[#73227] Help with an old-styled date

[Guest Patricia Carlsen Mikkelsen]

Regarding the death/burial date of my 6th g-grandfather (Ommund Gitlesen Bjørnestad), I am a little confused about the result from my 'Dage' program. Here is the kirkebok page (see upper right):Permanent sidelenke: LenkeAccording to my 'Dage' program:'1. søndag i advent' is 'before Christmas Day. Earliest November 27, latest December 3.But the program also states that Advent is (Sunday) 28 December. So, why wouldn't it be Nov 28?Hilsen Patti Mikkelsen

[Guest Anette Skogseth Clausen]

There must be an mistyping in the Dage program. Advent is the period until Xmas eve. So it could not have been after.The first Sunday of Advent in 1773 was 28. Nov.You can also use this calender program http://digitalarkivet.no/cgi-win/WebKalender.exe

[Guest Patricia Carlsen Mikkelsen]

AnetteThank you for your response and for the link to this calendar. If Advent goes until Christmas eve, then I really don't understand why the 'Dage' program said the latest is Dec 3!Hilsen Patti

[Guest Leif Biberg Kristensen]

If 1st Advent Sunday is December 3, then 4th Advent Sunday is December 24. That's perfectly possible.

[Guest Patricia Carlsen Mikkelsen]

Hei LeifThe 'Dage' program stated 'before Christmas Day. Earliest November 27, latest December 3'. The first Sunday in Advent for 1773 was 28 Nov. I didn't understand why the program said the latest date was December 3... but now, I think I know -- the 'Dage' program is defining the range for the first Sunday in Advent! So, the latest date for the beginning of Advent is Dec 3. At least, that's my interpretation.Many thanks to you and Anette!Hilsen Patti

[Guest Leif Biberg Kristensen]

Yeah, you've got it. I think that your Decemer 28 «Advent Sunday» must have been a misreading.

[Guest Patricia Carlsen Mikkelsen]

Sometimes, it takes me a while... but I usually figure things out eventually!Thanks, Leif

[Guest Ivar S. Ertesvåg]

Maybe this is a contribution to increased confusion:1) Unless the calendar linked in (2) has been considerably upgraded, it is not reliable.2) The burial entry linked in (1) is not for Ommund Gitlesen Bjørnestad, but for his son. 'Jordfæstet 1) Ommund Gitless: Bjørnestads Sön'

[Guest Patricia Carlsen Mikkelsen]

Ivar!This is very interesting. About this, I have two questions/comments...1) I have a genealogy tree for Ommund Gitlesen Bjørnestad that shows this for him 'sk 06.04.1774 Eikelandsdal'. I'm not sure why Ommund would be at this farm in Heskestad in 1774. However, there are links to Egelandsdalen in later generations, so it's certainly possible. Also, Ommund's widow, Eli Torjesdtr, is at Mydland in 1801 with her daughter, Guri. I thought this burial record (Nov 1773) fit into the timeline already established. And I could not find another burial record for Ommund. So... you are certain this is not for Ommund, but for his son?2) Ommund had six children (that I found), born from 1747-1767. There were three sons -- Gitle (my 5th g-grandfather, b 1748), Torgie (b 1753) and Aadne (b 1756). I'm certain it's not Gitle or Torgie... but it could be Aadne (who died in 1773). Would they show the death of a 17 year-old in this way (by his father's name and not by his own name)?What do you think? Perhaps there is someone with a bygdebok for Tonstad/Sirdal that can help me with this.Hilsen Patti

[Guest Ivar S. Ertesvåg]

Patricia (9): The entrance is clear, as cited; this is for a son of Ommund G.B.An answer to your other questions will be more 'speculative' from my side and I have no specific knowlegde of this district. Nevertheless, 'sk' is often used as an abbreviation for 'skifte' (= division of the inheritance, i.e. when the person is dead), for instance in 'bygdebøker'. If this is from such a book, it also indicates that the author of the book did not know the time of his death - which can have a number of reasons.A 17-year old boy was still regarded as 'son of his father', that is, a minor or under-age. A male came to age at 18 in most matters and at 25 in matters of real property, fortune etc. Therefore, the form of the entrance can not exclude Aadne in this case.

[Guest Patricia Carlsen Mikkelsen]

Thank you, Ivar!I had interpreted the 'sk' to mean skifte, so I was looking for evidence of Ommund's death before 1774. Although, I realize that some recorded their probate before death... the only certainty in this case is that he died sometime between 1766-1801... a rather long span of time. I had hoped to find something more definitive. But I am having a difficult time reading these particular kirkebøker.I appreciate your clarification of the entry. Unless there was another son whose birth I did not find, this must be for Aadne. The last evidence I found of him was his Confirmation in Oct 1770.I wonder if the bygdebok for Tonstad/Sirdal has any more information about Ommund?mvh Patti

[Guest Ivar S. Ertesvåg]

(11): I will suggest that you make a new 'tema' with a heading more specific on Ommund. This will improve the chances of catching people with knowlegde of the district. Include a link or reference to this 'tema',

[Guest Patricia Carlsen Mikkelsen]

Thank you, Ivar. I have just received the bygdebok pages by email today. About Ommund Gitlesen Bjørnestad, it states only 'skifte 6.4.1774 på Eikelandsdal'. I don't see a list of probate records for Rogaland on this site. And I don't find a burial record for him in Heskestad. So, maybe there is nothing more to find.Again, thank you for your help.mvh Patti