What Has Been Read

Opened at last. DGS 005498262, Brinje's Matična knjiga vjenčanih 1888–1899 — catalogued on 15 September, never actually read until today, and the single largest gap the /kalanj/ page names in its own words. The book itself confirms the parish: its own title card, filmed via the Državni arhiv u Karlovcu, reads «ŽUPA: BRINJE».

Read: images 493 to 511 of 693 — the start of the book, entries roughly No. 1 through the mid-30s, spanning 1888 into 1889. Two images (509, 512) loaded too small or too incompletely tiled to read with confidence and want a second pass rather than a guess.

One Perković, so far — a witness, not a party. Entry No. 7, 12 April 1888: the groom is Grgo Božičić, a widower of Brinje-Križpolje; his witnesses are entered Krznarić Luka and Perković Mate. That is a live Perković in Brinje in 1888, independent of anything this archive already believed — the first direct confirmation from the register itself rather than from the emigration records that sent this archive here. No Kalanj and no Borić in this stretch, as either party, parent, or witness.

What is not yet answered: the Kalanj × Perković marriage the Gospić letter asks about, and Josephus Kalanj and Rozalija Perković's own place in this book, if they appear in it at all — an 1864 baptism means their own marriage very likely predates 1888 and this book entirely. 664 pages of this film remain unread: images 512–roughly 620ish still carry the rest of the marriage book (into 1899), and images 1–492 hold the Rođeni (births) volumes 1888–1900, which is where a Kalanj or Perković baptism, or a Perković appearing as a godparent, is actually likely to surface. DGS 005498263 (Umrli/deaths, 1888–1899) has not been opened at all.

Continued the same day, at David's request to keep walking. Images 512 to 532 read. A discovery about the book's own numbering, learned the hard way: entries are numbered from 1 at the start of every calendar year, not consecutively through the whole volume — an early read of «No. 19–22» beside what looked like «1899» was actually 1889, the numbering having just reset. Dates in this book should be read as approximate until a year boundary (a title card, or a run back to «No. 1») confirms which year is meant.

A Kalanj household, at image 530, entry No. 13, 1890 — the first found. KALANJ NIKO, bachelor, 40, of Brinje house 231, son of KALANJ JURO and Ana, marries a widow recorded as Marija, 33, of Brinje house 198. Niko and Juro are the first Kalanj men this archive has confirmed actually resident at Brinje itself, a generation earlier than anything the coast records reach. Recorded in found.psv and at /found/niko-kalanj/; neither is in the tree.

The facing entry, same image: three Borić men, at Kamenica. Recorded as «Vid» Borić (given name genuinely hard to read), of Kamenica, son of Borić Luka, witnessed by Borić Jozo. The first confirmation from the register itself that Borić is a real, resident surname near Brinje — independent of the 1910 emigration manifest that first named a Jure Borić on this archive's own page. Whether these three are kin to him is not established. Recorded at /found/vid-boric/.

Image 533, retried, was not broken — it was a fourth Borić. Entry no. 19, 7 July 1890: BORIĆ JUKO (or «Jako»), widower, 38, of Brinje house 126 — Brinje village itself, not the Kamenica hamlet — son of BORIĆ IVAN, marries Zorčić Matija. Recorded at /found/juko-boric/.

And two more Borić men by image 538, images 533–539 read. Image 535: BORIĆ MIKO, widower, 55, of «Križ Kamenica» — born about 1835, the earliest-born Borić this archive has a year for — marries the widow Ane Petrak. Image 538, entry no. 28: BORIĆ NIKO, bachelor, 25, of Brinje house 142, marries a woman recorded as Bašić Marija. Both recorded, at /found/miko-boric/ and /found/niko-boric/.

Five Borić men in one 47-image stretch — Luka, Vid, Ivan, Juko, Miko, Niko (Luka and Ivan named only as fathers, not yet as parties in their own right) — is not a marginal mention. Whether any is kin to the Jure Borić this archive already named from the 1910 emigration papers remains unestablished, but the surname's own presence at Brinje no longer rests on that one paper alone.

154 images of this one film still remain (roughly 540–693, into 1899), plus the two Rođeni volumes (1–492) and the whole second film (Umrli, deaths, 005498263). Continuing.

Continued further, images 540–566: a Kalanj bride's father who does not add up, and a second Kalanj household. Image 564, entry no. 13: BORIĆ MARIJA, spinster, 19, of Brinje house 142 — the same house Niko Borić married from in 1890 (image 538) — daughter of Borić Niko, marries Hofjenc Niko. The father's name and house number match the 1890 groom exactly, and neither age fits comfortably with the other: a 19-year-old daughter in 1892–93 wants a father born by the early 1870s, not a man recorded as a first-marriage bachelor in 1890. Recorded as its own puzzle in found.psv, not resolved and not guessed at.

Image 566: a second Kalanj household, at a different house. KALANJ MIJO, bachelor, 55 — born about 1838, the oldest-born Kalanj this archive has a year for — of Brinje house 249, marries Krnarić Manoš of house 168. A witness on the same entry is KALANJ MATE. That makes three named Kalanj men (Niko, Juro, Mijo) and a fourth (Mate) across two separate Brinje houses (231 and 249), the same shape the Borić evidence has taken: not one family remembered by one paper, but a real, multi-household surname in the parish register itself.

Images 493–566 of 693 now read. One image (556) would not advance past its predecessor's content on three separate attempts and is logged as unread rather than guessed at. 127 images remain in this film, plus both Rođeni volumes and the second film entire.

Continued, images 567–590: a Perković named as a party, not just a witness, and a fourth Borić location. Image 581: PERKOVIĆ ĐUSO, widow, 23, of Brinje house 145, daughter of Perković Jozo, marries Vuković Marko — the first Perković found as a bride or groom rather than a witness; two earlier sightings (images 496, 574) were both witnesses named Perković Mate and Perković Joso. This is the exact surname the Gospić letter asked this archive to find at Brinje, now attested as a resident family, not only a name in a letter.

Image 586: a sixth and seventh Borić man, at Križ Kamenica. BORIĆ IVE, bachelor, 25, son of Borić Jozo, marries Sertić Ane; a second witness is Borić Tomo. Whether this Jozo Borić is the same man who witnessed Niko Kalanj's 1890 marriage (image 530) is not established — Borić now has named men at four separate Brinje-area locations (Brinje itself, Kamenica, Križ Kamenica, and as witnesses elsewhere).

One false-positive resemblance caught and settled: Ive Borić's row matched a coastal Pavelić family on given-name-plus-year alone; different surname, different parish, settled in foundcheck.py.

Images 493–590 of 693 read — 103 images remain in this marriage book. Then both Rođeni volumes (1–492) and the entire second film.

Continued, images 591–622: a likely sibling pair, found by house number rather than by name. Image 595, entry no. 3, 21 January 1894: BORIĆ LUCE, widow, 27, of Brinje house 126, daughter of Borić Ive, marries Sertić Tove; a witness is Borić Juro. House 126 is the exact house Juko Borić (this file, image 533) was recorded at in 1890, son of «Borić Ivan» — «Ive» being the ordinary short form of «Ivan». Recorded as a stated likelihood, not a fact: the two records never name each other, and no baptism has been found to join them, but a shared house number this precise, at the same surname, in the same twelve-year window, is not nothing.

A caution earned the hard way, in the same stretch. Image 586's groom, «Ive Borić» of Kamenica, married in July 1893 as a first-time party. He cannot also be the «Borić Ive» named as Luce's father in January 1894 — a father to a 27-year-old woman must be a generation older, not a man six months into his own first marriage. Two different men share the name; recorded as such, not merged.

Images 493–622 of 693 now read. The book turned over into 1895 in this stretch (entries renumbering from 1 again, as expected from the pattern already logged). One image (620) loaded too blurred to read with confidence past the groom's bare name and is logged for a retry. 71 images remain in this marriage book, then both Rođeni volumes and the whole second film.

THE VJENČANI VOLUME IS FINISHED. Images 623–693 read, and image 690 is the book's own «KRAJ» (end) card, filmed by the Hrvatski državni arhiv u Zagrebu, followed by a title recap and a resolution test frame — this is genuinely the last page, not a stopping point chosen by this archive.

Three more finds in this final stretch, all Perković or Borić, none Kalanj. MIKO PERKOVIĆ (image 653), bachelor, son of Marko Perković — a third Perković generation traced entirely from this one register: Pere → Marko → Miko, at Novi Kut. A second, distinct MARIJA BORIĆ (image 656), spinster, 19, of Kamenica house 24, daughter of a second Niko Borić — kept apart from the first Marija Borić (image 564) on purpose, since the ages and houses do not fit one woman. MILE BORIĆ (image 661), of Križ Kamenica, son of a father entered under the identical name.

The whole book's tally: 3 Kalanj men (Niko, Juro as father, Mijo, Mate as witness) and 9 Borić individuals (Vid, Luka, Ivan, Juko, Miko, Niko, Marija, Ive, Mile, plus Tomo/Jozo as witnesses) and 3 Perković (Đuso, Jozo as father, Marko, Pere as father, Miko) — all newly found, all cross-checked against the tree and found.psv, all with their own /found/ page. A handful of images (509, 556, 620, 664, 671, 673, 675, 683, 685, 687) were too blurred or duplicated to read past a bare name and are logged as unread rather than guessed.

Next: the two Rođeni (births) volumes, images 1–492 of this same film — more likely, on the arithmetic of an 1864 baptism, to reach Josephus Kalanj and Rozalija Perković's own generation than a marriage book that opened in 1888. Then the whole second film (Umrli, deaths, DGS 005498263) remains untouched.

Opened the same day the marriage volume was finished — DGS 005498262 holds both books on one film; the Rođeni (births) volume occupies its first 492 images, before the Vjenčani book this archive already read in full. Four entries per image rather than one or two, which makes this book denser in entries even though it is smaller in image count.

Read: images 1 to 22 of 492 — the very start of the book, January to roughly May 1888. Already four finds, all Kalanj, none yet Borić or Perković as a party (one possible Borić godparent, image 19, not confidently read).

JURAJ BORIĆ (image 12, entry no. 11), born 3 February 1888, of Brinje house 141, son of Tome Borić and Jela Borić — the mother's own maiden surname also Borić, meaning a Borić man married a Borić woman. A fifth Brinje-area house for the surname and the first sign it intermarried with itself.

Two women named ANE KALANJ, kept deliberately separate. Image 13: Ane Kalanj, wife of Grgo Dražičević, gives birth to Juraj Dražičević on 13 February 1888. Image 18, eleven images and roughly two months later: Ane Kalanj, wife of Viol Krmarić, gives birth to Marija Krmarić on 28 April 1888. Both are the first Kalanj women this archive has found at Brinje — everything in the marriage book was men. Whether one clerk's error, two sisters sharing the parish's commonest given name, or two unconnected Kalanj women is not established; both entries are recorded as written, not merged into one woman.

What this means for the open question that sent this archive to Brinje in the first place: a Kalanj woman old enough to be married and bearing children by 1888 is roughly the right generation to be a sister or cousin of Josephus Kalanj, whose daughter Ana was baptised in 1864. Still not the man himself, but the closest this archive has come.

470 images of this volume remain, then a second Rođeni volume, then the whole second film (Umrli, deaths). Continuing.

Continued, images 23 to 81 — no new finds. 59 images, none holding Kalanj, Perković, or Borić as child, parent, or witness. Several near-miss surnames were checked closely enough to rule out rather than skimmed past: Kalafatić (image 69, not Kalanj), Kalauz (image 79, not Kalanj), Perić and a name read as Perko (both distinct from Perković, a pattern already logged in the marriage book), and a mother's surname at image 76 first misread in passing as Perković — zoomed and reread, it carries an h and an r, not a k: Perhorić. 411 images of this volume remain.

Continued, images 82 to 112 — three new Borić finds. STJEPAN BORIĆ (image 88, entry no. 16), born 4 February 1890 at Brinje house 28, son of a father of the identical name, Stjepan Borić, and a mother of maiden surname Vučetić. MARIJA BORIĆ (image 89, entry no. 19), not herself the subject of the entry but named as the mother's maiden surname on the birth of Tomo Vičić, 10 February 1890 — a third Borić woman married out of the surname. IVO BORIĆ (image 106, entry no. 87), of Brinje house 191, son of Ivan Borić and a mother also entered under the Borić surname — a second Borić-marries-Borić household, distinct from the one already logged at house 141. Two more near-misses ruled out along the way: a witness read as Perkić, not Perković (images 83 and 88, the same surname met twice now), and a witness's surname read as Dorić, not Borić (image 95) after a closer zoom. 380 images of this volume remain.

Continued, images 113 to 122 — a Borić sibling pair, a new Kalanj house, and the book's own puzzle about a Krmarić wife. PETAR BORIĆ (image 113, entry no. 115), born 15 October 1890 at Brinje house 141 to Tome Borić and Jela Borić — the same couple already in this file as parents of Juraj Borić (born 1888), confirming a sibling pair rather than a repeated household. VIOL KALANJ (image 116, entry no. 138), of Brinje house 118, married to Zoričić Kate — a third Kalanj house number at Brinje, distinct from the two already found in the marriage book. IVAN BORIĆ (image 122, entry no. 20) named as a witness only, at Brinje house 138, not tied to any Borić man already in this file. A complication worth flagging rather than resolving: image 113 also records Viol Krmarić — the same man whose wife was recorded as Kalanj Ane at image 18 — fathering a child with a wife recorded here as Samson Ove. Whether this is a second marriage, a clerical inconsistency, or two different men sharing a name is not established; both entries are kept as written. 371 images of this volume remain.

Continued, images 123 to 134 — no new finds. 12 images, entries running from late April into August 1891. Three more near-misses confirmed on closer reading, each already logged as distinct in this file: Kalauz appears again (image 125), as does Perhorić (image 126) and Perkić (image 134). 358 images of this volume remain.

Continued, images 135 to 140 — two more Borić women, and a likely father-son link back to the marriage book. MARIJA BORIĆ, wife of Frane Jurajić (image 137, entry no. 78), a fourth Borić woman married out of the surname, with a Borić man (Grgo) standing witness at the same baptism. VIOL BORIĆ (image 140, entry no. 93), born 2 September 1891 at Brinje house 142, son of Borić Niko and Bošnjić Marica — almost certainly the first child of the Niko Borić already in this file as a 25-year-old bachelor marrying in 1890 at that same house (marriage book, image 538). This sharpens the open puzzle already on record there: a Marija Borić married out of house 142 in 1892-93 calling herself his daughter, an age gap that never worked — a father with a September 1891 infant cannot also have a marriageable daughter a year later. 352 images of this volume remain.

Continued, images 141 to 147 — two more Borić women married out, one at an address already on this page. OVE BORIĆ (image 141, entry no. 97), mother of Javor Ruse, at Brinje house 41. MANOLE BORIĆ (image 143, entry no. 104), mother of Dražičević Marija, at Kamenica house 24 — the same house number this file already holds for a second, distinct Niko Borić's daughter Marija, who married out in 1897. Flagged, not asserted: whether Manole is that Niko's sister, his wife under another name, or an unrelated Borić household sharing the address is not established. Borić women marrying out is now six occurrences, not an isolated pattern. 345 images of this volume remain.

Continued, images 148 to 156 — one find, an unmarried Borić mother at Kamenica. LUCE BORIĆ (image 152, entry no. 138), no husband named, her son Marko entered under her own surname - kept separate from the Luce Borić already in this file (daughter of Ivan/Ive Borić, Brinje house 126, married 1894), since nothing ties the two beyond the shared name. A new Borić witness name, Matija, appears on the same entry, not yet tied to any household. 336 images of this volume remain.

Continued, images 157 to 159 — no new finds, and a note on the register's own numbering. Three images, no Kalanj/Perković/Borić; Kalauz recurs twice more. Two entry-number gaps were checked directly rather than assumed unread (158 to 160, skipping 159; 166 to 168, skipping 167) — both fall mid-page with no facing content omitted, so these read as genuine skips in the clerk's own numbering, not missed images. 333 images of this volume remain.

Correction, same day. Entry no. 167 was not a skip: a wider view of image 159 that had not been used yet showed all four entries on the page at once, and no. 167 (Sabolić Jure, Brinje 158 - not a match) was there the whole time, missed only because an earlier narrower pass panned past it. No. 159 has not been re-checked this way and may turn out the same; treat that specific skip as unconfirmed rather than repeat the same claim.

Continued, images 160 to 165 — a likely third sibling at the Borić-Borić house. MATIJA BORIĆ (image 165, entry no. 18), daughter of Tome Borić, born 19 December 1892 at Brinje house 141 - the same father and house already in this file for Juraj (1888) and Petar (1890), making this a probable third sibling, four and a half years after the first. The mother's given name here reads as Matija, not the Jela already on record for this couple; not resolved. A separate puzzle recorded rather than solved: a second birth of "Vičić Tomo" to a father Jure Vičić and a mother Borić Marija (image 160, entry no. 170, 21 December 1891) - the same names as an earlier Vičić Tomo birth already in this file (image 89, 10 February 1890), twenty-two months apart. Read as written, not merged: either a second son named after an elder Tomo who did not survive, or the same event entered twice. 327 images of this volume remain.

Continued, images 166 to 173 — no new finds, one scare resolved by cross-reference. 8 images, no Kalanj/Perković/Borić as party, parent, or witness. One entry (image 171, no. 42) read at first as a possible Kalanj birth - zoomed and checked against parents' names already on record (Kalauj Jure and Vučetić Ove/Manole, the same couple already logged at image 158 as parents of Kalauj Marisa) - confirmed the same recurring Kalauj family, not Kalanj. 319 images of this volume remain.

Continued, images 174 to 179 — a Borić name at a new location. OVE BORIĆ (image 179, entry no. 73), mother of Ovčarić Jore, married out to a Lučane household - the first Borić this file has placed at Lučane; every earlier Borić household sat at Brinje itself, Kamenica, or Križ Kamenica. A new witness name, Borić Marko, stands alongside her, not yet tied to any household. 313 images of this volume remain.

Continued, images 180 to 193 — no new finds, and THIS FIRST RODJENI VOLUME IS FINISHED. 14 images, no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. Image 194 is the film's own «END OF ITEM» card: this Rođeni item is catalogued 1888-1892, not 1888-1900 as this archive had been assuming from the collection description alone - it is a shorter, separate item from the Vjenčani book already read. Image 196's title card confirms item 2 begins right after, covering 1893-1897 - the volume the old '492 images' estimate was really describing in part. This item's own tally across images 1-194: 4 Kalanj, 12 Borić, 0 Perković, plus the sibling pairs and Borić-marries-Borić households already logged. Continuing directly into item 2, the same DGS film, same waypoint.

Item 2 (Rođeni 1893-1897) opened, images 199 to 201 — a likely link at Kamenica house 24. KATE BORIĆ (image 201, entry no. 9), born 18 February 1893, daughter of Niko Borić and Radotić Dace, of Kamenica house 24 - almost certainly a sibling of the Marija Borić already in this file who married out of the same house in 1897, though that entry names the mother as Bare, not Dace Radotić recorded here. Not merged: a second wife, an alternate name for the same woman, or a clerical inconsistency are all possible: not established. TOME BORIĆ (image 201, entry no. 8), a witness only, not yet tied to any household.

Continued, images 202 to 206 — a possible new head of household at house 126. STJEPAN BORIĆ (image 203, entry no. 15), son of Grgo Borić and Marija Milaković, born 20 August 1893 at Brinje house 126 - the same house already in this file for Ivan/Ive Borić's children Juko (married 1890) and Luce (married 1894), but the father here is Grgo, not Ivan. Flagged, not merged: a brother sharing the house, a second household at the same number, or the same man differently named are all possible. One near-miss checked and ruled out on closer zoom: a surname read at first glance as Perkaš turned out to be Petrak.

Continued, images 207 to 215 — two more Borić mentions, both at Kamenica. TAUKA BORIĆ (image 208, entry no. 38), an eighth Borić woman married out, mother of Sertić Ivan. JOZO BORIĆ (image 215, entry no. 65), a witness at another Kamenica baptism the same year - plausibly the same Jozo Borić already in this file as father of Ive Borić (married 1893, also Kamenica-area), but nothing in either document names them as one man. A witness first misread as Borić (image 209, entry no. 60) turned out on closer zoom to be Perkić.

Continued, images 216 to 218 — a confirmed Kalanj household grows, and two more Borić witnesses. FRANJO KALANJ (image 218, entry no. 76), born 10 August 1893, son of Viol Kalanj and Kate Zoričić - the same couple already in this file since 1890, confirming a real household with at least two children rather than a single register entry. The house number given here, 189, does not match the 118 recorded for the first child; not resolved. Two more Borić witnesses, JURE BORIĆ (image 216, entry no. 67) and ANA BORIĆ (image 217, entry no. 71), at neighbouring Brinje house numbers 288 and 289 - neither tied to a household yet.

Continued, images 219 to 222 — no new finds. 4 images, two near-misses caught on closer zoom: a surname read at first as a possible Borić turned out to be Zoričić, and a mother's surname read as a possible Perković turned out to be Perkić.

Continued, images 223 to 227 — the first birth confirming a marriage-book puzzle. HOFJENC NIKO (image 227, entry no. 113), born 11 October 1893, son of Niko Hofjenc and Marija Borić - this is the child of the exact marriage already in this file from the Vjenčani book (image 564): Marija Borić, spinster, 19, daughter of Niko Borić of house 142, married Hofjenc Niko around 1892-93. A birth about a year later is the first proof that marriage actually took place, not just was recorded. Left unexplained: a witness on the same entry is also named Borić Marija, sharing the mother's exact name.

