Erik's request in the last part of the year and during a meeting the day before departure, he has allowed himself to be led to receive the notes in order to publish them. They were to share the profit, and he paid Erik 1 Spd. In advance. Erik Aadsen denies having made counterfeit money or delivered such to Steffen. However, take the following evidence against him: 1) His statements to the 1st and 2nd witness that he had given Steffen money and that Steffen had incorrect goods or counterfeit money with him. For the 1st Witness, he gave the amount owed soon to 4, soon to 6 and soon to 15, by which the witness understood Species. The defendant says, on the other hand, that he did not mention species and meant place ort, without remembering the number he gave; but he owed Steffen some money for a saddle sølje/silver brooch and a gun, which the latter had not received. 2) That the applicant has several times made statements that allude to the fact that he was ready to make counterfeit money, and that he did not consider this to be wrong. He thus said to the 13th witness that they could be done in two hours. To 14th Witness, he has expressed several times that he could probably make a Ti Tendaler slip. To the 16th Witness has testified that the monetary outlays imposed on him in the older legal case had to come out of the state treasury. To the 20th witness, on the occasion reported, he said that they should not make him the moneylender, and added: "lend me just a model, but under four eyes". 3) That Angj., while Steffen was under arrest, went to the 33rd witness, in order to get Steffen to speak, and on this occasion, according to the witness's statement, pretended that Steffen was acting crazy. 4) Is Angj., despite the fact that he denied during the preliminary hearing in the last 6 or 7 years having had any ti Ten-daler note in his custody, however, by his own later admission and the 23rd witness's evidence, transferred to have in the month of March f. A, of this witness had allow such a note for approximately 14 days. In f. A.'s (f.A. =last year) winter there, Anj. According to the 12th witness's statement, this person was arrested for the loan of a "ti ten-daler note" - not 10 Daler. 5) is Anj. In possession of the skill in writing and drawing that he may have completed the notes, while Steffen Æen, according to his proof and the 34th, 35th and 36th witness's explanations, lacks the necessary writing skills. It also seems that Angj. has sought during the case to conceal his skill in writing, when you compare the proof attached to the document with an application he wrote for a police officer post. The administrator has certified that Angj. at the trial writing he clearly tried to show a heavier and more unpracticed hand than his usual one. There also seems to be some similarity between the writing on one during the inquisition at Angj. found Lap, on which there are stains with yellow color, and his handwriting, although Anj. denies that the writing on the note is his. There also seems to be some similarity between the application and the writing in the fake notes found at Steffen's. Incidentally, Angj refuses. to have possessed guult(=Yellow) paper or to have dyed white Papiir (paper) guult, whereas for Paint he has possessed guul Farve (yellow paint). 6) has Anj. had previously been under indictment for a similar crime and, according to the court-martial verdict of 16th March 1838, which was not appealed in his case, was only acquitted of further indictment. While he was under arrest In the older case, after the explanation of the 15th witness, he made statements that must have led to the assumption that he was guilty, and this witness was heard to say that on the day he was released, he said to the guard: "It was strange that the one who handed over fake money, was to receive 10 years of slavery and the person who had worked them was to go free». His then co-defendant Ole Knudsen was punished with 10 years of slavery. – The Supreme Court confirmed the judgment of the Provincial Supreme Court and awarded Actor in Salarium 12 Spd.

"Intimeret [kunngjort] af Prædickestolen angaaende Herlof Simonsøn Roosberg Soldat un- der Velr Obr: Lieut Rochlenges Compagnie og Anna Erichsdatter ??esdal, som vil æcte hverandre og have forseet sig med leiermaal. Hand foreviiste Obr Liet: Tilladelse at gifte sig. Have begge ??..de til T. ?? "

