Please translate church book entry

[Kathleen Love]

Please, what happened to Ole Andersen of Haukland on 17 May 1793? Bottom left of page.

https://media.digitalarkivet.no/view/16701/191

kb20071106620191

 

My problem is there are two Ole Andersen's at Hougland/ Haukland / Haugland, Buksnes. One of them should be the son of Anders Jensen, died 1792, probate in 1794 at:

https://media.digitalarkivet.no/en/view/25004/24 , where a son Ole is mentioned.

 

thank you again.

[Ivar S. Ertesvåg]

11 minutter siden, Kathleen Love skrev:

Please, what happened to Ole Andersen of Haukland on 17 May 1793? Bottom left of page.

"Blev paa hiem Reisen fra Resvigen, hvor de havde ligget paa Fiske-

riet, af fire mand, som var paa Baaden, tvende borte paa

Søen, Sc. en gift mand Ole Andersen af Haukeland gl. ...

-en ungkarl Jacob Hansen Ad Rise gl. ... "

 

On travel home from fisheries; two of four men on the boat lost at the sea

Ole is married man; the vicar has made space for the age, but for some reason not written it

 

 

[Kathleen Love]

Thank you!

Please, can you tell if the son Ole on the probate record is living in 1794?

[Ivar S. Ertesvåg]

42 minutter siden, Kathleen Love skrev:

My problem is there are two Ole Andersen's at Hougland/ Haukland / Haugland, Buksnes. One of them should be the son of Anders Jensen, died 1792, probate in 1794 at:

https://media.digitalarkivet.no/en/view/25004/24 , where a son Ole is mentioned.

 

First... Ole and Anders were very frequent names (Ole nationwide approx 10% in 1801, close to 20% in some areas; Anders perhaps 4-7%.)

Thus, finding two Ole Andersen at the same farm would not be a surprise. 

 

However, the division of the inheritance  ("probate" is not quite correct, since the English term involve a will)  is somewhat tricky ... 

It is dated 2 Aug 1794, which must be the date of the closure.  After mentioning the widow and the heirs:

Son Ole - no age i.e. mature, Daugther Berethe Maria 20 years; daughterson Peder Jacobsen 1 year (apparently son

of a deceased daughter).

Then "Forretningen fremholdt af Lensmanden Ole Hanss. Jentoft den 1te Dec: 1792 ...."
meaning that the administration was initiated 1 Dec 1792.

 

This means that Anders passed away before 1 Dec 1792 (presumably 1-3 months before).

Strictly, the probate proves that a son Ole was living when Anders died.

If one of the heirs died before the division of inheritance, he/she would still be an heir - and then his/her lot would go into a new division.

 

Thus... there are still two possibilities:

- there was one Ole andersen Haukland, he was lost after death of his father, but before closure of the division of inheritance

- There were two Ole Andersen Haukland

Endret September 5, 2021 av Ivar S. Ertesvåg

[Ivar S. Ertesvåg]

Just to add....  In 1801, there was an Ole Andersen Haugland, 49 years - apparently alive:

https://www.digitalarkivet.no/census/rural-residence/bf01058483000642

 

With the possible reservation that this Ole had moved to Haugland (øvre) after 1792; is seems that

there were two Ole Andersen Haugland.

 

 

[Kathleen Love]

Thank you. There is something before Ole Andersen's name on the probate that I thought might say "død."

Yes, Anders died October '92.

There are definitely two Oles - they have wives and children existing at the same time. If it is Ander's son Ole who died in 1793, wouldn't the 1794 probate mention his widow and child, who would get his share? Though there doesn't seem to be any goods or money that anyone inherited.

 

 

[Ivar S. Ertesvåg]

8 timer siden, Kathleen Love skrev:

Thank you. There is something before Ole Andersen's name on the probate that I thought might say "død."

Yes, Anders died October '92.

There are definitely two Oles - they have wives and children existing at the same time. If it is Ander's son Ole who died in 1793, wouldn't the 1794 probate mention his widow and child, who would get his share? Though there doesn't seem to be any goods or money that anyone inherited.

 

"den afdødes Børn sc 1 Ole Anders..."     sc=scilicet, latin, 'that is tyo say'

 

The estate after Anders was insolvent.  All the belongings were sold on auction, providing 50-4-12. Expences of the

administration and division was 7-4-5, leaving 43-0-7.

The debt was 86-0-4.  Nothing for the heirs.  The creditors lost about half their claim.

It has been noted that judges not always have made careful accounts of the heirs when there were nothing to inherit.

The account of the creditors can be trusted, though...

 

Even if this Ole was dead meanwhile, he would still be the heir (Alive at the time of Anders' death).  But as noted, one

Ole Andersen was still around - it could be this one.

Subsequently, if Ole was dead  (and left any properties and/or debt), there would be an administration and division of

his estate. Here, widow and children (if any) would get their shares.