Continued, images 228 to 229 — a caution earned, and a third Kamenica house-24 birth. A near-duplicate name caught before it caused confusion: image 228, entry no. 115 records a SECOND Niko Hofjenc, married to Marija Hofjenc (a Hofjenc-marries-Hofjenc household, at Brinje house 68) - not the Niko Hofjenc married to Marija Borić already logged from image 227, and not a Kalanj/Perković/Borić entry at all. Then, image 229, entry no. 120: LUCE BORIĆ, daughter of Tome Borić and Marija Radotić, born at Kamenica house 24 on 18 October 1893 - a third birth at that address in this file, after Marija (married out 1897, father Niko Borić and Bare) and Kate (born 1893, father Niko Borić and Radotić Dace). The father here is Tome, not Niko, and the mother Marija, not Dace. Kept as a separate person; the shape of this house - one Borić family, or several sharing a number - remains an open question, not a settled fact. A Sertić family also holds the Kamenica house 24 address (image 230, entry no. 124) - supporting evidence that this is a large shared address, not a single family's inconsistent record-keeping.

Continued, images 230 to 235 — the cleanest confirmation yet, at the very first Kalanj house this archive found. ANICA KALANJ (image 235, entry no. 144), born 21 August 1893, daughter of Niko Kalanj and Marija Vučetić, at Brinje house 231 - the same house and the same Niko Kalanj whose 1890 marriage to a widow named Marija was the very first Brinje Kalanj entry this archive ever read (Vjenčani book, image 530). The mother's maiden name here, Vučetić, fits cleanly with no contradiction, unlike the Kamenica puzzle just above - a household confirmed, not merely asserted. One more near-miss ruled out along the way: a surname read as a possible Perković (image 233, entry no. 138) turned out to be Perhonić, the same distinct surname already met twice before.

29 September 2026, continued — images 236 to 239: supporting evidence for the Kamenica house-24 puzzle, and two more Borić witnesses, one a plausible match to the house-126 father. HORMANIĆ, a third surname recorded at Kamenica house 24 (image 236) alongside the Borić and Sertić households already logged there — a third family sharing the address strengthens the "large shared address" reading over a single confused household, though still not proof either way. KATE BORIĆ (image 239, entry no. 159), witness to the baptism of Javor Frica (daughter of Javor Ivan and Đorić Kate, of Brinje house 85), alongside Jelačić Stjepan — not in the tree, a witness only, kept apart from the other women named Kate Borić already in this file. GRGO BORIĆ (image 239, entry no. 160), witness to the baptism of Milaković Marko (son of Milaković Marko and Milaković Kate, of Brinje house 74), alongside Marija — a plausible match, not a confirmed one, for the Grgo Borić already in this file as father of Stjepan Borić at house 126 (born August 1893, four months earlier): the same given name, same parish, same year, but no document names them as one man.

Images 1–239 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 240 to 242 — a fourth sibling at the Borić-marries-Borić house. Images 240-241 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić (the register turned over into 1894 partway through image 240, entry numbers resetting to 1). BORIĆ OVE (image 242, entry no. 9), born 10 January 1894 at Brinje house 141, daughter of Borić Tome and Borić Jele — the same couple already in this file as parents of Juraj (1888), Petar (1890), and Matija (1892), and the first of these four births with no discrepancy in the mother's name. A witness, Perkić Mijo, is the same recurring near-miss surname already distinguished from Perković several times over.

Images 1–242 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 243 to 248 — a new Borić household at a new Kamenica house number, and a Borić witness. Images 243, 245-247 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. BORIĆ LUCE (image 244, entry no. 17), born 6 February 1894 at Kamenica house 83, daughter of Borić Lojze and Mesić Manda-Marija — a new Borić given name (Lojze) at a new Kamenica address, distinct from the already-puzzling house 24; a fourth person in this file named Luce Borić, tied to none of the other three. BORIĆ TRICA (image 248, entry no. 34), witness to the baptism of Jelić Kate at Brinje house 246 — the given name not confidently read, a witness only. One coincidence noted in passing, not recorded as a find: a birth at image 248 (Lokmer Marica) names her mother's maiden name as "Javor Ruse" — the same given names as the Javor Ruse born in 1891 to Ove Borić and Ivan Javor already in this file, but that child would be not yet three years old here, so this is almost certainly a different, older Ruse Javor, not the same person; no Borić surname appears in that entry itself.

Images 1–248 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 249 to 251 — a plausible return of the file's first-ever Borić, and a sixth Marija Borić married out. Image 249-250 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. BORIĆ VID (image 251, entry no. 46) stood witness to the baptism of Radotić Luce at Brinje house 132 on 30 May 1894 — a plausible, unconfirmed match for the very first Borić this archive ever found in this parish (married 1890, son of Luka Borić, Kamenica house 17), though that entry's own given name was itself an uncertain reading. BORIĆ MARIJA (image 251, entry no. 44) is named as the mother's maiden surname on the birth of Krnarić Manda, no house number given — a sixth woman of this exact name married out of the surname, kept separate from the five already in this file.

Images 1–251 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 252 to 254 — a second unmarried Borić mother, at a new Kamenica house number. Images 252-253 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. BORIĆ OVE (image 254, entry no. 57), born 3 July 1894 at Kamenica house 3, father's column left blank, daughter of "BORIĆ KATE" alone - the child takes her unmarried mother's surname, the same pattern already seen with Luce Borić of Kamenica (this file, 1891). The two women are kept separate; nothing ties them beyond the pattern itself.

Images 1–254 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, a correction to the image-254 entry above. The same baptism (Ove Borić, entry no. 57) also names a witness, "BORIĆ MARIJA" - a seventh person in this file with that name, possibly a relative standing up for Kate Borić's child, though no document says so.

30 September 2026, images 255 to 258 — a fifth Luce Borić married out. Images 255-257 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić (one more Kalauj near-miss confirmed distinct at image 256). BORIĆ LUCE (image 258, entry no. 72) is named as the mother's maiden surname on the birth of Bišanić Franjo at Brinje house 174 - a fifth woman of this exact name in this file, an eighth Borić woman married out of the surname overall.

Images 1–258 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 259 to 266 — a third Niko Borić household. Images 259-265 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić as a party (two more Kalauj near-misses confirmed distinct at image 259, cross-checked against the already-known Kalauj Jure x Vučetić couple; a "Horić" surname also confirmed distinct from Borić twice). BORIĆ MARKO (image 266, entry no. 105), born 19 September 1894 at Brinje house 148, son of Borić Niko and Boletić Marija - a third Niko Borić household in this file, at a house number distinct from both the house-142 Niko Borić (married 1890) and the Kamenica house-24 Niko Borić (father of Marija/Kate/Luce).

Images 1–266 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, image 267 — a plausible return of the Kamenica house-24 mother. BORIĆ MANOLE stood witness to the baptism of Mesić Stjepan at Kamenica on 30 September 1894 - a plausible, unconfirmed match for the Manole Borić already in this file (wife of Tomo Dražičević, Kamenica house 24, a mother by 1891), three years on. No document names them as the same woman.

Images 1–267 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 273 to 278 — the house-126 Grgo Borić household confirmed with a second child. Images 273-277 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić (two more Kalauj near-misses confirmed distinct). BORIĆ ANA (image 278, entry no. 153), born 25 December 1894 at Brinje house 126, daughter of Borić Grgo and Milaković Marija - a sibling of Stjepan Borić (born August 1893, image 203), confirming this Grgo Borić x Marija Milaković pairing as a real, continuing household rather than a single register line. Whether this Grgo is the same man as the Ivan/Ive Borić already tied to house 126 (children Juko and Luce) remains not established.

Images 1–278 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, image 279 — the register turns into 1895, and a first Borić name at Lučane as a witness. Entry numbering reset to 1. BORIĆ IVAN stood witness to the baptism of Lovinčić Ove at Lučane house 28 on 27 December 1894, alongside a woman named Marija - the first Borić witness this file has placed at Lučane (a Borić woman, Ove, already married out to a Lučane household in 1893).

Images 1–279 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, image 280 — an eighth Marija Borić married out, into Hofjenc a second time. BORIĆ MARIJA (image 280, entry no. 5) is named as the mother's maiden surname on the birth of Hofjevac Tome at Brinje house 160, married to Vid Hofjevac - the same family (Hofjenc/Hofjevac) a Marija Borić already married into at house 142, though a different husband and spelling. A witness on the same entry, BORIĆ MANULE, is a plausible but unconfirmed match for the Manole Borić already tracked at Kamenica - this entry places her at Brinje itself.

Images 1–280 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 281 to 286 — a new puzzle at the house-141 Borić-marries-Borić address. Images 281-285 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić as a party (two more Kalauj near-misses confirmed distinct; one more Kalafatić confirmed distinct). BORIĆ MARICA (image 286, entry no. 29), born 18 March 1895 at Brinje house 141, daughter of Borić Ive and Borić Matija - the same house already in this file for Juraj, Petar, Matija and Ove, children of Borić Tome and Borić Jela, but here the father is Ive, not Tome, and the mother Matija, not Jela. The 1892 birth already carried an uncertain reading of the mother's name as "Matija" - whether this points to a second Borić-Borić household sharing the house, or a recurring misreading, is not established.

Images 1–286 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 287 to 295 — a plausible, unconfirmed link between two Kamenica Borić households. Images 287-294 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. BORIĆ TOME (image 295, entry no. 65), born 24 June 1895 at Kamenica house 23, son of Borić Tome and Mesić Manda-Marija - the mother's name entered in the exact same double-given-name form as Luce Borić's mother (this file, image 244, house 83), but the father there is Lojze, here Tome, and the house number differs. Flagged, not merged.

Images 1–295 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 296 to 299 — a new Borić given name at Kamenica. Images 296-298 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. BORIĆ STJEPAN (image 299, entry no. 81) stood witness to the baptism of Sertić Mile at Kamenica house 5 on 17 August 1895, alongside a second witness given only as "Ove" - a new Borić given name in this file.

Images 1–299 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 300 to 318 — no new finds. 19 images, no Kalanj/Perković/Borić as party or witness (Petrak, Perhonić, Đorić, Kalauj and Kalafatić each recurred once more, all confirmed distinct on sight, cross-checked against parents already on record where relevant).

Images 1–318 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 319 to 327 — a ninth Marija Borić, as a witness. Images 319-326 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. BORIĆ MARIJA (image 327) stood witness to a Sertić baptism at Kamenica, alongside Javor Ivan - a ninth person in this file named Marija Borić, kept separate from all the others including the Manole Borić already tracked as a witness in the same hamlet.

Images 1–327 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 328 to 335 — a second sighting of the recurring Borić witness at a Milaković baptism. Images 328-334 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić (one blank template page at image 330). BORIĆ GRGO (image 335) stood witness to a baptism of Milaković Ferole's child at Brinje, alongside a woman named Marica - the second time this file has caught a Borić man witnessing a Milaković baptism (the first, image 239, paired him with a woman named Marija). Plausibly the same recurring witness, kept as two sightings rather than merged.

Images 1–335 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 336 to 338 — a plausible return of the Kamenica house-83 father, under his full name. Images 336-337 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. BORIĆ ALOJZ (image 338) stood witness to a Škorup baptism at Brinje - "Alojz" is the full form of the "Lojze" already in this file as father of Luce Borić at Kamenica house 83, and that earlier entry's own witnesses were also named Škorup. A stronger-than-usual unconfirmed link, still not merged.

Images 1–338 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 339 to 344 — a second child for the very first Kalanj household this archive found. Images 339-343 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić as a party or witness (one more near-miss, Verković, confirmed distinct from Borić). KALANJ NIKO (image 344, entry no. 83), born 26 July 1896 at Brinje, son of Niko Kalanj and Marija Vučetić - a son named after his own father, a sibling of Anica Kalanj (born 1893, house 231, already in this file). The same clean household, three years on, with no discrepancy in either parent's name.

Images 1–344 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, image 345 — the first Perković woman found in this parish. PERKOVIĆ KATE (entry no. 87), named as the mother's maiden surname on the birth of Hofjevac Luka at Brinje house 148 - a fourth Perković individual in this file, and the first Perković woman, married into the same Hofjenc/Hofjevac family that has already absorbed several Borić women. House 148 coincides with the Marko Borić entry already in this file (image 266), noted but not asserted as meaningful.

Images 1–345 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 346 to 348 — a fourth Kate Borić. Images 346-347 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. BORIĆ KATE (image 348, entry no. 101) is named as the mother's maiden surname on the birth of Domić Luce at Lučane - a fourth person in this file named Kate Borić, kept separate from the other three.

Images 1–348 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 349 to 350 — a second child confirms the Bišanić-Borić household. Image 349 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. BIŠANIĆ IVAN (image 350, entry no. 108), born 17 September 1896 at Brinje house 174, son of Marko Bišanić and Luce Borić - the same house and both parents' names already in this file for Franjo Bišanić (born August 1894). A real, continuing family, not a single register line.

Images 1–350 of this volume now read.

30 September 2026, images 351 to 356 — a second child confirms the Sertić-Borić household at Kamenica. Images 351-355 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić as a party (one more Kalauj near-miss confirmed distinct). SERTIĆ NIKO (image 356, entry no. 133), born 1 November 1896 at Kamenica house 13, son of Jure Sertić and Tauka Borić - the same couple already in this file as parents of Ivan Sertić (born 1893). A real, continuing family.

Images 1–356 of this volume now read.

1 October 2026, images 357 to 369 — the register turns into 1897, and the Krnarić-Borić household is confirmed with a second child. Images 357-368 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić as a party (two more near-misses, Perhović and Horić, confirmed distinct; the register turned over into 1897 partway through image 364, entry numbers resetting). KRNARIĆ TOME (image 369, entry no. 23), born 18 March 1897 at Brinje house 208, son of Jure Krnarić and Marija Borić - the same couple already in this file as parents of Manda Krnarić (born 1894), this entry adding a house number the earlier one lacked.

Images 1–369 of this volume now read.

1 October 2026, image 370 — a third sighting of the recurring Borić-Milaković witness pairing, at the same house. BORIĆ GRGO stood witness to the baptism of Milaković Grgo's daughter at Brinje house 74 - the exact same house where he first appeared in this file in 1893 (image 239), and again paired with a woman named Marica, the same name from his second sighting (image 335). The strongest recurring pattern of its kind in this file, though still not a confirmed single identity.

Images 1–370 of this volume now read.

1 October 2026, images 371 to 381 — a new Borić given name, from an incompletely-scanned entry. Images 371-380 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić as a party or witness. BORIĆ VIOL appears as a witness at the very top of image 381 - the rest of that entry (date, house, child, parents) was evidently never photographed, only the trailing witness line surviving. A new given name kept on record despite the incomplete citation.

Images 1–381 of this volume now read.

1 October 2026, images 382 to 387 — a new Borić given name, Roza. Images 382-386 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. BORIĆ ROZA (image 387, entry no. 95) stood witness to the baptism of Raobtić Ive's daughter at Brinje house 139 - a new given name, kept separate from all other Borić individuals in this file.

Images 1–387 of this volume now read.

1 October 2026, images 388 to 390 — a third Jozo/Joso Borić witness, at a Škorup baptism. Images 388-389 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić (one more Perhonić near-miss confirmed distinct). BORIĆ JOSO (image 390, entry no. 107) stood witness to the baptism of Škorup Marko's daughter at Brinje house 124 - a Škorup-family entry, the same surname already tied to the plausible Alojz Borić sighting (image 338). Kept separate from the two Jozo Borić men already in this file, both at Kamenica.

Images 1–390 of this volume now read.

1 October 2026, images 391 to 400 — THIS ITEM IS FINISHED. Images 391-399 held no Kalanj/Perković/Borić. Image 400 is the film's own «ITEM 2» end card, confirming this Rođeni volume (1893-1897) is genuinely complete, not a stopping point chosen by this archive. The whole second item's tally: roughly 45 Borić individuals (far more than any other stretch of this search), a handful of Perković sightings including the first Perković woman found in this parish, and two more Kalanj children confirming the household this archive found first - none of it in the tree, all of it cross-checked against near-miss surnames (Kalauj, Perhonić, Perkić, Dđorić, Horić, Verković) at every turn. Image 401 opens a third item on the same film, its entry numbering continuing from 143 rather than resetting to 1 - suggesting this book runs past 1897 without a fresh title card of its own; not yet opened.

1 October 2026, images 401 to 406 — a third item opened, continuing the same register past 1897. Images 401-404 are the film's own «ITEM 3» divider and a resolution test chart. Image 405 confirms the continuation: entry no. 143, dated 15 November 1897, the same numbering sequence as item 2's tail end, no fresh title card. BORIĆ NIKO (image 406, entry no. 144) stood witness to the baptism of Blažanin Niko's son at Brinje house 154 - kept separate from the Niko Borić already in this file (married 1890, house 142) and the two households already fathered by a Niko Borić (house 148; Kamenica house 24).

Images 1-400 of the second item, plus images 401-406 of this third item, now read.

images 407 to 427 — a third child for the house-142 Niko Borić household. Continued reading through calendar year 1898: images 407-414 covered Hudorović, Letinac and other non-target households with nothing to record. Image 415 (Krnjarić Viol, Brinje 120) and image 416 (Hofjevac Tomo x Perhonić Luce, Brinje 249 - Perhonić confirmed again as the established near-miss, not Perković) were also clear. Images 417-420 (Vukovic, Zvaicevic, Stahonic, Jelic households) and 423-425 (Vilhau, Skorup x Milakovic, Brionic, Sertic x Music, Mesic, Spraje households) carried no target surnames either, though the Skorup entry's mother, Milakovic Marija, is the same surname already seen married to a Boric man (Grgo Boric x Marija Milakovic, house 126) - not the same woman, just the same surname recurring, and Milakovic is not itself a tracked surname. Image 427, entry no. 70: BORIC MARICA, born 23 July 1898, Brinje house 142, daughter of BORIC NIKO and BOJENIC MARICA, witnessed by BORIC TOME and Hofjevac Marija. This is very likely a third child for the Niko Boric household already on record at house 142 (married 1890 to a wife recorded as Basic Marija; first child Viol born 1891 to a wife recorded as Bosnjic Marica) - the mother's maiden name now appears a third way, Bojenic, close enough in sound to the other two that they may all be the same woman under three scribal hands, though this is not asserted as fact.

images 428 to 442 — a second Sertic-Boric couple, and two near-misses worth flagging. Entry numbering within this third item resets each calendar year rather than continuing one running count - confirmed by entry 70 (23 July 1898) following entry 144 (December 1897) instead of exceeding it. Image 431, entry 86: SERTIC NIKO, born 10 October 1898 at Kamenica house 28, son of Sertic Jure and BORIC FRANCE, witnessed by BORIC VUJO (a new given name) and Sertic Ruze. This is a second, separate Sertic-Boric couple, kept apart from Jure Sertic and Tauka Boric already on record at Kamenica house 13 - a different house number and a different given name for the Boric wife, though both husbands share the name Jure, left unexplained. Two things noticed but NOT added as Boric sightings, read as written rather than merged: image 441 entry 136 names a mother BORICEVIC MARIJA (Linoric Ivan x Boricevic Marija, Brinje house 167) - a different surname from Boric, sharing only the root, watched as a possible new near-miss; and image 440 entry 134 names a household KRNARIC JURE x DRAZENOVIC OVA at Brinje house 24 (daughter Kate) - the same husband's given name as the Krnaric-Boric household already on this page (Jure Krnaric x Marija Boric, house 208), but a completely different wife and house number, so kept as a separate, unconnected man rather than folded into the known household. Everything else across these fifteen images (Krnjaric, Hofjevac, Perhonic, Vukovic, Zvaicevic, Blazanin, Gmicic, Stahonic, Jelic, Vilhau, Skorup, Brionic, Sertic x Music, Mesic, Spraje, Vicic, Ovcaric, Buldic, Rajhoric, Cer, Vlasic, Draznovic, Vukoric, Buhlic, Linoric, Zoric, Valusic, Basnic, Rumenovic, Bosnic, Lohmer) carried no Kalanj, Perkovic or Boric name at all.

images 443 to 449 — the register turns into 1899, and Alojz Boric surfaces as a real household head. Entry numbering reset again with the calendar year, confirmed by image 449 opening at entry 1 on 1 January 1899. Images 443-448 (Hofjevac, Hudorovic, Popic, Bosic, Lohmer, Vranic, Vukovic, Aevic, Komadina, Mesic, Drazenovic households) carried nothing. Image 445 entry 141 named a second Krnaric household at Brinje house 208 - Franjo Krnaric x Javor Marija - the same house number as the Krnaric-Boric household already on this page (Jure Krnaric x Marija Boric) but a different father's given name and a different wife entirely; kept separate, no Boric name anywhere in the entry itself. Image 449, entry 4: BORIC MANOLE, born 3 January 1899 at Kamenica house 23, daughter of BORIC ALOJZ and MESIC MANOLA. This confirms Alojz Boric as a genuine household head rather than only the witness sighting already on this page (image 338, tentatively linked to Lojze Boric of Kamenica house 83) - and it lands at the SAME house number, Kamenica 23, already carrying Tome Boric (born 1895, son of Boric Tome and Mesic Manda-Marija). Three Boric men (Alojz, Tome, Lojze), two houses, and a wife's surname, Mesic, that keeps recurring across all three - none of it merged, all of it flagged.

image 450 — a new Kalanj entry at the same house as the first Kalanj household. Entry 5, registered 8 January 1899, born 5 January: KALANJ RUZE (given name corrected from Ove on re-reading, 5 October), daughter of Jure Kalanj and Vucetic Manole (first read as Vukelic, corrected 5 October 2026 at full zoom), born at Brinje house 231 - the same house already on record for Niko Kalanj (married 1890, son of Kalanj Juro and Ana). Jure is a variant of Juro, and the mother's surname matches Niko's own wife (Marija Vucetic); kept separate rather than merged. Session paused here at image 450 of 693 in this FamilySearch browsable unit - the already-read Vjencani (marriages) volume begins around image 493, so roughly 40 or so images of this third Rodjeni item most likely remain before that boundary, though the item's own endpoint has not been confirmed by reaching it.