Brudgommens far er kirkesanger Aage Lund Trondenes. Troms fylke, Trondenes i Trondenes, Ministerialbok nr. 11 (1853-1862), Fødte og døpte 1858, Side 73 https://media.digitalarkivet.no/view/9979/77 https://rhd.uit.no/folketellinger/ftliste.aspx?ft=1865&knr=1914&kenr=004&bnr=0011&lnr=00 Tellingsår: 1865 Kommune: Trondenes Kommunenummer: 1914 Navn på bosted: Erikstad Antall personer registrert på bostedet: 17. Trykk på for å se på tidslinjen for personen. Navn Familie-stilling Sivil-stand Yrke Fødselsår Fødested Etnisitet Aage Lund hf g Gaardbr. Kirkes.?? 1819 Stegens Præstegj. Liva Lund Hans Kone g 1822 Levangers Prg. Anna E. Lund Deres Datter ug 1851 Trondenes Hans R. Lund Deres Søn ug 1853 Ibestad Kirstine J. Lund Deres Datter ug 1856 Ibestad Peder L. Lund Deres Søn ug 1858 Trondenes Aage L. Lund Deres Søn ug 1859 Trondenes Olaf Lund Deres Søn ug 1861 Trondenes Gurina R. Lund Deres Datter ug 1862 Trondenes Sofie E. Lund Deres Datter ug 1863 Trondenes Mangnus Lund Deres Søn ug 1864 Trondenes Ole Andersen ug Tjenestedræng 1817 Værdalen Peder H. Eriksen ug Tjenestedræng 1849 Trondenes Ane H. Mikkelsdatter ug Tjenestepige 1834 Trondenes Hanna M. B. Nilsdatter ug Tjenestepige 1840 Trondenes Johnette J. Andersdatter ug Tjenestepige 1841 Bodø Sogn Jensine M. Madsdatter ug Tjenestepige 1846 Bodø Sogn https://rhd.uit.no/folketellinger/ftliste.aspx?ft=1875&knr=1914&kenr=005&bnr=0001&lnr=00 Tellingsår: 1875 Kommune: Trondenes Kommunenummer: 1914 Navn på bosted: Erikstad Antall personer registrert på bostedet: 13. Trykk på for å se på tidslinjen for personen. Navn Familie-stilling Sivil-stand Yrke Fødselsår Fødested Etnisitet Aage Lund hf g Kirkesanger Skolelærer og Gaardbruger 1819 Stegens Prg. n n Liva Lund f Rinnan Kone g 1822 Levanger n n Kristina Joacima Lund d ug Hjemme 1856 Ibbestad Prg. Peder Ludvig Lund s ug Søfarende fra ?? 1858 Trondenes Aage Laurits Lund s ug Hjemme 1859 Trondenes Olaf Lund s ug Hjemme 1861 Trondenes Gurine Rebækka Lund d ug Hjemme 1862 Trondenes Soffie Emelie Lund d ug Hjemme 1863 Trondenes Mangnus Lund s ug Hjemme 1864 Trondenes Johanna Margrethe Nilsdatter Tjenestepige ug Tjener 1849 Trondenes n n Maren Kirstine Scheldrupsen Tjenestepige ug Tjener 1850 Trondenes n n Anna Bergithe Hartvigsen Tjenestepige ug Tjener 1853 Trondenes n n Elise Kathrine Clausdatter Tjenestepige ug Tjener 1856 Trondenes n n

Du kan sende en henvendelse til Arkivverket: https://www.arkivverket.no/tjenester/bestill-en-enkeltopplysning/skifte-og-dodsfallsopplysninger Arkivverket/Statsarkivet i Oslo har dødsfallssaker til og med 1974 - jf. katalogen for Oslo skifterett - serie Gc: Dødsfallssaker og underserier Gca, Gcb, Gcc og Gcd med dødsfallssaker for avdeling I, II, III og IV: https://www.arkivportalen.no/entity/no-a1450-02000000001903?ins=SAO

ja, tyda nokolunde rett. Eg les det som "Døbt Tosten Hovelsøns Røbringens Søn, nom Berger. T. Ingmund og Lars Maarstad, Tore Søpler, Elseby Torp, Birthe Søpler." (litt usikker på om det er "Else by" eller "Elseby" - med eller utan mellomrom)

Her har du litt å ta tak i 🙂 Hovedrullene 4727: https://media.digitalarkivet.no/view/39412/653 Annotasjonsrullene 2954: https://media.digitalarkivet.no/view/39441/238

Jeg får ikke helt fatt i dette jeg heller, men kanskje andre ser resten: efter attest af Provst Berg af 29/10 54 for at det, foregaaende. Attest er ?? ved konens død samt ?? er litt usikker, men det kan muligens være Forsel (med en liten l). Ser at det finnes flere Ole Olsen Forsel og Gunhild Olsdtr Forsel i DA.

Her må vi kanskje bla? Storebroren Leif (1900) ble registrert i Jacob menighet : https://www.digitalarkivet.no/view/255/pd00000029246368 Det samme ble lillebror Ivar (1904): https://www.digitalarkivet.no/view/255/pd00000029249048

Får håpe det løser seg.

Ah ... får samme problem på min iPad (mens det altså fungerer på PC-en). Takk for at du gjorde meg oppmerksom på problemstillingen, selv om det ikke nødvendigvis er er relevant for trådstarter. DTH

Er det fra iPad du forsøker å åpne kirkeboken? Se tråden under:

Noen ganger går det litt tregt, men har ingen problemer med denne. Sikkert et midlertidig problem. DTH

Skifte er skrevet 26/07-1698. Dødsfallet bør jo være en stund før den dato, Skifte 245 på venstre side. Østfold fylke, Heggen og Frøland, Skifteprotokoll nr. 3 (1683-1705), Skifteprotokollside, Side 369b-370a Brukslenke for sidevisning: https://www.digitalarkivet.no/sk20081121350375

Hans Helgesøn Li og Daarete Christophersdatter Hære

Hjertlig takk Even!