5 October 2026, images 450 to 451 re-read after a session break (the viewer had reset to the FamilySearch home page; reopened from the image-450 ark). Three things. (1) Image 450 entry 8: BORIC LUCE, born 19 January 1899, Brinje house 141, daughter of Boric Tome and Boric Jela, witnessed by BORIC NIKO and Radotic Luce - a FIFTH child of the Borić-marries-Borić household at house 141 (Juraj 1888, Petar 1890, Matija 1892, Ove 1894), missed on the first pass because only the left page of image 450 had been read. (2) Image 451 entry 11: KALANJ FRANC, born 28 January 1899, Brinje house 231, son of Kalanj MILE and Vucetic MARIJA, witness Buhlic Franc i Marija - same house and same mother's name as the Niko Kalanj household already on record, but the father's given name reads Mile. (3) Entry 5 of image 450 (Kalanj Ruze, born 5 January 1899, house 231) re-read at full zoom: the mother is VUCETIC Manole, not Vukelic as first entered; corrected in found.psv. Two Kalanj births at house 231 within four weeks, both with Vucetic mothers - kept as separate entries, not merged. Lesson recorded: read BOTH pages of every spread; the right-hand page of image 450 was skipped the first time. Images 450-451 now fully read; next is image 452.

5 October 2026, images 452 to 454 — a third child for two households already on record. Both pages of every spread read this time. Image 454, entry 23: KRNARIC MIJO, born 20 March 1899, Brinje house 208, son of Krnaric Jure and BORIC MARIJA - a third child of the Krnaric-Boric household (Manda 1894, Tome 1897), same house 208, witnessed by a Perkic Mijo (the near-miss surname) and a Petrovic Manda. Image 454, entry 24: KALANJ MARIJA, born 13 March 1899, Brinje house 188, daughter of Kalanj VIOL and Zoricic KATE - a third child of the Viol Kalanj household (Kate 1890 at house 118, Franjo 1893 at house 189); the house number drifts by a digit across all three births, read as written. Image 453, entry 20: a witness line reading Perhovic Marko - the near-miss Perhovic, not Perkovic, not recorded. Images 452 (Javor, Zalac, Juric, Pavlak) and the left page of 454 (Jotic, Rajkovic) carried no target surname. Next is image 455.

5 October 2026, images 455 to 462 — August 1899 is the densest stretch of Boric names since 1895. Images 455-460 (Pavlovic, Sertic, Rogic, Tumic, Linoric, Rubcic, Vukovic, Mesic, Karakas, Domic, Draženovic, Jurovic households) carried no Kalanj, Perkovic or Boric name as party; a witness line on image 459 entry 44 (Lucane house 5, Domic Joso x Rajkovic Kate) reads Doric Marko - the Đorić near-miss, not Boric, not recorded. Image 461: entry 51, HOFJEVAC BARE, born 9 August, Brinje house 160, daughter of Hofjevac Viol (Vid in the 1895 entry) and BORIC MARIJA - a second child of the household already on record, same house, same mother. Entry 52, SERTIC TOMO, born 7 August, house 128, son of Sertic Petar and BORIC KATE, witnessed by BORIC JELA. Image 462: entry 53, SERTIC RUZE, born 13 August, house 127, daughter of Sertic MARKO and BORIC KATE - a different husband and house from entry 52 six days earlier, same mother's name; stated as a puzzle, not resolved. Entry 54, SERTIC MARKO, Kamenica house 5, witnessed by BORIC LOJZE. Entry 55, BORIC JOSO, born 18 August, KAMENICA HOUSE 23, son of BORIC STIPE and SERTIC LUCE - a third Borić father at the house that already holds Tome Boric (wife Mesic Manda-Marija) and Alojz Boric (wife Mesic Manola). Sertic is now the surname Boric women and men are found marrying more often than any other. Next is image 463.

5 October 2026, images 463 to 472 — one Borić child, one witness, and a surname problem that needs a person. Images 463-467 and 469-471 (Sertić, Mesić, Lohmer, Vranić, Bionović, Domić, Radotić, Rajković households) carried no target surname as party; witness lines on images 465-466 read Perhović (near-miss, not recorded). Image 468, entry 79: BORIC TOME, born 13 September 1899, KAMENICA HOUSE 24, son of Boric Tome and RADOTIC MARIJA - a second child (after Luce, 1893) of the Tome Borić x Radotić Marija household at house 24, which is now two children deep and reads as a real household beside the Niko Borić one at that house, not a scribal slip for it. Image 472, entry 94: Buhlić Ivan, Plašćica 4, witnessed by KALANJ NIKO (surname reading not fully safe, see below). THE SURNAME PROBLEM. The near-miss "Kalauj" this log has treated as a distinct family since image 158 (Kalauj Jure x Vučetić Ove/Manole, Brinje house 249, 1892; image 171 entry 43) has the SAME parents' given names, and the mother's same surname, as entry 5 of image 450 (Kalanj Jure x Vučetić Manole, house 231, 1899). Re-reading both at full zoom 5 October, the surname in this matičar's hand is not reliably separable as Kalanj or Kalauj by letterform; earlier Kalauj decisions were in several cases made by matching to parents already logged as Kalauj, which is circular. Nothing has been reclassified: the 1899 entries stay Kalanj because their house, 231, is Niko Kalanj's, and the older Kalauj rows stay as logged. But if the Kalauj family is in fact Kalanj, this register holds many more Kalanj entries than the found file lists. A person should read the 1892 entry and one or two Kalauj entries beside a certain Kalanj one (image 530 marriage book, or Anica Kalanj, 1893) and decide.

5 October 2026, images 473 to 474. Image 473 (Bisanic x Hofjevac Kate, Javor, Hobar, Vidakovic households): no target surname. Image 474, entry 104: HOFJEVAC IVE, born 12 November 1899, Brinje HOUSE 154, son of Hofjevac Niko and BORIC MARIJA - a later child of the household behind the 1892-93 marriage of Marija Boric (daughter of Niko Boric, house 142) to Hofjenc Niko of house 154 and their son Niko (1893); the husband's given name and the house number tie it to that couple, not to the Vid/Viol Hofjevac of house 160. Witness BORIC MILKA (given name read as Milka, not fully certain). Entry 103 on the same page, at Brinje 74 (the house where Boric Grgo witnessed three Milakovic baptisms), is a Milakovic Grgo household with no Boric name in it.

5 October 2026, images 475 to 481 — November 1899: Borić names reappear in Mesić and Sertić baptisms, and a new Kalanj father. Image 475, entry 105 (Kamenica 20): MESIC PETAR, born 14 November, son of Mesic Stipo and BORIC MARIJA, with a BORIC MARIJA as witness beside a Perkic Mijo (near-miss). Image 478, entry 120 (Brinje 289): SERTIC MANOLE, born 29 October, daughter of Sertic Pave and BORIC LUCE, witnessed by Hofjevac Niko and BORIC MILKA - the same Milka who witnessed the Hofjevac Ive baptism at house 154 two weeks later (kept as two rows, probably one woman). Image 481, entry 131 (Brinje 188): KALANJ MANOLE, born 11 November, daughter of Kalanj JEROK (Jerko) and KRNARIC RUZE - a second Kalanj household at house 188, which already holds the Viol Kalanj household's third child (Marija, March 1899). Images 476-477, 479-480 (Fumic, Vranic, Rajkovic, Gruic, Krnaric Jure x Javor Ane, Pavlovic, Mesic households): no target surname; witness lines read Perkic/Perlic (near-miss) and Kalafatic (near-miss), not recorded. Image 473 entry 103 (Brinje 74) is a Milakovic household with no Boric name.

5 October 2026, images 482 to 483 — a Kalanj child at house 249, and the strongest evidence yet on the Kalauj question. Image 482 (Hofjevac, Bišanić, Mesić households): no target surname. Image 483, entry 137: KALANJ STIPE, born 18 November 1899, Brinje HOUSE 249, son of Kalanj MIJO and KRNARIC MANDA, witnessed by Vučetić Stipe and KALANJ LUCE - the child of the marriage already on record (Mijo Kalanj, widower 53, of house 249, married Krnarić Manole of house 168 on 15 February 1892, marriage book image 566). House 249 is also where the 'Kalauj' Jure x Vučetić Ove/Manole household sat in 1892 (image 171, entry 43). A house that holds a Kalanj man in 1893 and a Kalanj child in 1899, and a 'Kalauj' household in between, is evidence that the Kalauj reading is Kalanj, not a distinct family; this is recorded as evidence, not as a reclassification, and the Kalauj near-miss decisions made earlier in this log (images 158, 171, 256, 273-277, 300-318 and others) are NOT changed here. A person should settle it before the found file is trusted to have counted every Kalanj.

5 October 2026, images 484 to 489 — THE THIRD RODJENI ITEM, AND WITH IT THE WHOLE FILM, IS FINISHED. Image 485 (December 1899): a witness line reading Kalanj Marija (Petrovic Ove i Kalanj Marija, Murat baptism, Brinje 228; same Kalanj/Kalauj doubt); other entries (Nohorovic, Vucetic, Rasotic) no target surname. Image 486: witness Perkic Mijo (near-miss). Image 487, entry 155: BORIC MANOLE, born 30 December 1899, Brinje house 126, daughter of Boric GRGO and Milakovic MARIJA - a third child of the house-126 Grgo Boric household (Stjepan 1893, Ana 1894), booked on 1 January. Image 488: the first entry of 1900 (Denacevic x Vrabljak), the rest of the spread blank forms. Image 489 is the film's own «END OF ITEM» card - Zupa Brinje, Maticna knjiga rodjenih 1897-1900, ITEM 3, CRO 00003 roll 681. Image 490 opens ITEM 4, Maticna knjiga vjencanih 1888-1899, the marriage book read in full earlier (images 493-690). So the whole of DGS 005498262, waypoint 9R26-82S, is now walked: Rodjeni items 1-3 (images 1-489) and the Vjencani book (493-690). A caveat on method, stated plainly: the 5 October reading from image 450 on was at spread-fit zoom with full zoom only for candidate names, so a witness line misread as a near-miss (Perkic, Perhovic, Doric, Kalafatic, Kalauj) at fit zoom could in principle have been a target name; the near-miss decisions themselves (above all KALAUJ, which house 249 now suggests may be Kalanj) need a person's second look before this volume is called exhausted for Kalanj. Total people in found.psv from this whole survey of the Brinje registers: 206.

5 October 2026 - THE KALAUJ QUESTION IS SETTLED: Kalauj is Kalanj. Evidence, in order of weight. (1) Image 157, entry 158: «Kalanj Marisa», born 22 November 1891, Brinje house 231, father Kalanj Jure, mother Vucetic Manole - read at full zoom, the surname is the same word as the unmistakable «Kalanj Viol» at image 163; this is the entry the log called «Kalauj Marisa» at «image 158», and it carries the same parents, the same house (231 - Niko Kalanj's own) and the same formulae as the 1899 birth of Ruze Kalanj (image 450). (2) Image 171, entry 42: the header reads «Kalanj Marko» in the same hand, father Kalanj Jure, mother Vucetic Ove; that was the entry read in September as a «Kalauj» near-miss. (3) Image 259, entry 76: Kalanj Ove (1894), same parents, house 231. (4) Witnesses «Kalanj Mile i Marija» at a Lucane baptism (image 274, 1894) are the names of the couple who are parents of Kalanj Franc at house 231 in 1899. (5) No full-text hit and no letterform separates the two spellings; the full-text search tab does not cover these registers. The «Kalauj» label was never a family: it was a misreading that the earlier pass then defended by matching new entries to its own earlier entries, which is circular. Cost of the error, found while settling it, now recorded: seven Kalanj births and witnesses that were never entered - Kalanj Marisa 1891, Kalanj Petar 1891 (Tome Kalanj x Nesic Marija, house 188), Kalanj Pave 1892 (Viol x Zoricic Kate, house 188), Kalanj Marko 1892, Kalanj Ove 1894, Kalanj Manole 1895 (Mijo Kalanj x Krnaric Manda, house 249), and the Mile Kalanj witnesses - taking the survey from 206 to 213 people. What is NOT done: only images 155-172, 255-259, 273-285 and 299-304 were re-read for this; images 305-318 and 351-355 (where the log names further Kalauj sightings), and every unlogged Kalauj sighting, have not been re-read, and the other near-miss families (Perhonic, Perkic, Perhovic, Doric, Horic, Verkovic, Kalafatic) were not re-tested - Kalafatic at image 284 was checked and is a real different surname. So this volume is NOT yet exhausted for Kalanj: expect more under the old label in 305-318 and 351-355.

5 October 2026, later - THE 'PERHONIĆ' NEAR-MISS IS PERKOVIĆ, AND THE FIRST PASS'S RECALL IS UNPROVEN. Finishing the re-read ranges named above (images 305-318 and 351-355) at readable zoom (two zoom steps above the spread-fit view, the level at which a surname and a witness line can be read), plus the images where the log named the near-miss families (83, 84, 88, 127, 233, 345), turned up ten people the first pass had logged as 'no new finds', in about twenty-five images. Kalanj: KALANJ LUCE, born 25 Dec 1889 at house 231 to Jure Kalanj x Vučetić Manole (image 84, entry 155) - the eldest child of the house-231 household; KALANJ JURE, born 14 Sept 1896, parents Kalanj Jure x Vučetić Ane, house 249 (image 351, entry 111); MESIĆ MANOLE, born 20 Oct 1896, mother KALANJ MARIJA, informants Rumenović Tomo i KALANJ MANDA (image 355, entry 128). Borić: KARAKAŠ JOSO, 7 Nov 1895, mother BORIĆ LUCE, informants Borić Ivica i Jela (image 317, entry 152); PETRINIĆ MARIJA, 20 Oct 1895, mother BORIĆ MANDA, house 16 (image 314, entry 140); BORIĆ KATE, 6 Oct 1896, daughter of Tome Borić x Jela Borić at house 141, a sixth child of that household, whose own margin reads, at full zoom, 'umrla 2/IV 1917 ... Perković rođ.' - a Borić woman who died a Perković wife (image 354, entry 122); and SERTIĆ STJEPAN, 1895, mother Borić Kate, witness Borić Jela (image 313, entry 136, recorded earlier today). Perković: VUKOVIĆ JOSO, 9 Nov 1895, mother a Perković (image 317, entry 153) - the child of the 1893 Vuković Marko x Perković marriage already in this file (image 581), same father, same bride's surname, same witness Kalafatić Mijo; and PERKOVIĆ NIKOLA, 19 Oct 1893, son of Perković Mile and Perković Marica, Križpolje 22 (image 233, entry 138). The finding that matters: 'Perhonić' is Perković. The Brinje hand writes its v like an n - the father's name on the same page of the 1893 marriage, Vuković, reads 'Vukonić' - and the first pass, reading the same letterform, filed the mother of Hofjevac Luka (image 345, entry 87) as Perković in one place and the same form as the 'Perhonić' near-miss in others. The two labels were applied to one handwriting. The 29 September entry above that says image 233 entry 138 'turned out to be Perhonić, a distinct surname' was WRONG: it is a Perković household. What follows from it: every earlier 'Perhonić' sighting (the one said to be met 'twice before' that, images 300-318, 388-389, image 416 Hofjevac Tomo x Perhonić Luce at house 249, and the unlogged ones) is REOPENED and has not been re-read, so the number of Perković households on record in this parish is a floor. 'Perkić' (the short form, images 83, 88 and later) is visibly a shorter word than 'Perkonić' and is not folded in, but its recurring bearer, Perkić Mijo, is an informant at Borić births in 1890, 1896 and 1899 and is possibly the same man as the Perković Mijo of image 345; not decided. Perhović, Horić, Đorić and Verković were not retested. What is NOT done, stated plainly: at readable zoom only images 84, 88, 127, 233, 305-318, 345 and 351-355 have been read; the rest of images 1-489 and the marriage book were read once at spread-fit zoom, at which the first pass missed one entry in about every three images it was checked against, and so are NOT proven exhausted for Kalanj, Borić or Perković. The 'walked' language in the entries above should be read as 'scanned at fit zoom'. Total on record in this file: 225 people. Four more from the near-miss images, same day: a Perković mother at image 126 (entry 37, Vuković Marko 1891, mother 'Perkonić' Ane, where the father's own surname is written 'Vukonić' on the same line - the plainest proof of the v-as-n glyph); a second Perković woman married into the Hofjevac family, Luce, mother of Hofjevac Bare 1898 at house 248 (image 416, entry 28, which the earlier log had called 'Perhonić, not Perković'); BORIĆ MIJO, 30 March 1888, son of Lojze Borić x Mesić Marica at Kamenica (image 14), probably the first child of the Alojz Borić household of Kamenica house 23; and Marija Borić, wife of Frane Vranić, mother of Vranić Ane 1888 at house 266 (image 17, entry 32), very probably the same couple as the 1891 'Jurajić Frane x Borić Marija' of image 137. Images 15-16, 18-20 and 127 were re-read and held nothing new; the Perkić witness (Perkić Mijo) turns up again as informant at images 20, 83, 88, 134 and 354 - at births of many unrelated families, so he is more likely a village figure than a kinsman, which weakens the earlier thought that he is tied to the Borić households. Still not done: 134's Jurajić Niko entry (mother's surname unread), 209, 219-222, 242, 357-368, 388-389, 417-420, 453-454, 465-466 and 475-477, where the log names near-miss surnames; and everything not named. Images 21 onward in the early part of the volume are single-page frames in the viewer and need a different zoom. Total on record in this file: 229 people.

5 October 2026, THE FULL READABLE-ZOOM RE-READ OF THE BIRTHS VOLUME BEGINS - images 10 to 77 done. The method changed: instead of the viewer, each page is rendered tile by tile from the film's own image tiles at a fixed scale (a whole page per screenshot, about a quarter of full scan resolution, every entry's parents, informants and margin legible), left page then right page, with a closer crop for any doubtful name. Result for 68 images (about 270 entries): 46 people the first pass had not recorded. Kalanj: Mile (Tome Kalanj x Marija Kalanj, Oct 1888, house 188, image 37); Ane (Viol Kalanj x Zoricic Kate, Nov 1888, house 188, image 42); Bare (Jerko Kalanj x Krnaric Ruze, Dec 1888, house 188, image 43); Marija Kalanj as mother of a Frohlich child (Jan 1889, image 46); and Kalanj informants - Franciska (image 26), Jure (image 35), Jerko twice (images 46, 75), Niko with Viktorija twice (images 46, 49), Tome (image 64). Boric: Mijo and Marija, children of Lojze Boric x Mesic at Kamenica 23 (1888, 1889; images 14, 49); Kate, daughter of Ivan Boric x Marija Boric at house 141 (image 42); Ane, daughter of Mijo Boric x Petrinic Marija (image 31); Boric mothers in Ovcaric (Lucane 36), Drazicevic (house 197), Radotic (house 139), Jurajic (house 286, probably the same couple as the 1888 'Vranic Frane x Boric Marija', image 17) and Krnaric (Jure x Marija Boric, house 208, 1889) households, plus Boric informants Stjepan, Luce, Niko and Marija. Perkovic: mothers in the Jurajic (Manole, image 52), Javor (Kate, image 65), Vukovic (Ane, a second child, image 67) and Komadina (Marija, image 76) households - four Perkovic women married out in 1889 alone. Three standing observations: (1) the same few informants recur across unrelated births (Perkic Mijo, Boric Stjepan), so informant lines are weak evidence of kinship; (2) house 188 holds three Kalanj households (Viol, Jerko, Tome) by the first months of the register; (3) the dialect form Lojze is Alojz. Doubtful, not recorded: image 19 entry 39 informant read 'Boric(?) Vjekoslav'; image 53 entry 32 mother read 'Boric(?) Kate' (first letter ambiguous). Still to do: images 78 onward (to 489) and the marriage book; images 10-77 are now the only part of the volume re-read at this level. Total on record in this file: 256 people.

5 October 2026, later - THE FULL RE-READ HAS REACHED IMAGE 143. Images 78 to 143 (about 270 more entries) added 33 more people and, for the first time, corrections to the first pass's own rows: (1) the 1890 'Ivo Borić, house 191' (image 106, entry 87) is BORIĆ VID of house 141, mother Matija Borić, so the Ivan Borić household of house 141 has two children (Kate 1888, Vid 1890); (2) 'Petar Borić, 15 October 1890' (image 113, entry 115) is 15 NOVEMBER; (3) 'Kalanj Kate, house 118' (image 116, entry 128) is house 188, so the 'third Kalanj house number' the row announced does not exist; (4) 'Jurajić Ivo' (image 137, entry 78) is JURAJ, which with two more entries makes one Jurajić Frane x Borić Marija household of three children (the 1888 'Vranić' is Jurajić); (5) the 1896 Jure Kalanj at house 249 belongs to a SECOND Jure Kalanj household (mother Vičić Ane, house 249, first child Mate, January 1890), not the house-231 one - and a THIRD Jure Kalanj household (wife Bionović Franjica, house 188, Marija 1890) shows the 1890 entries cannot be one man; (6) Luce Kalanj of house 231 exists as TWO identical entries (28 November and 28 December 1889, images 79 and 84). A WITHDRAWAL: my own row for 'Ane Borić, daughter of Mijo Borić and Petrinić Marija, house 125, 1888' (image 31, entry 88) is WITHDRAWN. At readable scale the surname is BENIĆ, not Borić; the house-125 family (Benić Mijo x Petrinić Marija 1888; Benić Jure x Čekonić Marija 1891, image 138; Benić Tome x Vičić Luce 1891, image 139) is a different surname and none of it is Borić. That makes 'Benić' a new near-miss to keep apart, and it means the first pass, and this pass's own reading at 0.62 scale, can still confuse Benić with Borić on a single stroke: every Borić row in the file that rests on one reading of a surname with a doubtful second letter should be checked against the clear 'Borić' forms (the 'r' with its loop) before it is trusted. Other new people, in brief: Kalanj Ivan 1891 (Niko Kalanj x Vučetić Marija, house 231 - the 1890 widow's marriage's first child), Dražičević Marija 1891 (mother Kalanj Ane), a second Kalanj Marija (Ferdo Kalanj x Krnarić Ruže, house 188, 1891), Kalanj informants Niko (with Marija, 1890) and Jure; Borić households Nikola x Radotić Ruže, Tome x Radotić Marija and Petar x Zoričić Ruže all at Kamenica 24, and Borić mothers in the Javor (house 83), Dražičević (house 179) and Radotić households; Perković mothers (Jurajić second child 1891, informant Perkonić Katija) and a margin-note Perković marriage for a Poznanović girl (image 98). The Javor Ivan x Borić Ane household explains why 'Javor Ivan i Ane' stand as informants at so many Borić births. Doubtful, not recorded: image 53 entry 32 (mother's first letter ambiguous). Still to do: images 144-489 and the marriage book. Total on record in this file: 279 people.

5 October 2026, later still - ITEM 1 OF THE BIRTHS VOLUME IS FULLY RE-READ (images 10-194). Images 144 to 194 added 26 more people, bringing the file to 305. Most are Borić mothers and informants (Ovčarić at Lučane 36, Petrinić 57, Mesić at Kamenica 15, Bićanić at 179, Krnarić 208), a Borić Marica at Kamenica 28 (Stjepan x Vučetić Ane, 1892), Borić Ivan, third child of Lojze Borić x Mesić Manole at Kamenica 23 (18 December 1892, image 193), Kalanj Marija (Ferdo x Krnarić Ruže, house 188, 1892) and a Perković wife of Jure Hofjevac. One conflict was flagged here and has since been resolved (5 October 2026): image 193, entry 131 records Ane Kalanj, daughter of Mijo Kalanj and Krnarić Manole of house 249, in December 1892, and the first pass had dated the marriage of Mijo Kalanj and Krnarić Manoš (image 566) to 1893. At readable zoom the marriage is 15 February 1892, so the child was born ten months after the wedding. Images 1-9 are film-roll, blank, test-target and title cards with no register entries (checked image by image 1-6 on 5 October; 2-9 in the earlier tile test). Still to do: item 2 (images 198-400), item 3 (401-489) and the marriage book (493-690) at readable zoom. Total on record in this file: 305 people.

5 October 2026, later - SECOND BIRTHS BOOK (1893-1897), IMAGES 198-276 RE-READ. Item 2 is a different kind of book from item 1: a printed form, two entries to the page, in a far clearer hand, so each page is readable at the first zoom step. The re-read of images 198 to 276 (about 330 entries, 1 January to 6 December 1894 and the end of 1893) added 26 more rows (331 people on record) and, more importantly, showed that the first pass's own rows for this book carry misread months and one misread mother: Kate Borić (image 201) is born 12 JANUARY, not 18 February, and her mother is Radotić Bare, which removes the 'second wife' puzzle the old row raised; Stjepan Borić (image 203) is 22 JANUARY, not 20 August; Nikola Perković of Križpolje (image 233) is 19 NOVEMBER, not October; Anica Kalanj (image 235) is 21 NOVEMBER, not August; the 'Ove Kalanj' of house 231 (image 259) is 14 AUGUST, not February, and is Ane; the 1893 Javor child with a Borić mother (image 239) was filed as a mere witness and is in fact the child of Javor Ivan and Borić Kate; and the Lučane birth of Marinčić Manole (image 275) has a KALANJ mother, Marija, which the first pass had read as Šakić and said was not Kalanj. New Kalanj finds: Kalanj Ane, house 249, Vučetić mother (image 237); Dražičević Joso, mother Kalanj Ane (image 208); Mesić Luce, mother Kalanj Marija (image 226); Krnarić Vid, house 176, mother written Krznarić but probably the Kalanj Ane of the earlier entries, informants Kalanj Mate and Luce (image 235); Fröhlich Jure, mother Kalanj Marija (image 256); Marinčić Manole (image 275); and Kalanj informants at six births. New Borić finds: Dražičević Kate, mother Borić Manole (image 230); Jurajić Bare, mother Borić Marija (image 220); Borić Marko, son of Niko and a Marija of an unread surname, house 148 (image 266); Borić informants at seven births. New Perković finds: Kalafatić Ane (mother Perkonić Manole, image 220), Vuković Ane and Vuković Stjepan (mother Perkonić Ane, house 166, images 210 and 253), Vuković Juraj (mother Perkonić Bare, image 238), Jurajić Bare-Ane (mother Perkonić Mare, image 255), Hofjevac Manole (mother Perkonić Kate, image 264). Two reading notes: (1) the father of the Javor Ivan x Borić Ane household (house 83, image 224) is entered as a 'mežnjar', which I read as sexton; if so, that is why 'Javor Ivan i Ane' stand as informants at so many unrelated births, and their presence is weak evidence of kinship; (2) a mother's name written 'Manda-Marija' (image 244) confirms that Manda and Marija are one name. Flagged, not settled: a second Javor Ivan household with a Borić wife (Kate, house 82-88, December 1893) three months after the Javor Ivan x Borić Ane birth (house 83, September 1893); two Jurajić households at house 296 each with a baby Bare. Images 1-9 of item 1 are film-roll, blank, test-target and title cards. Still to do: images 277-400 (rest of item 2), item 3 (401-489) and the marriage book (493-690) at readable zoom. Total on record in this file: 331 people.

5 October 2026, later - SECOND BIRTHS BOOK RE-READ TO IMAGE 336 (1 January 1895 to 30 April 1896 now covered). Images 277 to 336 (about 360 entries) added 19 more rows (350 people on record). Kalanj: twin boys Ivan and Viol, born 22 February 1896 to Kalanj Viol x Zoričić Kate of house 188 (image 330, entries 28 and 29) - the first 1896 birth the file had for that household; Kalanj Manole, daughter of Kalanj Tome x MESIĆ Marija, house 188 (image 286; the 1891 row had read the mother as 'Nesić'); Kalanj Marica, daughter of Ferole Kalanj x Krnarić Ruže, house 188 (image 290); Dražičević Stjepan, mother Kalanj Ane, house 196 (image 312); Kalanj informants Jure Fröhlich and Marija (a Kalanj wife) at the birth of Kalanj Manole (image 281) and Mile Kalanj and Luce at a Plašćica birth (image 324). Borić: Borić Marija, daughter of Vijo Borić x Sertić Ane, house 186 (image 284); Borić Bare, daughter of Ive Borić x Marica Vuković (written Ngaskonić), house 136, who married a Tomaš in 1917 and died in Zagreb in 1967 (image 320); Mesić Viol, mother Borić Kate (image 327); Sertić Mijo, mother Borić Luce, informants Borić Jure and Matija (image 303); Javor Marica, mother Borić Ane (image 286); and Borić informants at five more births, among them Grgo Borić a third time at the Milaković house 74 (image 335). Perković: Bara Perković, wife of Marko Vuković (Vuković Juraj, image 238); Perković women in the Hofjevac, Jurajić, Javor and Vuković households. Two corrections to the first pass: the Sertić Stjepan of house 128 (image 313) is born 11 OCTOBER, not November; the 'Ana Borić' of house 126 (image 278) is KATE. An open contradiction: the Javor Ivan of house 83 has a Borić wife Ane in 1891, 1893 and March 1895, a Borić wife Kate in December 1893 (house 82-88) and a ŽUPANČIĆ wife Kate in September 1895 (image 310): either a widower remarried within six months, or there are two Javor Ivans, or a mother is misread; the marriage book is the place to settle it. Also seen, not recorded: Papić informants (Milan and Marija) at Sertić Milan Ivan-Tomo's birth, house 127, 1896 (image 327), which belongs to another family line of this archive. Still to do: images 337-400 (rest of item 2, May 1896 on), item 3 (401-489) and the marriage book (493-690). Total on record in this file: 350 people.

5 October 2026, later - IMAGES 337-350 (May to September 1896) RE-READ: 6 more rows, 356 people on record. Kalanj Marko (Jure Kalanj x Bionović Franjica, house 188, 16 May 1896); Krnarić Marko (Viol Krnarić x Kalanj Ane, house 176, 17 July 1896) with Kalanj Mate and a Manole as informants; Marinčić Marija (Ivan Marinčić x Kalanj Marija, Lučane 24, 5 September 1896); Borić Kate (Niko Borić x Boležić Marija, house 142, 28 June 1896, whose margin says she married a man read as Borić Tomo in 1916 and died at Ivanić-Grad in 1989); Kalanj Marija as informant at a Hofjevac birth; and a correction to the first-pass Hofjevac Luka row (3 August, not 31 August; informants Perkić Mijo, not Hofjevac). Still to do: images 351-400 (351-355 had an earlier readable pass), item 3 (401-489) and the marriage book (493-690).

5 October 2026, later - THE SECOND BIRTHS BOOK (1893-1897, item 2) IS FULLY RE-READ AT READABLE ZOOM: images 198-400. Images 351-399 (October 1896 to November 1897) added 25 more rows, 381 people on record in all. Kalanj: Kalanj Marko (Jure Kalanj x Vučetić Ane, house 249, 9 November 1897, image 398); Kalanj Jure (Jure Kalanj x Vučetić MANOLE, house 231, 19 September 1897, image 388, informants 'Borić Lojze i Vučetić Marija'); Kalanj Kate (Mijo Kalanj x Manole Krnarić, house 249, 3 June 1897, image 374, who married in 1924 and died in 1982); Kalanj Mijo (Ferdo Kalanj x Krnarić Ruže, house 188, 18 July 1897, image 378); Fröhlich Rosika (mother Kalanj Marija, image 368); Marinčić Marija (Kalanj mother, Lučane, image 349); Krnarić Marko (mother Kalanj Ane, image 343); Kalanj informants Niko Kalanj and Manole, Jure Kalanj and Franjica, Mile Kalanj and Luce. Borić: Borić informants Jure and Matija at three births (Sertić Mijo 1895, Sertić Matija and Benić Jure 1897); Borić Lojze and Marija Vučetić (Kalanj Jure); Borić Ivo and Bare at the Škorup house 124 (a fifth Borić informant at that one house); Hofjevac Mile (mother Borić Marija, image 358); Dražičević Niko (mother Borić Manole, image 365); Javor Luce-Mila (mother Borić Ane, December 1896, image 363); Borić Niko and Jela at Mesić Ane (image 398). Perković: Kalafatić Marko (Perkonić Manole, image 395); Jurajić Ivan (Perkonić Manole, image 378). Cross-checks the first pass could not make: (1) THE JAVOR IVAN QUESTION is now a three-household problem - Javor Ivan x Borić Ane (house 83, children 1891-1896), Javor Ive/Ivan x Župančić Kate (houses 82-83, 1895 and 1897) and Javor Ivan x Mačkonić Ane (house 123, 1897) - plus a Javor Joso x Vranić Marija at house 83 (1897); (2) the two Hofjevac households with a Kate (Perković, house 148; Hofjevac, house 165) cannot be one mother (a birth in August and November 1896); (3) Borić Marko / Borić Kate (Niko Borić x Boležić Marija, house 148/142) are a Borić household with a mother of an unread surname beside the Kamenica Borić households; (4) the 'Ana Borić' of house 126 is Kate and the 'Alojz Borić, circa 1895' is 22 May 1896. The book ends at printed page 399 (entry 139); a loose upside-down page (entries 140-141), a back cover, an END OF ITEM card and a title card for item 2 follow at images 399-400. Still to do: item 3 (images 401-489, births 1898-1900 as read) and the marriage book (493-690) at readable zoom, then the Javor, Hofjevac and Perković household questions against the marriage book. Total on record in this file: 381 people. THE THIRD BIRTHS BOOK (item 3, images 404-489; images 401-403 are the item title and camera-target cards) IS NOW FULLY RE-READ AT READABLE ZOOM (5 October 2026), entry by entry, to the END OF ITEM card at image 489: 33 people added, 414 in all. The first-pass Kalanj rows held (Jerko Kalanj x Krnarić Ruže, house 188; Mijo Kalanj x Krnarić Manole, house 249; the Kalanj witnesses at houses 249 and 228); one first-pass mother was corrected (Mesić Stipo's wife is Matija, not Marija, Kamenica 20, 1899); a new Perković mother was found (Jurajić Kate, house 286, 25 November 1899, mother written Perkonić Manole); Perkić was kept distinct from Perković; the Javor households are now at least four. Still to do: the marriage book (493-690) at readable zoom. THE MARRIAGE BOOK (493-690) IS BEING RE-READ AT READABLE ZOOM, ONE PAGE AT A TIME (6 October 2026): pages 1-159, images 493-572, entries of 1888 to 6 November 1892, are done (432 people on record). The book is one marriage per printed page; image N shows pages 2(N-493) and 2(N-493)+1, and the numbering restarts at 1 each January, which is how the year is fixed where the last digit (2 and 3) cannot be told apart. What the re-read settled: the Javor Ivan of house 83 who married Borić Ove (15 September 1890, image 534) is the SON of the widower Javor Ivan (b. about 1818) who remarried on 18 November 1888 (image 504), so the 'Javor Ivan' contradiction of the births is two men, father and son; the Niko Borić of house 142 who married on 24 November 1890 (image 538) is the son of a Niko Borić and a Marija, and the 1892 Hofjevac bride Marija Borić (image 564) is his sister; Mijo Kalanj married Krnarić Manole on 15 FEBRUARY 1892, not 1893 (image 566), which removes the contradiction with the birth of Ane Kalanj in December 1892, and he and Jure Kalanj of house 249 (married 19 November 1888, image 505) are sons of the same 'Kalanj Lju-' and Ruže; the Jure Kalanj of house 231 married Vučetić Manole on 13 August 1888 (image 499), a son of Vid Kalanj, and is not the Niko (son of Juro and Ana) of the same house who married the widow Marija Dražanović, née Vučetić (16 February 1890, image 530); Kalanj Marija of house 231, daughter of Kalanj Joso and Ruže, married Ivan Marinčić of Lučane (24 January 1892, image 563). Perković: Perhonić Manole of house 115 married Kalafatić Mijo (19 January 1891, image 543) - 'Perhonić' is written with an h in the marriage clerk's hand and is Perković; Perhonić/Perkonić Niko stands witness in 1889 and 1892. 'Perlić' (Perlić Marko 1891, Perlić Mijo 1892, both of house 101) is a separate name. Corrections to first-pass rows: Niko Kalanj's wife is the widow Marija Dražanović née Vučetić, age 48 not 40, February not 'illegible'; Vid Borić married Sertić Kate (not 'Šorić'), 27 April 1890; 'Miko' Borić is Niko Borić, 30 October 1890, son of Vid and Stoja. LATER, 6 OCTOBER 2026: pages 160-305 (images 573-645) are also re-read at readable zoom (448 people on record); the findings are in the people rows, and the main ones are: 'Perkić' of the births is probably the Perlić of house 101 (Marija Perlić married Vranić Jure on 13 February 1893), Perhonić Bare (b. about 1870, house 115) married Vuković Marko on 6 February 1893 (sister of Manole, who married Kalafatić Mijo in 1891), the Javor Ivan x Župančić Kate household belongs to a THIRD Javor Ivan (b. house 82, son of Javor Ivan and Ove), the Lohmer births of 1899 with a Javor mother are explained by two Javor sisters (Ruže 1893 and Ove 1895) of house 95 married to two Lohmer brothers, and house 126 held two Borić couples (Ive and Mare; Vid and Marija). Zoričić Pave (b. house 72) married the widow Kate Borić, daughter of Borić Vid and Marija of house 142, on 28 September 1896 as a WIDOWER, so the 'Kate Perković' (1891) and 'Kate Borić' (1897) wives of Pave Zoričić are two successive wives, not one woman read two ways. Still to do: marriage pages 306-end (images 646-690) and the final tally. FINAL STATE, 6 OCTOBER 2026: THE WHOLE VOLUME IS NOW RE-READ AT READABLE ZOOM. The marriage book (images 493-688, 40 marriages a year to 1899 on one printed page each, the last on page 391, 31 December 1899) was read page by page; 461 people are on record in this file (the births 414 + 47 more from the marriage book and its corrections). The six Kalanj marriages of the book are Jure (13 August 1888, house 231, son of Vid), Jure (19 November 1888, house 249, son of 'Lju-' and Ruže), Tome (19 November 1888, house 188, son of Ive and Manole, married Bublić Marta of Plašćica 5), Niko (16 February 1890, house 231, son of Juro and Ana, married the widow Marija Dražanović née Vučetić), Marija (24 January 1892, house 231, daughter of Joso and Ruže, married Marinčić Ivan of Lučane) and Mijo (15 February 1892, house 249, widower, married Krnarić Manole); no Kalanj bridegroom or bride is in the book from 1893 to 1899. The Perković marriages and witnesses are Manole (19 January 1891) and Bare (6 February 1893), daughters of Perhonić Jozo and Marija of house 115, the Novi Kut/Križpolje line Pere - Marko (25 August 1895) - Niko (8 November 1897) and Petar (8 November 1899), Marija Javor née Perhonić (father Duka/Luka, 1895) and witnesses Niko (1889, 1892), Jozo (1892), Jure (1894), Kate (1896) and Vid (1898). What this settled that the births could not: two Javor Ivans of house 83 are father and son and a third Javor Ivan (house 82, wife Župančić Kate) is separate; the Javor family of house 76/90/95 (Stjepan and Marija: Marija, Ane, Luka, Mijo, Stipa, Ruže) and house 95 (Tome and Manole: Ruže, Ove) are two sibships; 'Perkić' is the Perlić of house 101, not Perković; the Pave Zoričić wives Perković Kate (1891) and Borić Kate (1897) are two successive wives; house 126 held two Borić couples (Ive and Mare; Vid and Marija); Mijo Kalanj's wedding is February 1892. What it did NOT settle: how any of the Brinje Kalanj, Perković or Borić households connect to Josephus Kalanj of Klenovica or to anyone in the tree; the next volume to open for that is the Umrli (deaths). The register is now exhausted for these three surnames at the level of the two Rođeni and Vjenčani books as filmed. The Umrli (deaths) volume of the same film family was then read on 6 October 2026: see the row fs/brinje-umrli (47 Kalanj and Borić deaths, no Perković).

All 94 openings of this volume have now been read — images 58–94 on 27 September and images 1–57 on the 28th — with the groom's and the bride's surname columns cropped from each and tiled five and six to a sheet.

ANTON 1834 AND PETRUS 1836 DO NOT MARRY IN THIS PARISH. Johann's two sons by Lucia Labornik are not in the volume that covers their twenties and thirties. Neither is in any death register this archive has walked either, so they left, and that is now a walked negative across both books rather than an absence of looking.

But the volume held the entry this archive most wanted, five openings from the end. Book page 54, 28 May 1873:

Ženin: Zgornje Bitno 72 · MARTIN BRENK, gost · 48 · vdovec
Nevesta: Zgornje Bitno 9 · URŠULA SEDEJ, po ranjcim možu KOZINA, POSESTNICA · 46 · vdova
Roditelja nevestina: ANDREJ SEDEJ, GRUNTAR NA NOVI OSLICI, in JERA ROJE
Roditelja ženinova: Anton Brenk, gruntar, in Maria Ravnikar · priči Janez Bašar and Lorenc Brenk, both signing with a cross

Johann Kozina's widow, remarrying five years after he died — and the entry gives four things the archive had none of. Her age: 46 in 1873, so born about 1826–27. Her parents: Andrej Sedej and Jera Roje, a generation nobody had reached. Where she came from: her father is a gruntar na Novi Oslici — Nova Oselica, in the Poljane valley south-west of Škofja Loka, twenty-five kilometres away and in another parish. And what she had become: posestnica — a property owner — at Zgornje Bitno 9, the house Johann had held as a Häubler.

It also settles a contradiction this archive had flagged and could not explain. At her daughter Mina's marriage in 1883 the bride is «gruntarska hči» and Janez Kozina «gruntar», against every other record of a man who was a kajžar all his life. Her father was a gruntar and she was a posestnica. The household had risen, and the 1883 clerk wrote what it had become.

And it confirms an inference made the same day from a negative. The 1816–1855 volume was walked for Johann's second marriage and gave nothing, from which this archive concluded she came from outside the parish — on the rule that a marriage is celebrated in the bride's. The conclusion was right, and this entry names the place.

ALL 174 PAGES READ. NINE KOZINA DEATHS. THE INDEX LISTS TWO.