Da Barnet blev Hjemmedøbt og %-%. døde førend Daaben blev confirmeret i Kirken, saa var ingen andre Vidner tilstede ved Daaben end Gbr. Arn(?)find Iversen Dahle og hans Kone [usikker på hvor den ene innførselen slutter og den neste begynnner, men tror det ovenstående hører til Oles innførsel] Siste kolonne: Angivelsen skeet af Barnets moder Mvh

Om jeg ser rett i selve kirkeboken nr. 58 til högre så virker det som att gutten desverre har dött?: https://www.digitalarkivet.no/kb20070319630618

Hehe ja, som en annen av slektning av oss kommenterte, «Aron var tydeligvis en familiekjær mann…».

You're not being patronizing at all... & I'm just trying to emphasize my hope that I'm not being too frustrating for those of you tryin to help me. -- 😉 Perhaps I did mix up the messages... or rather, the senders... so I'll say oops, & I'm sorry about that. i am still very interested, but I also realize that this is not an easy, or quick, task for you. 🙂 If you could possibly move on to, I believe, the last page or so, of the document, where I think it discusses both Steffen's & Erik's sentences and such, I'd be very interested in having that translation so I could place it into the biography I'm creating for my kids & future generations. (I assume the information in the middle, might be back and forth legal jargon and witness testimony, which might repeat much of what was already translated, so, yes, it's fine to skip that part, which would be the majority of what is left. I thank you so much for everything you've done for me! Sincerely & with gratitude! Sue

Sannsynligvis denne mannen fra 1910 FT. Ingen spor etter Karl (Carl) på denne gården. Louis O Wangen Census • United States Census, 1910 https://www.familysearch.org/search/ark:/61903/1:1:M259-57R

Sannsynligvis hans ankomst. Reiser du til onkelen L. O. Wangle? i Madelia, Minnesota. Karl Hansen in the New York, U.S., Arriving Passenger and Crew Lists (including Castle Garden and Ellis Island), 1820-1957 Name:Karl Hansen Gender:Male Ethnicity/ Nationality:Scandinavian Marital status:Single Age:21 Birth Date:abt 1885 Last Known Residence:Stange Departure Port:Glasgow, Scotland Arrival Date:20 Mar 1906 Arrival Port:New York, New York, USA Final Destination:Madelia Money in Possession:$9 Person in US:L. O. Wangle Person in US Relationship:Uncle Ship Name:Columbia https://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=7488&h=4009894385&tid=&pid=&queryId=02eec80a3841858495fd20e2529bc352&usePUB=true&_phsrc=gFm6&_phstart=successSource&_gl=1*1nr8rus*_ga*OTI3ODYwNC4xNjc2ODI4OTc0*_ga_4QT8FMEX30*YTIyNjAxZjQtYjNlMi00NGI3LWFmNGUtN2M5OWQyNmZkODRmLjEwMS4xLjE2NzkxNjYyNDcuNTkuMC4w

Meiner det står Farvermester

Sorenskriver Hjort

Syns det ser ut som Dreiermester

Skibsrehder

Ba- gersvend

Opgaven skeet af Enken Anne Karine Sørensdatter i Nordre Klev. Barnefaderen desuden offentlig udlagt i Kirken af hende, som bar Barnet til Daa- ben, nemlig Maren Kirstine Olsdr. af Nordre Forstad. Anmeldt for Amtet 23 Novbr. 1843 Mvh

Constitueret Undertoldbetjent og forhenværende Kjøbmand

Det er Bager, ja. Mvh

Rollag bygdebok band II side 189 Søre-Haugen og side 190–191 Lykkja. Om boka er digitalisert veit eg ikkje, foto er frå boka i bokhylla mi.

Mener du trygt kan stryke spørsmålstegnet . . . 🙂 Mvh

Bronchit og Mæslinge(?)

Tarmslyng

Rygradstuber culose og Bronchit

Knem (i Kristiania Bogstadvejen 40)

Totalt uten betydning, men med den høye staven vil jeg tippe på Smørstehn. Kristian med lokalkunnskap har jo fastslått gården og navnet – så dette er kun nattlig ‹nitpicking› fra min side. [Note to self: Get a Life!] 😉 Mvh

Det dreier seg åpenbart om Smørstein i Botne, men om det står Smørsten, Smørsteen, Smørstehn eller hva, er ikke riktig godt å si.

Tror brudgommens far er Kjøbmand og Skibsrheder. Ellers enig i Compagniechirurg. – For hva det måtte være verd . . . 🙂 Mvh

Kan det stå Compagniechirurg?

Hilda Hansen født Henriksen