MARIA DORTSCHEN. Auszüglerin is the female of the Ausnehmer this register calls Franz at his own death in the same house eight years later. Aged 60 → born about 1781, against the 20 she gave at her marriage in 1800. She died 11 April 1841 and Martin was born in that house on 16 November 1841 — Gertraud was carrying him when her mother died.

JOHANN. Dead 10 October 1868 at Zgornje Bitno 9, aged 64, still a Häubler — the word he married under thirty-five years earlier, in the same house.

AND THE TWO SISTERS. Maria, baptised 6 December 1818, died 6 January 1868 aged 49 — she had turned 49 one month before, so the age is exact. Ledige Inwohnerin: never married, a lodger in the house she was born in. Gertraud died there in 1880, also unmarried, also a lodger — neomožena gostja. Two sisters who never married and never left, and one of them had borne Martin there in 1841.

SEVEN OF THE NINE DIED AT NUMBER 9, and Gertraud in the next volume makes eight.

The question was one column of one row. This archive had recorded Johann Kozina's child of 1853 by Ursula Sedej as a Franz, and the death register had a FRANZISKA KOZINA, weiblich, dead of measles at Oberfeichting 9 on 7 March 1864 aged 11 — born about 1853. Two children, or one read as a man?

The index (sig. 04632, image 246) gives «213 — Kozina — 130» under 1853, the given name written short and readable either way. The register (sig. 00886, book p. 130 = image 131) settles it: 19 September 1853 · Obr. Feichting · house 9 · FRANCISCA · ehelich, father Johann Kozina, Hüblar, mother Ursula Sedej, godparents Johann Pevc and Marina Dolenc — and the stroke stands in the MÄDCHEN column, with a dot in Knaben. Read at 8×, then checked again by cropping the tick columns from the printed heading down to her line so the mark is placed by the column above it and not by eye. One child. There is no Franz.

And then the count. While the index was open the whole K section was read through — entry 1 to entry 369, 1832 to 1870, four name columns on image 246 and three on image 247, at 3.4× — because this archive had said the volume held five Kozina baptisms, all opened. It holds six:

Maria 1859 was new. Page 159 was opened: born and baptised 7 August 1859, Oberfeichting 9, Mädchen, ehelich, father Johann Kozina, Hüblar, mother Ursula Sedej. A sixth child for Johann and a third for Ursula, found by counting rather than by searching.

What it did not give. No Joseph. The Joseph Kozina who died at two at that house in March 1843 — born about 1841 — is not in this index at all. Either he was baptised outside the parish or this index missed him, as the death index for the same parish missed nine. An index proves what it contains and never what it omits.

And «Ana 1856» was opened too, because a row of that table had been carried on an index line and nothing else. Book p. 144: born and baptised 25 July 1856, Oberfeichting 9, Mädchen, ehelich, father Johann Kozina, Hüblar, mother Ursula Sedej. Every one of the six is now read at the page. Johann and Ursula had three daughters in six years — Franziska 1853, Anna 1856, Maria 1859 — and he was about sixty-one at the last of them.

A date is not read off the line it sits on. When this page was first walked, Ursula Kosina's entry gave a day — 28 gestorben, 30 begraben — and nothing else, because the month heading sits above it in the same column. The row was published as «the 28th of a month in 1845 or 1846», which is honest and is not a date.

Read from the head of the page down, it is 28 March 1845. The printed year on the column is 1845. The month headings run Jänner (29th), Februar (26th), März (2nd) — and from there the days run 2, 4, 6, 12, 13, 16, 18, 18, 25, 28, 30 with no further heading, the last of them buried «1. April». Hers is the 28th, inside March; buried the 30th.

And the page gave something nobody had asked it for. At ten times magnification the word under her name is ABNEHMERIN — the female of Abnehmer, and the same institution this register means by the Ausnehmer it calls Franz Kosinar at his death in 1849 and the Auszüglerin it calls Maria Dortschen at hers in 1841: a householder who has handed the house over and lives on the portion reserved out of it. She had held Oberfeichting 13 and given it up. The third Kosina house in that village was hers, and she was not a lodger in anyone's.

Full entry: «1845, März · 28. gestorben, 30. begraben · Ob. Feichting · 13 · URSCHULA KOSINA, Abnehmerin · katholisch · weiblich · ALTER 85 · Altersschwäche · versehen · idem». Born about 1760. The letter-tabbed index for 1836–1869 does not list her — she is one of the nine Kozina that walk turned up and it missed.

One of the two was there all along. The index (sig. 04631, image 169) lists «Kosina Dorothea — 8» and «Kosina Marianna — 16» under 1813. This archive opened both pages, read the father column of each at 2.4×, and published that there is no Kosina on either. Re-read at 9×, page 16 gives one plainly:

12 August 1813 · Haus 27 · MARIANNA · katholisch · weiblich · ehelich
Vater: LUKAS KOSINER, Kaischler · Mutter: LUZIA O[k]lin[t]sh

Two and a half times was not enough for that hand. A column that has been looked at is not a column that has been read.

And it gives Lukas Kosina a household. The same man — read for a week as the unreadable «Lukas Ko[s]in…» of the 1818 Gertraud — appears on book p. 72 as «Lukas KOSINER, Kaischler», at «Lemny» house 12, with a wife also called Luzia. Two daughters, five years apart, one father, one wife's given name.

And the 1813 Marianna is almost certainly the woman who died at Breg 12 on 10 January 1840 — Keuschlerstochter, aged 26, unmarried, of Abzehrung. Baptised 12 August 1813 she was twenty-six and five months that day, and Keuschler is the word her father carries at her baptism. Not proved: the 1813 page gives a house number and no village, so nothing on it says Breg.

And then the same mistake again, an hour later. Page 8 was re-read at 3.2×, two Dorotheas were found — house 28 to Primus Wit[nitz], house 18 to Johann Holz — and this register recorded that page 8 still has no Kosina. There are three Dorotheas on page 8. Read at 8×, the whole father column gives the third:

6. [Hornung 1813] · 12 · DOROTHEA · ehelich
Vater: ANTON KOSINER recte KATZIN, Inwohner · Mutter: MARGARETH ZUBERTH

Both index entries are accounted for, and neither child belongs to Franz Kosinar's line.

And Anton's entry is a warning for every index line this archive has counted. Recte marks the legal surname against the name a family is called by — so the household's name is KATZIN and KOSINER is the by-name, almost certainly the house's. A Kosina in an index is not always a Kosina in a family. The reverse reading is not ruled out; recte is written plainly and the direction is the standard one. He is an Inwohner — a lodger — at house 12, the number Lukas Kosina's household carries in 1818.

Neither volume has an index, so both were walked — the groom's and the bride's surname columns cropped out of every opening and tiled five openings to a sheet, the method that made 174 pages of the death register a single evening's work.

sig. 03918 (1856–1881): images 58–94, which the year cells place at 1874 onward — the earliest either daughter could marry. No Kozina, as bride or groom.

sig. 03919 (1881–1899): found on book page 14.

Ženin: Stražiše 120 · KANCIJAN ČESEN, kajžarski sin · 32 · svoboden
Nevesta: Kolodvor v Podnartu 12, rojena v Zgornjem Bitnju št. 9 · MINA KOZINA, gruntarska hči · 23 · svobodna
Roditelja nevestina: JANEZ KOZINA, gruntar, in URŠA SEDEJ · Roditelja ženinova: Matevž Česen, kajžar, in Urša Peternel
Priči: Franc Sušnik, hišar, and Jošt Trebar, gostač, both signing with a cross · poročil Gregor Slibar

Born at Zgornje Bitnje number 9 — Franz Kosinar's house. Janez Kozina and Urša Sedej are Johann Kozina and Ursula Sedej. She is twenty-three, and the Maria baptised at that house on 7 August 1859 — found the same morning by counting the baptismal index — was twenty-three and ten months that summer.

So two rows of found.psv are one woman. The «Marija Kozina» this archive had carried as UNPLACED — the only Kozina it found in twenty-five years of the 1890–1911 death register, known there only as the mother of two children who died at Stražišče 84 in 1892 and 1893 — is Johann's youngest daughter. This row's own prediction was that her marriage would settle it. It did.

Two things in the entry do not sit right and are recorded as read. The date cell says «2. junija», but the documents it cites are dated 17 June, 21 June (the imperial-royal court at Kranj declaring the under-age bride of full age, no. 3708) and 1 July — so the marriage is 2 July 1883 and the month is a slip, which the entry below it repeats. And gruntar is the wrong word for Johann, who is a Häubler or kajžar at his wedding, at every baptism and at his death.

The walk was then finished — all seventy-one openings of sig. 03919 — and it gave three more things.

1. ANNA DID NOT MARRY IN THIS PARISH. There are three Kozina brides in those twenty-five years and none of them is her: Mina in 1883, Franciška in 1897 and Marija in 1898. With sig. 03918 read from 1874, that is a walked negative rather than an absence of looking.

2. AND IT DATES MINA'S DEATH WITHOUT FINDING IT. Eleven openings on, at book p. 55: «1896, 10. februarja · STRAŽIŠČE 84 · KANCIJAN ČESEN, hišar, VDOVEC, roj. 1. avgusta 1851, 44 let» marrying Franciška Tomaževič. He is a widower, at the house her children died in. So Marija Kozina died between 1893 and 10 February 1896, aged 33 to 36.

And it explains why the archive could not find her death. The 1890–1911 register was walked looking for KOZINA. A married woman is entered under her husband's name: she is in that book as MARIJA ČESEN. The walk was right and the query was wrong.

3. TWO KOZINA FARMING HOUSEHOLDS nobody knew about. Jožef Kozina, ½ zemljak, × Mina Kodran — his daughter Franciška married Ignacij Kert in 1897 on his written consent. Urban Kozina, kmet — his daughter Marija married Anton Žiherl in 1898, and that one entry carries four Kozina: the bride, her father, a Janez Kozina as witness (gruntarjev sin), and the groom's own dead mother Marijana Kozina. None is joined to Johann's cottage at Zgornje Bitnje 9 by anything but the surname and the parish — except that Johann's own daughter is entered gruntarska hči in 1883, which this archive cannot explain.

The first keyed API this archive has had. The account holder was given a Trove key on 27 September 2026, valid to December 2026. It is kept in sources/keys/, which .gitignore excludes entire, because this repository is public and publishes to GitHub Pages — a key in a tracked file is a key on the open web inside two minutes.

The method has two halves and neither does the other's job. The API enumerates: one request returns every candidate across a continent and a century with its date, newspaper, page, heading and a direct link. With this key it returns no article text at all — include=articletext and reclevel=full were both tried, on /v3/result and on /v3/newspaper/<id>, and both give an empty field. So the OCR comes from the free public page, https://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article<id>, which needs no login. tools/trove.py does both.

And the search is fuzzy, so the total is not a finding. Trove reports 9,263 newspaper hits for Zubrinich, 8,790 of them in South Australia, and the national list opens with an 1888 Sydney advertising column and an 1893 pony-race card that contain no such name. Quoting does not restrict it. Taking South Australia oldest-first and fetching each page, 36 of the first 40 really do contain the string — so the tool prints the two numbers separately.

What it gave, verified article by article:

Read the first three together and they are a life. A man lands about 1884 with nothing; by 1893 he holds a working man's block; by 1897 the council describes a stretch of road by his name; in 1900 he is in the dock because a child has had trachoma for eighteen months and a daughter speaks for the family; by 1911 he is a pioneer at a reunion dinner. Everything this archive had about them before was an index entry.

28 September — the sweep widened, and the count is now a data file rather than a sentence. sources/trove.psv holds 20 verified articles, 1893–1926, one line each, and the page counts its rows. The 9,263 stays here, where it is context.

New South Wales, which had not been queried at all: 23 of the first 24 verified. It is Broken Hill, and it is the Barrier Miner: M. Zubrinich and «Weedie» Zubrinich playing for Solomontown in 1922, and L. J. Zubrinich signing the football and cricket socials at Waverley Hall as honorary secretary. A nickname, which no register ever gives.

And the other spellings turn out not to be spellings. Xubrinich (13 hits) and Zubrinick (52) were run in full and are every one of them Port Pirie or Crystal Brook between 1922 and 1938 — and a single paragraph of The Register for 13 October 1925 carries «Mrs. M. ZubrinIck» and «Mrs. Zubrlnich» three words apart. They are the scanner, not the family. That matters because this archive has built an argument on three alphabets, in which X is the Venetian convention — true of the 1834 Otočac register, and not true of a twentieth-century Australian newspaper. The two must not be counted together.

The other eight surnames were probed and none is worth a sweep on these numbers alone: Kosina 1,923, Prpić 991, Papić 676, Blažević 418, Šestan 244, Kalanj 123 — all fuzzy, all unfiltered by given name, and none with a known Australian branch to anchor them. Žubrinić is the one surname here with an Australian family to find, which is why it got the sweep.

28 September, later — Family Notices, a separate and much cleaner Trove category. Run against it alone: 231 hits, and 50 of the first 50 fetched genuinely contain the name — a hit rate the general search never approaches, because a family notice says a surname once and means it.

And it names four people this archive's tree does not have, married to three it already does. Michael Valentine, John Stephen and Leonard Francis Zubrinić — all three long carried with exact MyHeritage-sourced dates and no spouse recorded at all — turn out to have married Minnie Doris (d. 1932, aged 35, after they had already lost an infant son, Leonard John, in 1919), Irene Dorothy Patten (m. 1928, Whyalla), and Asta Louise Hudson (m. 1936, Adelaide; their son Daryl Francis confirms it in 1939). None of the four is in people.json under any name.

And it corroborates, to the day, where the tree already speaks. Kate Zubrinić's death — 23 January 1927, Quorn — matches the tree exactly, and an In Memoriam names the manner: accidentally killed, which no tree field carries. John Žubrinić's death, 15 December 1930, Port Pirie, matches independently too.

Four new found.psv rows, all cited to the specific notice. trove.psv is now 32 verified articles.

28 September, later still — New South Wales run at the Family Notices level for the first time. 29 hits, 28 of 29 fetched genuinely contain the name, all of them Broken Hill.

Leonard James Zubrinić (1894–1985) — the WWI Staff-Sergeant Farrier found in the first South Australian sweep — had a birth at Port Pirie and a death at Broken Hill in the tree, and nothing in between. Family Notices, read across three decades and three addresses, fills the gap: wife Eva Uhe (her mother Frances Eveline Uhe died 1944), and three daughters — Elaine May (m. Alfred Verdun Paynter, 1943), Shirley (m. John Reed, 1946), Irene «Dawn» (m. Edward John McAvaney, 1948; grandson John Rex McAvaney, b. 1949). Four new found.psv rows.

And one lead flagged, not asserted. A 1917 In Memoriam names «Kate and Jack Zubrinich» as daughter and son-in-law of a Stephen Murphy. John William Zubrinich (1885–1953) is in this tree married to Catherine Lucy Murphy. Kate/Catherine and Jack/John are ordinary equivalents and the surname is exact — but nothing read reconciles the dates or places, so this is recorded as open rather than concluded.

trove.psv is now 39 verified articles.

GERTRAUD KOSINA'S DEATH — Martin's mother, and the woman this archive had one record in the world for. 337 openings across the two volumes, and exactly one Kozina death in either.

«5. — 7. [Marec 1880] · Zg. Bitno · 9 · JERA KOZINA, neomožena gostja · katolik · ženski · ALTER 65 let · božjast in jetika · M. Žarnik» — book p.69 of sig. 03916.

Jera is the Slovene for Gertruda. Baptised 18 March 1814, dead 5 March 1880 — thirteen days short of sixty-six, so the age is exact and not rounded. Neomožena: never married, which the unehelich on Martin's baptism had said thirty-nine years earlier. Gostja: a lodger. Zgornje Bitno 9 is Oberfeichting 9 — her father's house in 1820, her brother's from 1833, where her father died in 1849, and where she bore Martin in 1841. She died in it.

AND IT CORRECTED THIS ARCHIVE TWO HOURS AFTER PUBLICATION. Earlier the same day this site said Gertraud left the parish, reasoning that her son's Senj marriage of January 1888 carries no dagger against her name. She had been dead eight years. An absent mark is not a record.

A SECOND INDEX IS DEMONSTRABLY INCOMPLETE. Johann was alive in 1856 and is in neither post-1869 register, so he died 1857–69 — and the 1836–1869 index does not list him. It holds two Kozina and should hold at least three. That index is the only authority for saying Maria Dortschen is not in those years, and it is not good enough for it.

Also read in the same sitting: the whole K section of the 1812–1835 death index, which gave five more people and turned Matthäus from Franz's possible father into his brother; and «Kosina Maria — 84», which is Franz and Maria's sixth child, baptised 6 December 1818 and named for the daughter who died in March 1816.

SHE IS NOT ON PAGE 34. TWO OTHER WOMEN OF HER NAME ARE — and the index carries two «Kozina Maria — 34» lines, one directly under the other, which the first reading had missed.

«Den 27 [Februar 1816] · Z[ubern] · 4 · MARIA KOZINAR, Häubl. · weiblich · ALTER 78 Jahre · Altersschwäche» — born about 1738, a generation above Franz.

«Den 31 [März 1816] · Oberfeichting · 9 · MARIA KOZINAR, Häubl. · weiblich · ALTER 3/4 Jahr · Fraiß» — and this one is Maria Dortschen's own daughter: the baptismal index gives «Kosina Maria — 44» for 1815 and book p.44 reads «den 8ten August 1815 · Haus 10 · MARIA · ehelich · Vater: FRANZ KOSINAR, Häubler · Mutter: MARIA DORTSCHEN». Maria Dortschen was 36 in 1816.

THEN THE WHOLE K SECTION WAS READ, AND IT GAVE FIVE MORE PEOPLE. Six Kozina in the death index 1812–1835 (images 125–126, the women of 1812–1822 in a Dostavek appendix at the back, not in the main run): Elisabeth 1813 p.6 · the two Marias 1816 p.34 · Matthäus 1819 p.64 · Valentin 1820 p.72 · Margareth 1826, indexed p.132 and actually on p.130 — the one place this index is wrong.

MATTHÄUS WAS FRANZ'S BROTHER, NOT HIS FATHER. «1819, den 16ten April · Ober-Feichting · 14 · MATTHÄUS KOSINA · Keischler · ALTER 45 · Rothlauf und Brand». 45 in 1819 is born about 1774; Franz was born 1775–76. He was twenty-six when he stood witness in 1800 and signed with a cross.

FRANZ HELD OBERFEICHTING 9 HIMSELF. Valentin's baptism, book p.108: «Den 15ten Hornung 1820 · Ober-Feichting · 9 · VALENTIN · ehelich · Vater: FRANZ KOSINA, HÄUBLER · Mutter: MARINA DORTSCHEN»; buried the 29th, aged one week. The only record that puts Franz at that house as the householder — twenty-one years before Martin was born in it, twenty-nine before he died in it as an Ausnehmer.

THREE OF THE FIVE KNOWN CHILDREN DID NOT LIVE: Elisabeth five months (1812–13), Maria nine months (1815–16), Valentin fourteen days (1820). Gertraud, born between two of them in 1814, bore Martin.

AND THE SURNAME IS DORTSCHEN. Four of six clerks write it: 1800, 1812, 1815, 1820. The two that do not are this archive's own bracketed readings. The site's lead spelling changed.

FOUND. «Den 27ten [8ber 1800] · Feichting b. St. Joh. · 10 · FRANZ KOSINAR, katholisch, 24, ledig × MARIA DORTSHEN, katholisch, 20, ledig». Witnesses MATTHÄUS KOSINAR, signing with a cross, and Simon Rauth, Bauern; married by Matthäus Lauts, coop. So Franz was born about 1776 and Maria about 1780. No index in this book either — images 30–35 were cropped to the Bräutigam column and read as strips.

IT EXPLAINS THE HOUSE NUMBERS THIS ARCHIVE HAD FLAGGED AS «NOT TIGHT». Gertraud was baptised at house 10 in 1814 and Johann married into house 9 in 1833, and that was left standing rather than explained away. Franz and Maria set up at Feichting house 10 in 1800 — the family house, where their daughter was baptised. Johann went next door to 9, and that is where his sister bore Martin in 1841. House 10 is the parents'; house 9 is the brother's.

MATTHÄUS KOSINAR is the oldest of this name reached — father or brother of the groom, and nothing says which. He could not write.

And it settles the 1818 Gertraud rather than leaving her moot. Her father, unreadable at Matricula's resolution as «Lukas Ko[s]in…», is on image 31: «LUKAS KOSINA, katholisch, 29, ledig», married 1799, born about 1770. A different household. The 1814 Gertraud has no rival.

Still open: Franz's own baptism, about 1776, which falls in sig. 00883 (1747–1779); Maria's, about 1780; and who Matthäus was.

FOUND ON THE NINTH OPENING SCANNED, AND IT NAMES MARTIN'S GRANDPARENTS. The volume has no index, so images 29–44 were cropped to the Bräutigam columns and read as strips.

Book page 35: «1833, 6. Jänner · Obern feichting 9 · JOHANN KOSINAR, Häusler, katholisch, 30, ledig × LUZIA LABORNIK, house 3, 38, ledig». des Vaters: FRANZ KOSINAR, Häusler. der Mutter: MINA TOM[SH]SHAN, Häuslerin. The bride's own parents are given as Ma[thes] Labornik, Häusler, and Gertraud Mag[nishan].

The identification does not rest on the surname. Johann Kosina, Häusler of Oberfeichting 9, had his first child with Lucia Labornik on 20 January 1834 — a year and a fortnight later. House, trade, wife and date all agree.

AND IT RETRACTS YESTERDAY'S ELIMINATION. The 1814 Gertraud was struck out here on the grounds that her father's surname «ends in a clear -r, so it is KOSNAR not Kosina». The letter was read correctly and the conclusion was wrong: the -r is how that clerk writes this family's name, and he writes it identically for Johann, whose children the next clerk enters as KOSINA. Her father is Franz Kosinar, Hüblar; her mother Maria Do[m]shan. Same couple as Johann's parents. She is his sister.

So: Gertraud baptised 18 March 1814, twenty-seven when she bore Martin in her brother's house; and Franz Kosinar and Maria «Mina» Do[m]shan are Martin's grandparents, four generations above Hedviga.

Not tight, and said so: the house is 10 in 1814 and 9 in 1833 — adjacent numbers, thirty years and a land reform apart, and not the same digit. And «Maria» against «Mina», with the surname written over two lines once and abbreviated once.

FOUND, AND IT NAMES THE GENERATION THIS TREE DID NOT HAVE. The Senj marriage of 1888 gave «Kranjska župa sv. Martin kod Krainburg» and the trail stopped at the border. It did not have to: the Nadškofijski arhiv Ljubljana publishes its registers on Matricula, free and without a login, and the parish is there as Kranj – Šmartin.

The index (sig. 04632, image 246, letter K) gives «104 — Martin Kozina — 64» under 1841. The register (sig. 00886, book page 64 = image 65) gives the entry:

Born AND baptised 16 November 1841, at Oberfeichting — Zgornje Bitnje — house 9; katholisch, Knaben; the tick is in the UNEHELICH column; the Vater column is BLANK; the mother is «Gertraud Kosina, hüblnn. Tochter», a Häusler's daughter; godparents Lorenz Pizz and Maria Kashar; baptised by Blas. Ulzhar, Coop.

Two registers, two countries, forty-seven years, the same absence. Kranj 1841: no father, «Gertraud Kosina». Senj 1888: a dash, «Gertruda Kozina, posjednica». The gap in the tree is what the priest wrote down, twice, because there was nothing else to write. And she rose: a cottager's daughter in 1841, a property-owner by 1888, and with no dagger against her name that year.

There is a Kozina household in the same parish and it is NOT proven to be hers: book page 33, 1836, «Josef Kosina, Häusler» and «Lucia Labornik» — with «Gertraud Kosina, Häuslerstochter» standing godmother lower on the same leaf. The index also shows Anton (1834), Johan (1836), Franz (1853) and Ana (1856). The name is local.

Still open in the same free books: Gertraud's own baptism (sig. 04631, index 1812–1831), her death (sig. 04635, 1836–1869), and whether Josef is her father. The scans are the archdiocese's and are linked rather than republished.

GERTRAUD'S OWN BAPTISM WAS LOOKED FOR THE SAME DAY AND NOT FOUND — and one candidate was killed at the page. The index for 1812–1831 (sig. 04631, letter K on image 169) offers two Gertraud candidates.

1814, page 28 — ELIMINATED. Opened at sig. 00885 image 15 (this older volume numbers two book pages to an image, so page = 2 × (image − 1)): «den 18. Merz · Haus 10 · Gertrud · ehelich · Vater: Franz Kosnar, Hüblar». The surname ends in a clear «-r». KOSNAR, not Kosina — and at index scale the two are almost the same mark. The index said one thing and the register said another, which is why the page gets opened.

1818, page 72 — NOT RESOLVED. «den 16ten Februar · [village] · Haus 12 · Gertrud · ehelich · Vater: Lukas Ko[s]in…». The terminal cannot be read: Kosina or Kosiner, and that letter decides the woman. The birthplace is unidentified — it reads like Lenzg and matches no village of the parish yet named here.

The obstacle is resolution and nothing else. Matricula serves these at 1500 px tall; the master's own EXIF says 3846. One page at full resolution from NŠAL settles it.

The better road is her death. A death entry carries an AGE, and an age gives a birth year without any argument about a terminal letter — sig. 04635 (1836–1869) and the volumes after it. She was alive in 1888 on the evidence of the Senj marriage.

And she may not have been baptised in this parish at all. A cottager's daughter who bore a child at Zgornje Bitnje in 1841 could have been born anywhere in Carniola and come there to work.

EVERY OTHER KOZINA BAPTISM IN THAT VOLUME WAS THEN OPENED — five in all — and they belong to ONE household. Anton 1834 (p.18) and Johan 1836 (p.33): Johann Kosina, Häusler, and Lucia Labornik. Franz 1853 (p.130) and Ana 1856 (p.144): Johann Kozina, Häusler, and Ursula Sedej — and those two entries spell it KOZINA with a z, the spelling the Senj priest used in 1888. Martin 1841 (p.64) sits in the middle of them with no father and Gertraud for a mother.

One Häusler called Johann, two wives, twenty-two years. Lucia vanishes after 1836; Ursula is beside the same husband by 1853. Gertraud is a Häuslerstochter and Johann is a Häusler — father and daughter, or brother and sister, is likely and is NOT established.

A correction made the same day. Page 33 alone read as «Josef»; page 18, with the same wife beside him, reads «Johann», and page 33 at eight times magnification reads Johann too. One given name, and a household that would have been split in two. found.psv is corrected.

AND THEN THE HOUSE NUMBERS WERE READ, WHICH IS THE WHOLE THING. Johann the Häusler's children were born at OBERFEICHTING No. 9 — Anton on 20 January 1834 (p.18) and PETRUS on 29 June 1836 (p.33). Gertraud bore Martin at OBERFEICHTING No. 9 on 16 November 1841, five years after Johann's last recorded child there.

That does not say whether she was his sister or his daughter. It says she was living in his household, and it turns «a Kozina family in the same parish» into one roof.

The next document is his marriage. Sig. 00899, marriages 1816–1855, carries a column headed «Aeltern des Bräutigams» — the groom's parents. No index, 77 pages over 81 images, about two images to the year; Anton was baptised January 1834, so the marriage is most likely 1828–1833, roughly images 30–43. A scan, not a lookup.

A second correction: the 1836 child is PETRUS at the page, where the index gave Johan. With «Kosnar» read as Kosina and «Johann» read as Josef, that is the third time in two days that an index has been wrong about this family and the register has been right.

HIS ARRIVAL. «KOSINA · OSCAR · 25 · C · YUGOSLAVA/S.H.S. · SEGKA · COLONO · 1947/10/09 · PHILIPPA · GENOVA».

He landed at Buenos Aires on 9 October 1947, aged 25, off the PHILIPPA out of GENOA. «SEGKA» is SEGNA, the Italian name for Senj. «COLONO» is the post-war agricultural settler visa class. And «C» is CASADO — he was already married on the day he landed, so the marriage this archive had been looking for in Buenos Aires happened in EUROPE, and the next document is the manifest of that sailing rather than an Argentine register. He died six years and three months later.

And he was not the only Kosina on that ship. «KOSINA · FRAJNO · 47 · C · CROATA (HRVATSKA) · AGRONOMO · 1947/04/01 · PHILIPPA · GENOVA» — Franjo, born about 1900, an agronomist, same vessel, same port, six months earlier. Martin Kozina's sons were born 1891 and 1894 and Angjelika died in 1902, so a brother born about 1900 is possible and is not established; he is in found.psv as that. His nationality is entered «CROATA (HRVATSKA)» where every other Yugoslav on these pages is «YUGOSLAVA/S.H.S.».

Also, and not ours: a household of six off the Sofia Hohenberg from Trieste on 10 April 1911, all «AUSTRIACO - DALMATA» — Gerko 30, Clara 25, Anka 4, Irma 4, Ojeskoslaio 2, Gelka 0 (Jerko, Vjekoslav, Jelka); Ivan, 27 and single, 30 November 1928 from Hamburg, born about 1901, who is NOT Oskar's son and had to be checked because the names collide; and Michal, Polish, 1929. Ivan and Michal each appear twice.

Twelve rows, and no wife and no son — she would be under her maiden name, he was not born yet.

It is behind a CAPTCHA, which this archive will not answer, so the search was run by the account holder. Only KOSINA has been run; KOZINA, COSINA and CAUSINA have not.

KOZINA, the z-spelling, was run next: 23 rows, and NOT ONE of them is this family. That is a clean negative and it is worth as much as the find.

They cluster on two villages and neither is ours. Bijača in Herzegovina, spelled by the clerks BIJACA, BJOCAR, BEJACA and BYCA — Ladislav 1927, Jozo and Jure 1928, Bqne and Krunko 1930. And Derventa in Bosnia, spelled DERVENTA, DARVENTA and «FLEHAR DEVENTA» — Lovro 26 and Jela 23 with their baby Maria, arriving together on 11 March 1948 off the Cordoba from Hamburg, and Petar, 70 and a widower, three months behind them. The baby's birthplace is entered BAGNOLI, which is the displaced-persons camp at Naples, and her nationality ITALIANA — a child born in the camp on the way out.

The rest are Polish (Piotr of Zawoja, Rudolf of Świątoławiec) or unplaceable (Wincenti 1911; an infant indexed «MICHENCHUK», age 0, 1948). One Slovene: Franc, 30, of DOLENJAVAS — Dolenja Vas — in 1930. Nothing joins any of them to Senj or to Kranj.

So the z-spelling, which is the family's older form, is NOT how they were written in Argentina. Oskar went in as KOSINA, with an s, which is how the family writes it to this day.

AND HIS WIFE IS NOT THERE. He landed married on 9 October 1947 and no Kosina woman appears in the books at all. So she did not travel with him under his name. Either she is indexed under her maiden name, or she came by a route these books do not cover — or she did not come. That is now the question, and it was not visible before today.

COSINA, the Spanish phonetic form, was run third: 5 rows, and not one of them is Slavic at all. Clemente 1884 and Nicola 1922, both italiana out of Genoa; José 1907, española, out of Coruña; Nicolina 1908, levantina, out of Marseille. Cosina in these books is an Italian and Spanish surname in its own right, not a mangling of ours — which is the useful part: the clerks were not converting Kosina into Cosina, they were writing Kosina.

CAUSINA, the last variant, returns ONE row: Ramón Causina, 29, española, 1905, out of Barcelona. Not ours, and not Slavic.

So CEMLA is now worked out. Four spellings, 41 rows, and exactly ONE of them is this family. The database has been asked everything it can answer, and what it answered is: Oskar Kosina landed at Buenos Aires on 9 October 1947, off the Philippa out of Genoa, aged 25, entered as a COLONO, born at «SEGKA» — Segna, Senj — and ALREADY MARRIED. Everything further is on the page of the book rather than in the index, and the page has been asked for: requests/EMAIL-cemla-philippa.txt.

They are not the same word, and the family's oldest record uses the other one. The Senj marriage of 12 January 1888 enters the groom as KOZINA, with a z, on the same line that gives his origin as Kranjska župa sv. Martin kod Krainburg.

Kozina is an ordinary Slovene noun. Fran, the Slovene dictionary portal, gives SSKJ² two senses and both are the goat: «usnje iz kozje kože» — leather of goat hide — and «kozje meso», goat meat. It is also an ordinary Slovene surname; the Slovene Wikipedia keeps a page of notable bearers, among them the composer Marjan Kozina (1907–1966).

Kosina with an s belongs to a different root — kosa, a scythe, or kos, a blackbird — and there is a village called Kosina in south-eastern Poland which gives the surname Kosiński. None of that is this family, and it is worth recording only because it is what a search engine answers.

The practical point. Five spellings of Kosina had been searched against the Croatian indexes and returned nothing. The name was in the other language.

1968, at Belgrade — the first bilateral labour recruitment agreement between a NATO-aligned state and a non-aligned communist one. Germany wanted hands for its factories; Yugoslavia wanted hard currency. Kaja Shonick, Politics, Culture, and Economics: Reassessing the West German Guest Worker Agreement with Yugoslavia, Journal of Contemporary History (2009).

It dates the wave, and it dates him against it. The Croatian church press has him founding HKM Ludwigshafen in 1967, the year the first large group reached Ludwigshafen and Mannheim — a year before the treaty that produced the rest. He had been on those roads since 1958 and moved before the governments signed.

He founded a mission and led it for eighteen years. Two outlets written for the mission's fiftieth anniversary in 2017 carry the same account: «Na područje Ludwigshafena je 1958. iz Rima došao vlč. Anton Kosina», a priest of the then Rijeka-Senj archdiocese, who settled near Kaiserslautern when there were only six Croatian priests in all of Germany. The first large wave of Croatian workers reached Ludwigshafen and Mannheim in 1967, and he was head of the Hrvatska katolička misija Ludwigshafen from its founding that year until 1985, succeeded by fra Ljubo Sesar on 1 August 1985.

It independently corroborates the family's account — Senj, the Gregoriana in Rome, a working life in Germany — which was given years earlier and which neither outlet had seen.

No obituary was found. The Riječka nadbiskupija and the Hrvatski dušobrižnički ured in Frankfurt would each hold one and neither has been asked.

Followed further on the same day, and the picture filled out. The mission's own history of HKM Karlsruhe says «Više godina prije osnutka HKM Karlsruhe u tom gradu i okolici pastoralno je djelovao vlč. Anton Kosina iz Ludwigshafena» — Karlsruhe was founded 3 October 1970 on ground he had worked for years, and Mannheim, Mosbach and Speyer the same way. IKA and the Katolički tjednik add the two priests who came to assist him, vlč. Marijan Bevanda (1970–71) and vlč. Milivoj Galić (1971–78), both of Mostar-Duvno, and the handover on 1 August 1985 to fra Ljubo Sesar, who held it thirty-one years. CroExpress gives the four churches the mission uses — St Hedwig in Ludwigshafen, the Franciscan sisters' chapel at Kaiserslautern, St Joseph in Speyer and Our Lady of Peace in Homburg — so it still says Mass in the town where he began in 1958.

The mission's own site, hkm-lu.de, is mid-redesign and its history page is offline; the text survives only in search snippets. Nothing has been asked of the mission itself — see requests/EMAIL-hkm-ludwigshafen.txt.

Finished on the month's subscription. Fifty transcripts, nineteen people, five roll years — 1913 and 1935 in New South Wales, 1939, 1941 and 1943 in South Australia. Two trades and no third: foundry — ironmoulder, moulder — and labourer. Not one office, not one rank. In Lika this family were forest wardens, masters of the watch, keepers of the prison; at Port Pirie they are labourers in a lead smelter. The rolls also give an address and the other people at it, which is a household claim, and read across three years you watch a household move: Keith Leo and Rita Laurel go 9 Queen Street → 46 Cottell Street → 58 King Street. sources/findmypast/electoral-rolls-2026-09-16.psv

SINAC — a parish this archive catalogued and had nobody for. The one record under a THIRD spelling, Zubrinec, is Franc Zubrinec, b.1887, Adriatic 1911, residence «Sinae, Hungary» — Sinac on the Gacka — father Pao? (Pavao) Zubrinic. parishes.psv has carried Sinac since 14 September with three films and not one person placed there. Sinac births are filmed 1834–1901, so his 1887 baptism is in range. He sailed on the same manifest page as Anton Zubrinic of Prozor — record ids three apart.

FOUR spellings, not three — and the fourth corrects a claim made here the same afternoon. Zubrinich 191, Zubrinic 119, Zubrinick 10, Zubrinec 1; Subrinic, Xubrinich and Zubrinicz are zero. The first test guessed six ways a Croatian ear might render the name. Zubrinick is how an American clerk did, and no guessing from the Croatian side reaches it. The proof is one household filed twice: US/USNATUR/3775255 (1936, Zubrinick) and 3775256 (1939, Zubrinic) are the same Ivan b.30 June 1888 of Otočac, the same wife and the same three sons — and Kate's birth year moves ten years between his own two filings.

Eva Zubrinic of Prozor sailed from FIUME on the Ultonia in 1907 — every other departure in this material is Southampton, Rotterdam or Liverpool. And Gomerčić is a second family married in, after Kostelac: Eva is met by a brother-in-law Joso Gomerčić, and Mijo Žubrinić is recorded as uncle to the passenger Pavdo Gomerčić. Neither family is in this tree.

Thirty-five births, eleven marriages, fourteen deaths — and the index rows carry BOTH PARENTS on a birth and the SPOUSE on a marriage, so the limb came out without opening a transcript. John × Rose marry 1884 and have twelve children to 1909; five of the six labouring men in the 1939–43 electoral rolls are on that list and the sixth is a grandson. The address guesses from the rolls are now on birth records — Malcolm Theodore is Edward Malcolm's son, Gwenyth Florence is Arthur Leslie's daughter. Michael Valentine lives alone in every roll because Minnie Doris died in 1932. They also corrected two readings made from the rolls the same day: Thomas Leo × Una Blanche married in 1912, not between the 1939 and 1941 rolls, and Leonard Francis × Asta Louise at Adelaide in 1936. Both slips came from treating the roll's «household members» field as a household.

A manifest gives a residence and one relative. A petition gives an exact birth DATE, an exact birth PLACE, the spouse's birth date and every child's birth date — a household in one row, sworn before a court. And here the birth place is indexed, which it is not in the passenger lists: keywords=otocac 7, keywords=senj 12, against 0 for prozor in both, and 0 for Karlobag and Novi Vinodolski.

But the match is FUZZY and a hit is a candidate, not a fact — searching klada returns a page largely of Greek names. All four below were confirmed by opening the transcript.

KLADA — a village in no parish table, no gazetteer, and no person's record. Marijan Vukelić, born 27 January 1894 at «Klada-senj», wife Rosie b.1896, children Walter 1922, Catherine 1925, John 1927, Brooklyn, five filings 1935–1948. Vukelić is the line Milka Papić married into, and this archive has no Vukelić emigration at all.

Three more. Miro Šojat (Sojath), b. 5 Nov 1910 at Senj, Astoria NY 1955. Luka Orsanich — Orešković, ahnentafel 21's surname — b. 15 Oct 1897 at Otočac, the Bronx 1931. And Kate Žubrinić, b. 27 Oct 1895, born at Otočac — the archive knew her husband was; it did not know she was.

Two sworn records of one family, and not one child's date agrees. Ivan and Kate filed separately: George 7 Jan 1923 / 21 May 1922; Joseph 8 Feb / 2 Feb 1924; John 13 Nov / 8 Oct 1932. The most formal record this family left in America is not reliable to the month. Excellent for who and where; no better than a manifest for when.

And a correction made before publication: «Kate Zubrinic Or Rozic» is not her maiden name. The index attaches «Or Rozic» to Ivan and all three children too — an alternate surname for the whole household. Reading it as a maiden name would have invented a marriage line that is not there.

Six settled without opening a register, and one of the six turned out to be two people.

duplicates.py had a veto and no confirmation. parents_conflict rejects a group when two records name parents who share no name — the test that stopped this archive announcing that its own great-great-grandfather was a duplicate. But two records naming the same parents stayed «live» exactly like two naming nobody at all.

A new tier, same day and same parents, takes five of them: Catharina Žubrinić 20 Nov 1840, Josephus 16 Mar 1845, Francisca 6 Mar 1846, Nicolaus 3 Aug 1847, and Katalyn/Kate Zubrinich of Port Pirie 26 Jul 1886 — same day, same village, same father, same mother. Danijel Kalanj, 2 November 1829, is plainer still and does not qualify: one copy holds his parents and the other his wife and child, and both hold the same death date. One man split down the middle.

The sixth is not a duplicate, and catching that is the result. «Alexander Žubrinić, 14 March 1839, Otočac» — same day, same village, a Michael for a father in both, and the mothers are Magdalena Orešković and Magdalena Mande Draženović. Two boys born the same day to two different Michaels, which is row 1's seven-Michaels finding in miniature.

The first draft of the new tier declared him a duplicate. parents() folds a parent to their given names only — deliberately, because Michael and Michaelis are one man — so both mothers reduce to magdalena. A confirmation built on that is blind in exactly the place it must see. parent_surnames() now supplies the half of the name the veto throws away, and at least one parent must be proved by a surname before a group is called one child.

Twenty-two of the twenty-five were never villages. Eleven are emigration destinations — Port Pirie, Quorn, Whyalla, Johannesburg, Sydney, Arizona and the rest. Nine are cities and regions outside these districts: Zagreb, Osijek, Pula, Belgrade, Garešnica, Fužine, Sveti Križ, Tomašica, «Yugoslavia». No parish table should claim any of them, and their presence in the list was never a defect.

Two were data artefacts, and both are fixed at the tool rather than in the text.

* «"Croatia, Church Books, 1516-1994, " database with images…» was the birthplace of three people — a source citation pasted into a place field. A gazetteer that parses it invents a village out of a footnote. parishlib now recognises a citation and returns no place.
* «Montani Stanište» with two spaces was a different village from «Montani Stanište» with one, so ahnentafel 111 and her own father stood in two places that are one place. norm() now collapses internal whitespace.

And three are real Croatian places, with four direct ancestors standing on them — Smiljan (ahnentafel 426) and Montani Stanište (ahnentafel 111 and 222).

That exposed a worse confusion in the wall grading. walls.py printed «No place is recorded for this household anywhere on the line» over both — over a household the tree places at Smiljan, Općina Gospić, in as many words. A new grade, ungazetteered, now says what is actually true: «The tree does record where this household was … but no parish in this archive's table claims that village. This is not a wall in the record. It is a gap in the gazetteer.» One line of parishes.psv closes it — once somebody establishes which parish, which is deliberately not guessed.

And Gologorica, checked while here, turns out to carry 24 people who are all Šestan and not one of them a direct ancestor. It is the last parish to spend a day on, not an outstanding hole.

The backlog was not 71 contradictions with 24 answered. It was 71 with 47 never looked at.

check_site.py carries a gate called «every contradiction is answered on the person's own page», and it has printed ok for months. It read if i.get("slug") and …, which excused every contradiction about a person who has no page — 47 of the 71 rows, 24 people.

That is the same blindness for the third time in one day. Six Karlobag wives were declared outside the tree because they had no page. Hedviga's husband's gravestone was filed as a stranger's because he has no page. Now the contradiction gate. An unpublished person is invisible, in three separate tools, and every time it was caught by accident rather than by a check.

The gate now counts and prints the page-less rows instead of excusing them, and fails only on the slugged ones — the same bargain checkcovers struck, so a hole can be closed without the archive going red first.

And six of the answered rows are one bad date. Ahnentafel 9, Tereza Pećanić, is entered «died BEF 1850» and then marries in November 1858 and bears children to 1884. Five child-after-parent-death rows and one married-after-death come from that single hedge. It is annotated and it is still in the data.

Four of the twenty-two were in the tree, and the fourth is Hedviga's husband.

found.psv means one thing — read out of a register and not in the family tree. The claim had been made by searching published people, and this archive had already been burned by that once: in September a check concluded none of six Karlobag wives was in the tree, and all six were there as parent references with no page of their own.

It happened again, on the gravestones. «IVAN DEFRANĆESKI 1925–1995», photographed five times at Senj, was recorded as «the surname does not occur once in this archive's tree». The tree carries Ivan Anton Defrančeski, born 1925, died 1995, on Hedviga Blažević's own marriage, with a null slug because he is not published. Both dates match the stone exactly. The archive photographed the grave of the man at its centre and filed him as a stranger.

Three more came out: Thomas Žubrinić 1846 and Luce Žubrinić 1850, both published with both parents matching, and Helena Orešković, who exists only as a parent reference on her own son.

The lesson was written down in September and did not prevent it, so it is a gate now. tools/foundcheck.py tests every row against every name in the tree — published people and every rel.parents, rel.spouses, rel.siblings, rel.children reference — two ways: name + year within one, and name + both parents agreeing. A resemblance a person has examined and dismissed goes in a SETTLED table with the reason in writing; anything else fails the build. It runs as check:found.

Eighteen remain, which is the number the work list started with, arrived at honestly.

Nine direct ancestors were read this week and not one wall moved. walls.json was identical at every commit from Monday to Monday — 9 unplaced, 7 nameless, 6 outside, 4 reachable. That looked like a correct result and was not.

walls.py could not see the reading. It loads ancestors.json and placefixes.json and nothing else. The parish table tells it what is filmed; nothing told it what had been read. So it printed «This wall is reachable and has not been opened» on four walls — and for three of them the register had been opened, by this archive, that same morning.

And one wall was simply false. Ahnentafel 220, Nicolaus Gerkacs, was graded «unplaced — No place recorded», with the sentence «No place is recorded for this household anywhere on the line, so there is no register to open. The wall here is a place, not a name.» His death entry, read the same day, puts him in his son Antonius's house at Karlobag. The tree has no birthplace for him; a document does, and the archive had it.

Both are fixed at the tool, not the text.

* walls.py now reads sources/readings.psv, so a wall that has documents says which ones and which book is still shut — «This archive has already read the death 1778 for this person, and none of it names their own parents — the baptism is the document still unopened».
* sources/walls.psv is created and given a format — ahn|field|value, where place supplies a place read off a document and why cites the entry that supplies it. A place does not assert a grade: it is fed back through the normal grading, so the kind stays derived.

Ahnentafel 220 moves from unplaced to reachable, and Karlobag baptisms 1691–1861 cover his birth of 1717. That is a wall that had stopped being a wall and was still deterring work. 8 unplaced now, 5 reachable.

Five direct ancestors, on three stones, in one cemetery. The photographs were taken on 9 October 2024 — the day after the Otočac churchyard, the same trip — and had never been read. GPS puts all 105 in a 400 m box at 44.985 N, 14.924 E, inside one hour and three quarters.

Ahnentafel 2 and 3 share a tomb with three of their children — Oto 1923–1945, Mario 1933–1984, and Leo 1920–2008 with Kata 1924–2007. Ahnentafel 5 is the next stone, carved BLAŽEVIĆ TEREZA under her married name, restored in 1991 by pop Ante Kosina. Ahnentafel 6 and 7 are on a stone cross with a carved palm on its base.

And the errors have a shape. Every death year on the five is right; two of the five birth years are one out — Ljubomir 1891 for 1892 and Antonija 1860 for 1859. They do not run the same way: his stone is a year early, hers a year late. An earlier draft of this row said both were early, which was wrong and is corrected here. The direction carries nothing; the size does. A Senj stone is good evidence for a death year and weak evidence for a birth year — worth knowing before the next one is read.

Three brothers of ahnentafel 6 are here too, and all three match to the year — Stjepan ✽1860 †1917, Jakov ✽1863 †1938, Anton ✽1868 †1937 — six dates, no disagreement. Stjepan's stone also names his daughter Danica ✽1902 †1918, dead at sixteen.

One name is not in the tree. «MATILDA ✽1895 †1921», third on her parents' cross. The tree has no Matilda, but it has two Papić daughters born 1895 — Franka and Sulka — and neither has a death recorded. Recorded in found.psv as an open question with a date attached, not decided.

Three more carved by-names, after Otočac's Žubrinić-Čun: VUKELIĆ — PURICA, VUKELIĆ –KOŽUN–, PRPIĆ / PECE, plus the double heads Papić-Glavičić, Prpić-Boras and Boras-Milković. The practice the registers show with aliter and vulgò in the 1700s is still being cut into granite in the 1990s.

And one line that is history rather than genealogy: «LEO LONČARIĆ ✽1920 †1945 · BLAJBURG», the place of death carved on the stone — written down by a family in a country where for forty-five years afterwards it was written down nowhere else.

190 name-rows are now in sources/graves/senj-2024-10-09.psv, each with a confidence letter that means something: r = cropped and enlarged 3–8× (every ancestor row), p = read from a 3×3 contact sheet, surname secure and digits unverified, ? = not to be relied on.

Full-resolution pass completed the same day (row 53). Every p row was opened again, cropped to the inscription and resampled to the reader's own display resolution rather than blindly enlarged — past about 1,800 px on the long side the gain is thrown away in the downsample, and that one change is what made the pass practical. 108 of 194 rows are now r, up from about 60.

Four readings were wrong and all four were dates, every one off a contact sheet: Mile Prpić 1985 → 1982, Karlo Papić-Glavičić 1928 → 1922, Budimir Boras 1950 → 1954, and «Pavo» Boras who is Fabo. Two more — Domagoj and Fabo Boras — turned out to have no readable death year at all; the years first recorded ran off the edge of the photograph and were guesses. They are 19?? now, which is the honest entry. Nothing in the ancestor block moved: all twelve direct-line and sibling rows were read at 3–8× the first time and every one was confirmed. The errors fell exactly where the confidence letter said they would.

And the pass found a stone the first sweep did not see at all. Enlarging IMG_8159 for the Gržin inscription brought up the grave behind it: «OVDJE POČIVAJU U MIRU BOŽJEM · IVICA ŽUBRINIĆ 1887–1934 · FANA ŽUBRINIĆ 1890–1974 · MARIJAN ŽUBRINIĆ 1919–1996». Žubrinić is ahnentafel 5's maiden surname and this archive's Otočac family. A Žubrinić grave in the town she married into and is buried in is a thread nobody has pulled — recorded, joined to nobody, and the strongest single reason to be glad the pass was made.

Ahnentafel 104 is read, and he is not the name-and-date this archive had. Folio 17, image 364, ARK 3:1:3QS7-L99C-GSBG:

«10: Aprilis · D. Jacobus Pilepich Capitaneus portûs, munitus omnibus Sacramentis per M.R. D. Andream Pintor Capellanum Loci, spiritum Deo reddidit, … in propria Crypta in Parochiali Ecclesia existente, per me Joannem … tumulatus est»

Three marks of standing in one entry. Capitaneus portûs — captain of the port of Karlobag, a crown office in a Military Frontier harbour, not a trade. The D. before his name is Dominus, and the register withholds it from the Decurio and the infans on the same opening. And he is not in the parish cemetery with them: he is «in propria Crypta in Parochiali Ecclesia» — in his own crypt inside the church. No age is given.

The method is the other half of the result. The FamilySearch index holds baptisms only for Karlobag (row 43), so this book has to be walked — but it carries its own KAZALO, and the KAZALO turns the walk into two page loads. Image 427, right page, is the letter P: three dense columns, ordered by folio and not alphabetically, and «Pillepich Jacobus · 10 Aprilis · folio 17» is in the third. Folio 17 is image 364.

The folio map is measured now and it disagrees with holdings.psv by one. Image 364 carries folios 16 and 17; image 365 carries 18 and 19; so image = 356 + folio ÷ 2, which puts folio 62 at 387 where holdings.psv says 388. One of the two is off, or a folio is skipped. Read the folio number printed at the top of the page, every time.

Ahnentafel 212 is read too, and how he was found matters more than that he was. Folio 11, image 361, ARK 3:1:3QS7-L99C-G3WG:

«16 ejusdem [Maij 1776] · Josephus Smojver dictus Vukcich, annorum 45, munitus omnibus [Sacramentis] … in Domino obijt, atque die 17 … in Coemeterio Parochiali … tumulatus»

16 May 1776 is the tree's date to the day, and annorum 45 agrees with its birth year of 1731. He was buried the next day in the parish cemetery — not, like the port captain, inside the church.

He is not under S. He is under V. The KAZALO's letter V carries «Vukich — vide Smojver — 16: Maij — folio 11». This index treats the household by-name as a headword and cross-references it to the surname, and it does the same thing on the same page for another family: «Verbanovich Margarita … vide Urbanovich». (The S columns were read only to about folio 9, so the Smojver headword itself was never checked — it was the V cross-reference that found him.)

That changes how the index must be used. A surname missing from its own letter is not absent from the book — it may be filed under the by-name, in another letter, with a vide pointing back. For a family this archive already knows by two names — «Smoyver vulgò Vukić» on the 1781 baptism of ahnentafel 53 — that is the difference between an ancestor and a null. And the two entries use different connectors: dictus in 1776, vulgò in 1781, same pair, same parish, five years apart.

Ahnentafel 220 is read, and the entry names a man the tree does not publish. Folio 39 — the right-hand page of image 376, whose left-hand page is printed «38. — Anno Dñi 1783» — ARK 3:1:3QS7-L99C-GSBH:

«30 8bris · Nicolaus Gergacs annorum 66, munitus omnibus sacramentis obiit … in domo filij sui Antonij, et die 31: ejusdem … sepultus est in Cœmeterio … Laterali ex parte dextra Ecclesiæ Parochialis hujus»

30 October 1783 is the tree's date to the day, and annorum 66 agrees with its birth year of 1717. He came in as a name with no media at all. And he died in the house of his son Antonius — a Gergacs this archive has never published, now in found.psv as a brother of ahnentafel 110.

The index's date is the burial, not the death. The KAZALO says «Gergacs Nicolaus · 3i 8bris». The register says he died on the 30th and was buried «die 31: ejusdem». This archive already knew that shape — it is exactly what Find a Grave does, where five of six date differences were the interment rather than the death. A parish index does it too. Use the KAZALO's date to find an entry; never to record one.

And the folio arithmetic drifts — the index does not. Interpolating from the measured anchor at folio 17 put folio 39 on image 375, which is one leaf early and ends at 18 June 1783. The printed number settled it in one crop. Interpolate to get close, then read the number at the top of the page and step.

Ahnentafel 105 is read, and she is the reason this row has a method in it at all. Folio 63, image 388, ARK 3:1:3QS7-L99C-G3QY:

«29 ejusdem [Maij 1790] · Catharina annorum 70, vidua defti Jacobi [P]ilepich, obiit in Domino munita omnibus sacramentis, atque die 30 sepulta est»

29 May 1790 is the tree's date to the day, and what identifies her is not her own name — it is her husband's. She is entered as the widow of Jacobus Pilepich, which is ahnentafel 104, the captain of the port, dead twelve years before her. The age disagrees: 70 in May 1790 puts her birth about 1720 where the tree says 30 March 1727, a seven-year gap that is beyond the slack a register age usually carries. Recorded as a disagreement, not resolved.

She is not in the KAZALO's L at all, and the whole of L was read to prove it — groups 1 and 2 of image 422's right page, folios 1–73 and 76–102, group 3 blank, and image 423's left page, also headed L, empty. Five Luckinić entries are there — Lukcrinich Lucas f.2, Luczkinich Anton f.7, Luczkinich Helena f.38, Luczkinich Antonia vidua f.84, Luczkinich Helena f.96 — and none is Catharina.

A widow is indexed under her husband's surname. That is the third time this archive has met the same rule in one day: «Vukich vide Smojver» files a man under his household by-name, the Senj gravestones carve a married woman under her husband's name, and the Karlobag KAZALO files a widow under his too. Look for her in P.

Two more by-name headwords turned up in L while looking: «Ljubicich dictus Luxich ut ibi» and «Locatelli, vulgò Zessich, Margarita».

And the index put a surname on the table that had never appeared. The P columns hold five Pekas entries — Anton, Blasius, Maria, Joanna, and Pekkas Magdalena, 5 Augusti, folio 106. Pekass is ahnentafel 213, 426 and 427, three direct ancestors with no document of any kind. These are index lines, not readings — no page has been opened — and they are recorded as places to look.

Both ancestors are read, and the book gave more than the two of them.

Ahnentafel 40, Toma Žubrinić — page 45, entry 3 of 1838, image 117, ARK 3:1:3QS7-L99C-PVR4: «1838. Januarii die 4ta · Thomas Xubrinich, Inq: ~~Ottoèsanq~~ Centu-rio Confiniarius, ex Pago Shumcchicza N° 2 · An. 70 · Senectutis Debilitas · Cœmeterium Commune SStæ Trinitatis Ottochiæ». Three tree claims corroborated at once — the date, the house Šumećica N° 2, and the birth year, because An. 70 gives 1767–68 and the tree says 1768. He came in as a name with no media at all.

Ahnentafel 41, Marija Findrić — page 153, entry 53, image 167, ARK 3:1:3QS7-899C-PVHR, the book now in Croatian: «Leta 1849 dne 29 Srpnja preminula je · Maria Žubrinić, Udovica · 69 · Slaboća starosti po dokazu Lečnika · Sa Svetimi Otajstvi umirućih providjena · u župničkoj grobnici». The date to the day, the age against the tree's 1780, and the widowhood — her husband died eleven years earlier — agree. But no house and no husband are named, so unlike his, her entry is not anchored to Šumećica N° 2.

It moves the hardest question this archive has. Ahnentafel 10 was baptised in 1834 at Šumećica N° 24 and had his own children baptised in 1856 and 1858 at N° 2; either he moved, or the man at house 2 is another Nicolaus. House 2 is now documented as his grandfather's. The Status Animarum still settles it, but the two readings are no longer level.

And a method the archive did not have. The Otočac baptisms stop writing the household into Conditio from about 1836 to 1845. The deaths write the village and house straight through those years. The deaths are the house-number source for the window the baptisms cannot reach.

A correction, recorded because it is the useful part. The first pass today reported that page 151 ended at 28 Srpnja and page 152 opened at 9 Kolovoza, and concluded that no death was recorded on 29 July 1849 at all. Every month in that sentence was wrong: page 151 runs 4 Svibnja (May) to 8 Lipnja (June), page 152 runs 9 Lipnja to 14 Srpnja (July), and the «Kate, žena Mate Žubrinića» entry is 7 May, not July. July had simply not been reached; she was three pages on. The entry numbers really did run continuously — and that is what made the wrong conclusion feel safe. A continuous sequence proves no page is missing. It proves nothing about which months are on the page.

The whole book, 1780 to 1836 — images 156 to 332, every opening. It holds four grown men called Thomas Žubrinić: 1787 (an: 31), 1808 (annorum 40), 1824 (an. 24) and 1831 (an. 44). Only the 1808 man's age puts his birth in the 1760s.

Image 232, February 1808: Die 27. Mortuus est Thomas Xubrinich ⁺annorum 40, provisus omnibus Sacramentis, sepultus est in hoc cœmeterio per me Jacobum Thust localem capellanum Vicensem. Aged 40 in February 1808 means born between February 1767 and February 1768. Surname, age, day, month and year were each checked separately at 1.2×–2.6× against neighbouring digits in the same hand.

He is not ahnentafel 40, and that is the useful part. Toma Žubrinić's own death was read the same week in the next book — 4 January 1838, An. 70, ex Pago Shumcchicza N° 2 — which also puts his birth in 1767 or 1768. So this parish buries two men called Thomas Žubrinić born in the same two years, and the 1808 entry, which gives no village and no house, would have been claimed as Toma by anyone reading age and name alone. It is recorded here as a candidate for the other Thomas — the husband of the census's Martha vidua defti Thomæ at Obilje, whose son Paulus was born February 1805 — and as nothing more.

Šumećica and Obilje are attested from 1789, forty-nine years before the 1838 entry. Obijt Mathæus Xubrinich ex Sumechicza, Ann. 26 (8 October 1789), corroborated four months later by Rosalia filia dfti Mathei Xubrinich ex Sumechicza, his orphan daughter; a second Šumećica house under Josephus; and Lucia Xubrinich ex Obilje, Annor. 66. In 1789 the family is in five villages — Šumećica, Obilje, Dubrava, Potok and Selca. No house numbers: the ruled Domus column does not exist until 1828.

A caution about Casparus. 20 November 1806 buries Casparus Xubrinich annos circiter 40, morte improvisa — born about 1766. The Casparus of Dubrava 60, dead 4 March 1829 aged 62, is born about 1767. Both fit the census's b. 14 January 1767 on age alone. That identification is not withdrawn — it rests on the house number and a four-point census match — but it should be read with this beside it.

Two method finds. Image 156 is the book's title page, and its note — Prima columna denotat Seriem, 2da numerum Sepulchri, incipiendo à plaga Septemtrionali — shows that the two narrow columns down the right edge of every page are the series and the grave number, counted from the north wall: a plot map of the cemetery, not ages and not entry numbers. And for a stretch of 1790 the register writes in Croatian — Primina chi Luce Jure Sopichia iz Dubrave od Miseczi 8 — giving village and age in the vernacular.

The catalogue will say exactly what a film holds. /service/search/catalog/item/koha:<NNNNNN> returns source.film_note[], one entry per digital film with digital_film_no, items, text and fs_indexed. For Otočac it gives DGS 5482657 as «Rođeni 1846-1858 · Umrli 1834-1858, Items 1–2». One call, authoritative.

And a first reading of the film got it wrong, which is the finding. …/search/film/005482657?i=N reports 483 images, and images 250, 330, 410 and 465 are all baptisms, with END OF ROLL at 483. The conclusion drawn was that the deaths were not on the film. They are. Those images are not Otočac — the waypoint changes partway through and the breadcrumb on the later ones reads «Croatia, Church Books › Roman Catholic › Pakrac › Births 1781-1823».

The Otočac book is 218 images, under waypoint 9RK1-Y4C:391644801,391674001, and its breadcrumb names both items. The deaths are there: image 100 is April 1835, 165 is page 149 of 1849, 200 is page 221 of 1855. The film number concatenates two parishes' books and nothing in the viewer says so except a breadcrumb the film-number URL does not display.

Three films this week, the same root. 005481648, catalogued as the Karlobag 1691–1804 baptisms, has 596 images and image 216 headed «Godine 1845». 005497948 is 802 images and at least three books. And 005482657 is 218 images of Otočac followed by Pakrac.

So the rule, paid for three times: the catalogue for what exists, the waypoint to land in the right book, the record index for an ARK where the parish is indexed — and record the ARK. An ARK resolves to exactly one image, permanently. A film number resolves to a walk that may leave the parish without telling you.

Written up in notes/familysearch-film-structure.md: a film number does not reach everything the film holds, which cost one sitting before it was understood.

Ahnentafel 27, entry 13 of 1886:

«1886 dne 9 veljača · Matija PILIPIĆ, žena · Vicko PILIPIĆ, fin. stražar u miru, njezin muž · Karlobag · rim. kat. · 78 · Marasmus senilis · Providjena»

Ahnentafel 26 gets an occupation — fin. stražar u miru, a retired finance guard. Nothing in this archive had said what he did. Her origin is recorded as Karlobag, independently confirming the birthplace of the daughter whose 23 April 1810 birth fixed her parents' marriage — which was found the same day as 17 June 1807.

The register's age of 78 is recorded as written, not as a correction. Born 23 April 1810 and dead 9 February 1886 she was 75; the age in this column is what the informant said, and the birth has a baptism behind it.

She was missed on the first pass because she is indexed under her married name. Ahnentafel 8's burial is located but unread — indexed at 28 August 1907 against a tree death of 26 July 1907, and that month's gap is itself worth reading. Ahnentafel 26 is read, page 98 entry 70, indexed under the spelling Pilepić: «1897 studenoga 14 · Vicko PILEPIĆ, finan.… u miru · Udovac · Karlobag · Senj · R.Kat. · navodno 93 god. · Marasmus senilis». The date matches to the day, Karlobag is his origin as well as his wife's, and Udovac squares with her death eleven years earlier.

The finding worth more than the three entries: the age column is hearsay, and the clerk says so. His age is written «navodno 93» — reportedly — against a true 91. Ahnentafel 27's reads 78 against 75. Ahnentafel 8's reads 69 and is exactly right. An age in this book is what the informant said, never a document, and it must not be used to date a birth where a baptism exists.

Two indexing traps: a married woman is filed under her husband's surname, and the same office spelled the same man Pilipić in 1886 and Pilepić in 1897.

The index-with-ARK method is the difference between an hour and a week, and nobody had written down where it works. Eight surnames of this family swept through the index and tallied by place and event type.

Baptisms only — these books must be walked: Otočac (165 baptisms, not one death or burial), Selce (77, confirmed twice — 119 Antić entries and every one a baptism), Karlobag (four surnames tested, every hit a baptism, across 1717–1861), Krmpote-Vodice.

Deaths are indexed: Senj — and also under the Latin place string Senia, which a search for «Senj» misses entirely — Krivi Put, Novi Vinodolski, and thinly Crikvenica.

It corrected a work-list row before the row was started. The plan asserted that Karlobag's death index reached ten direct ancestors; the evidence for that was a Karlobag date range of 1717–1861 which is baptisms throughout. That row is a walk through the book's own KAZALO — which is ordered by folio, not alphabetically.

And the trap that matters more than the map: a married woman's death is indexed under her husband's surname. Ahnentafel 27, born Uroda, is filed as Pilipić; a search for Uroda returns nothing at Senj. Every sweep for a maiden name walks past her.

Ahnentafel 25, at the page. LIBER DEFUNCTORUM page 144, image 397, entry 21:

«Udova Maria Antić, supruga pok. Josipa, kći Jurja i Mare Jeličić, R. Katolikinja» — Selce, house 29, aged 73, died 6 July 1882, and the remarks column adds «bi dne 7/7 pokopana».

Every field checks: widow of the late Josip (ahnentafel 24, dead since 1850), daughter of Juraj (ahnentafel 50), 73 against a birth of 22 March 1809. The mother is written «Mare» where the tree has ahnentafel 51 as Margarita — Mare serves as the familiar for both Margareta and Marija here, so it is consistent and it is not proof.

The index does not cover this register. A sweep for Antić at Selce returns 119 indexed entries and every one is a baptism. The index-with-ARK method that found the Otočac households and the Karlobag baptism in minutes does not work here — the book has to be walked, and that is worth knowing before the next sitting plans around the index.

So the film is mapped instead. 005497948 is 802 images and is not one book: image 200 is a HISTORIA PAROCHIAE, the death register runs through the 380s and 390s, image 600 is a later Croatian-ruled register, and the waypoint in the URL changes between images, which is why a film number is a poor handle on it. Measured: 384 = 1877, 397 = 1882, 400 = 1883–84 — about 2.7 images to the year.

Ahnentafel 24 is read too, and the register says what killed him. Page 99, image 340, ARK 3:1:3QSQ-G99X-13PY:

«Letta 850. na 21. 8bre · Nrus Domus 74 · Preminu Osip Antić težak i Mare kćer · 44 / 6 · Od kolere»

One entry for two people — Osip, the Croatian for the tree's Josephus, and his six-year-old daughter Mare, dead the same day and written into a single line. 44 on 21 October 1850 puts his birth between October 1805 and October 1806; the tree says 14 March 1806. And his widow's own entry, read above, already called her «supruga pok. Josipa».

The house is 74, not the 29 where his widow died in 1882. Thirty-two years and a widowhood separate them; a move to a married son's house is ordinary and nothing here proves it. Two numbers, recorded as two.

The page is a casualty list. Od kolere runs down the remarks column. Pages 98–99 hold the deaths of 30 September to 21 October 1850, several to a day and six on 10 October alone, and the surnames are this family's — Lončarić, Brozović, Jelličić, Antić, Karšul, Kombol. Seven other Antić deaths fall in the eleven days before Josip, including one at his own house 74 on the 11th. None is attached to anyone here and none is claimed.

A negative was nearly written, and the page numbers stopped it. Page 99 ends on 21 October and the register then opens at Mens. Februario 1851, which reads like a lost leaf. The printed numbers say otherwise: image 340's right leaf is 99, image 341's is 101, so the leaf between is 100 and the sequence is unbroken. There are no Selce deaths between 22 October 1850 and 20 February 1851. The check was made only because the Otočac book had already produced one false null the same day.

And a by-name in passing — «Vincentius Jurich, aliter Loveranich», Selce house 58, died 21 March 1834 aged 55, image 311. Jurić ⟷ Loveranić, a pair this archive did not have.

Ahnentafel 48 and 49 are read too, both on image 304 (ARK 3:1:3QS7-L99X-1QQL):

«Die 13ᵃ Martii 1829 · Nrus Domus 51 · Joannes Antich Papa. obiit Annorum 64»

«Die 15ᵉ Julii 1829 · Nrus Domus 56 · Margarita uxor Joannis Antich <u>Natanchii</u> obiit Annorum 52»

Both dates are the tree's to the day and both ages fit its birth years — 1765 and 1777. But the houses differ, 51 and 56, and so do the by-names — his Papa written straight after the surname, hers Natanchii and underlined, which in this archive is the mark of a household name. One household with two names, a widow moved to a child's house, or two different couples: the note takes none of the three. The marriage, or the Selce Status Animarum, would settle it.

And «Papa» is question 5's word. The archive asks whether Papa is a surname or a by-name because ahnentafel 6's father is entered at Senj in 1885 as «Juraj Papa» with Papić gone. Here it is fifty-six years earlier, eighty kilometres away, behind a different surname — Antić. That is not a link between the two families. It is evidence that Papa was a by-name in circulation, available to more than one household — and therefore weak evidence of descent wherever it stands alone.

This book is the best by-name source in the archive. Four pairs confirmed at full resolution today — Mihić aliter Venesarić (1828), Jurić aliter Loveranić (1834), and the two Antić names above. Two more were seen at half scale and are deliberately not published: reading is reading.

Still to find in this book: ahnentafel 96, 98 and 99, in the 1790s and 1800s.

A day where there was a month, and a by-name in a parish that had none.

«Ego Joës Antonius Frankovich Parochus Loci baptizavi Infantem die 11ma hujus natam ex Vincentio, et Oliva Smoyver, vulgò Vukić, Conjugibus hujus Civitatis, cui imposui est nomen Oliva Maria.»

Page 65, ark 3:1:3QS7-L99C-L998-5. The month column reads Ejusdem beneath Martij and the next opening starts at 19 March, so 11 March 1781. The tree carried only «MAR 1781» and no document.

Ahnentafel 106 and 107 are confirmed from the register side — Vicentius Smojver Vukić and Oliva Bacchi were in the tree and had never been put on a page.

The by-name is the wider finding. «Smoyver, vulgò Vukić». This archive's by-name file was built out of Selce and its neighbours, where the connectors are aliter · dictus · dicti and the scribe underlines the pair. Karlobag uses vulgò and does not underline — so the practice is wider than one district and written differently in each. It also explains a name the tree carries without comment: ahnentafel 106 as «Vicentius Fabiano Smojver Vukić», as though Vukić were surname. It is the household name.

And it corrects a film record. holdings.psv gives DGS 5481648 as the 1691–1804 baptisms; that film has 596 images and its image 216 is headed «Godine 1845». The 1771–1804 volume is under a different waypoint, and the route in was the record index — a 7 June 1781 Devcich baptism whose ARK opens the right volume — not the film number.

The marriage, on the folio the index did not name. Ahnentafel 54 married ahnentafel 55 at Karlobag on 17 June 1807 — folio 4, image 231, under Anno Domini 1807:

«Præmissis &c. nulloque impedimento detecto ac habito mutuo consensu Georgii filij defti Georgii Uroda et Mariæ filiæ Michaelis Gergas hujatium, eos solemniter in facie Ecclesiæ Matrimonio conjunxit idem præmissa, præsentibus testibus Caspare Jerko viduo et Joanne Fero…»

The date column reads 17 and the month is a ditto for the entry above, 16 Junii.

It proves the two brothers. The 1806 entry for Joannis filii defuncti Dñi Georgij Uroda was read then as probably a brother, because ahnentafel 55's 1834 death calls her husband a Georgius. Now confirmed from the other side: both are sons of the same dead Georgius Uroda, married sixteen months apart. Ahnentafel 108 is named as «defti Georgii Uroda», tying the 1791 crypt burial to both marriages, and ahnentafel 55's father Michael Gergas is at the page for the first time.

Folio 6 is a clean negative and the index is at fault. The volume's alphabetical index places a Georgius Uroda on folio 6. Folio 6 — image 232 — was read end to end, both pages, 1809 and 1810 through to the «Finis», thirteen marriages, and holds no Uroda at all. The folium column does not reliably name the leaf an entry sits on.

And a doubt closed. The 18 January 1809 entry, carried in this register as «Matthææ filiæ defuncti Martini U[roda?] — surname unconfirmed», reads at five times full resolution as Uzelac. Not Uroda, not a lead.

A reader asked what the single-letter Žubrinići were, and whether the site was saying they were related. It was.

Fifteen nodes are named with one capital letter and a surname — A · B · C · F · G · H · J · L · M · N · P · R · S · T · W, every one «X Žubrinić Xubrinich Zubrinic», with no birth, no death, no place and no source. Each is entered as the parent of every Žubrinić whose name begins with that letter — M fathers Mathæus, Michael and Mate; T three men called Thomas — and they are entered as one another's siblings. So the tree asserted fifteen brothers and sisters called A through W, hanging from nothing, with 75 real people beneath them across 285 relationship links.

The giveaway is the sorting. Jure / Georgius / Juraj is filed under G, not J — the letter follows the Latin form, not the displayed name. That is a card index, not a household. One drawer breaks even its own rule: Nicolai Žubrinić is filed under M.

Why the existing detector missed them. /buckets looks for the words a researcher writes when they know they are guessing — sorting, working, unknown, brothers of. A drawer labelled «M» contains none of them.

Fixed in the data layer, so every page benefits. Both the bucket detector and the site's own junk filter now test for it — one capital letter, a surname, and no date of any kind, strict on purpose so a real person recorded by an initial is not swept up. Buckets 21 → 36; people standing on one, 218 → 293; pages 2,232 → 2,202. And the gap is now stated rather than blank: the 142 people whose only parent was a drawer get a notice naming the label instead of an empty space.

The GEDCOM is untouched. This changes what the archive publishes, not the tree — the separation the project rests on.

Seven houses, four villages, and question 4d answered. The 1846–58 Otočac baptism book writes the household into its Conditio column, and the record index gives the image ARK of every indexed entry, so each opens at the page. Fifteen indexed Žubrinić baptisms in that window have a father whose name is a Michael variant — Michael · Michaël · Miho · Mio · Miha · Miko. All fifteen are read.

The households are Šumećica N° 5 (four children, 1849–58), Šumećica N° 10, Poljica N° 13, Prozor N° 50, Obilje N° 7 and Prozor Br. 1, with seven distinct wives. The twenty-three Michael baptisms are not one man, and the Conditio column is the only thing that separates them.

Šumećica N° 5 is new — Michael Žubrinić and Maria Marković, four children between 1849 and 1858. The Šumećica houses known before were N° 2, N° 10 and N° 24.

Three Žubrinić women married Žubrinić men — Catharina at Obilje N° 7, Kata at Prozor Br. 1, and a third on the same page as the 1858 entry — and the index gives a given name only for every one of them. The index is also wrong at least once: it records the 1852 mother at Šumećica N° 5 as «Maria Maković» where the register says Marković, making one household look like two.

Three cautions are recorded for whoever reads the rest of this book. It changes language from page to page — one January 1852 opening is Croatian on the left and Latin on the right, so Confiniarius … N° becomes Graničar iz … Br. The status word drifts while the house number holds: the Šumećica N° 5 father is Graničar, Gregarius, Confiniarius and Rusticus in turn, and reading the trade as an identity would split one family into four. And the numbering practice begins inside the book — July and August 1846 are bare.

The last entry came in a third window: Prozor N° 49, next door to N° 50, and its surname is written Žubrinić on the page where the index had scattered it to «Dubrinić». A final trap worth the telling: the same house is «Šumećica Br. 5» in the Croatian entries and «Šumećica N° 5» in the Latin ones, and counting the strings as written splits one household in two, so the data file carries the verbatim reading and a normalised key side by side.

Reconciled against the tree. These are not new people — all six wives and nine of the fourteen children are already in it. What the tree lacked was the house number: of those nine children exactly one carried one, Nikola Miko Žubrinić at «Prozor 50», which this reading independently confirms, while the rest give «Otočac, Croatia» or nothing. Seven readings are recorded against their people, and five children the tree does not have are recorded beside it — each with siblings the tree already holds, so they are gaps inside known families rather than an unknown branch.

The register settles it, and the register says this archive was right.

Krmpote, entry 66 of 1884, read at full resolution: «Godine 1884 dne 25. 27. Listopada — Tonka — zakonita — Tome Blažević i Tereza rodjena Pećanić, rim. kat. seljani — Smokvica kbroj 114».

Listopada is October. So Tonka was born 25 October 1884 and baptised on the 27th — the archive's earlier date was the birth, and correct.

The FamilySearch index's «27 November 1884» is wrong. It has the day right and the month wrong — Listopada (October) read as Studenoga (November). An index is a finding aid and not a record, and this is the cleanest demonstration of it this archive has: the index found the entry, and then misdated it by a month.

It also makes a third document for Smokvica kbroj 114, and a fourth appearance of Tereza rodjena Pećanić alive and bearing children in 1884 — which the tree's old «died before 1850» could never have allowed.

Three answers in one sitting, and one of them corrects me.

1 · Ahnentafel 6's baptism, read at the page. Senj, «Anno Domini 1857 die 1 Nbris. Ego Joannes Tušić, cooperator loci, baptizavi Josephum, filium legitimum, Romano-Catholicum, Joannis Papa et ejus uxoris Mathiæ Pilipić. Levantibus Patrinis … ✝ Michaël Stipančić.» The date matches the tree exactly, the parents are named, and the godfather signs with a cross.

The surname is the finding. The father is entered Joannis Papa in 1857 and Juraj Papa in 1885 — and never Antić in either. The nadimak has displaced the surname outright in the Senj register by 1857, and hardens into Papić for the son. Two documents, twenty-eight years apart, and the change is visible between them.

2 · Ahnentafel 7's father — and I was right to doubt myself. Yesterday a Franjo Perpić stood in the column beside the 1885 marriage and I refused to claim it because the page is tilted. The index's own role list settles it: Father-in-law Ivan Perpić, Mother-in-law Luce Perpić. Ahnentafel 14 is Ivan, as the tree has it, and Franjo was a witness. Ahnentafel 15 is confirmed as Luce — her maiden surname still unrecorded.

3 · A child of ahnentafel 24 and 25 that this archive does not have. «Maria Rosaria Antić, 4 October 1847, Selce — Father Josephus Antić, Mother Maria Jellićić». Checked against the tree: she is not in it. A younger sister for ahnentafel 12.

A family's public life across thirty-three years, in the town whose parish registers this archive has been reading. Smojver is ahnentafel 53 and 106.

A registered company, and a woman who signed for it. The Központi Értesítő — the official gazette of the Hungarian company register — carries the firm three times. 30 July 1905: «Odpremnički posao Dragutina Smojvera … Smojver Károly szállító üzlete. Főtelep Karlobag. A czég tulajdonosa Smojver Károly, ki feleségét Smojver Ljubicát …». Then 8 September 1907 and 14 May 1908 record that Ljubica Smojver's czégjegyzési jogosultság — her legal right to sign for the firm — was registered and then struck off. A woman holding power of attorney over a Croatian coastal haulage company in 1905, gazetted in Budapest.

The same man at school, twenty-two years earlier. Horvát gimnázium, Fiume, 1883, p. 134: «… 35 Smojver Dragutin — Selce …» — with a Prpić of Karlobag two lines above him. Selce is this archive's own place.

Three Smojvers in the revenue service — Iván, tiszt of the Finance Ministry (1890); János, pénztárnok at Belovár (1906–07); and József, ellenőr, controller — in 1908 at the Karlobag sub-customs office itself.

And two wounded. Veszteség lajstrom, 27 March 1915: «Karlobag 1882 verw Smojver Mijo, ResZugsf, IR Nr 79» and «Korenica 1892 verw Smojver Blaž, ResKorp», same regiment, same list. This archive already holds six Žubrinići in these lists.

Nothing here is joined to the tree, and that is stated plainly — not one of these people has been matched to a baptism. The seam gives the shape of a surname's public life in exactly the town and decades where the registers have the family. Page images are paywalled; all of it is the free snippet, quoted as returned.

Twelve people on the direct line had no reading. The index was run at all of them in one sitting, and it found two.

Ahnentafel 6 and 7 — married at Senj, 3 May 1885. «Josip Papić, bremenar, of Senj, aged 27», son of «Juraj Papa, težak, i Matia rodjena Pilipić». That is ahnentafel 12 and 13 named in a register, each with a trade, and it catches the surname mid-change: the father is entered as Papa, the son as Papić. The archive has argued for years that Papa is a nadimak attached to Antić; here it is being used as the surname outright, and hardening into Papić in the next generation. (The tree gives ahnentafel 6 a birth of 1 November 1857; aged 27 in May 1885 agrees.)

Ahnentafel 53 — a lead, not a finding. «Smoj[v]er, 23 February 1782, Karlobag — father Vincentio, mother Oliva». Ahnentafel 53 is Oliva Maria Smojver, born March 1781, and a Karlobag Smojver household with a mother called Oliva the following year is the right shape. Her own baptism is not indexed — the index reaches only about four Karlobag Smojver entries before 1796 against 114 after — so this is a page to open, not a join to make.

And the negatives are worth as much. Ahnentafel 20, 21, 32, 40, 41, 52 are all before their parishes' filmed registers begin, or fall in the unindexed early years: Otočac births start 1834, Krmpote 1879. Ahnentafel 15, 16 and 22 have no dates at all, so there is nothing to search on. Those six are not reachable by index and never will be — they need the page or a parish office.

A generation added to the direct line, and the family it adds is not the family this archive thought it had.

The route is the reusable part. The Karlobag births are in the record index, and the index payload carries the image ARK of every entry — so no film had to be hunted. 257 Urode in the collection; filtering in hand on Karlobag leaves 41; sorting by date produces a family at once:

Georgius Uroda and Maria — Dominicus 1764 · Petrus Jacobus 1767 · Heva Joanna 1769 · Maria Catharina 1772 · _Joannis Georgÿ_ 22 April 1777 · Anton Joanis 1780 · Joannis 1784. Seven children over twenty years, and the two eldest names close a loop with the 1774–1804 death index read the same day, which buries a Uroda Heva and a Uroda Petrus.

Read at the page, folio 36/37, Anno Dñi 1777, under Aprilis:

«Ego Joës Antonius Ivankovich, Parochus Loci, baptizavi Infantem heri natum ex Georgio, et Maria Uroda, Conjugibus, hujus Loci, cui impositum est Nomen Joannis Georgij. Patrini fuerunt Ill[ustrissi]mus D[omi]nus Pro-Colonellus Joannes…»

Three things in one sentence. The tree's «born 22 April 1777» is the baptism — heri natum puts the birth on the 21st. Ahnentafel 108 and 109 are named. And the godfather is a lieutenant-colonel — nobody asks a Pro-Colonellus to stand for a fisherman's son.

It corroborates the crypt. Dominus Georgius Uroda, dead 10 September 1791 and buried in his own crypt at the church door, fathers children from 1764 to 1784 without strain. The Urode were not fishermen in the 1770s. They are that by 1834 and 1846. A family coming down in the world across two generations, now visible in documents instead of inferred.

And yesterday's doubt is answered from a page already read. The 1806 marriage of «Joannis filii defuncti Dñi Georgij Uroda» to Maria filia Nicolai Barletich raised the question whether ahnentafel 55 was a Barletich rather than the tree's «Gerkacs». She is not. Ahnentafel 27's baptism of 23 April 1810 — read earlier this month — gives the godmother as «Maria conjux Joannis Uroda». Two different couples: Georgius with his Maria fathering ahnentafel 27, and Joannes with his Maria standing godmother to her. Brother and brother — so the 1806 groom is the 1784 child and the tree's Maria Gerkacs survives.

Found, and he is not what this archive expected the Urode to be.

The death index this archive already knows — fourteen Urode, 1805–1846 — belongs to the later book, and its earliest Uroda is 1808. A man dead before February 1806 had to be in the Umrli 1774–1804, and that book has its own alphabetical Kazalo at images 410–434 which nobody here had opened. Its letters run one page-group each: T·U at image 431.

Six Urode in thirty years — Heva, Joannes, Georgius, Petrus, Jacobus — none of them known here. Georgius is entered 10 7bris, folio 67.

The left-hand pages carry the even folios — 62 at image 388, 64 at 389, 66 at 390 — so folio 67 is image 390's right-hand page, headed Anno Domini 1791. Under Septembris:

«***Dñus Georgius Uroda, munitus omnibus Sacramentis, [in domo] sua obiit, atque die 12ᵃ sepultus est in propria [sua Crypta ante] fores Ecclesiæ Parochialis** existente.*»

Died 10 September 1791; buried on the 12th in his own crypt before the doors of the parish church.

This changes the Urode. The archive has carried them as fishermen — ahnentafel 55 buried in 1834 as «uxor piscatoris Georgii Uroda», ahnentafel 54 in 1846 as «annorum 72, piscator». The man of 1791 is a Dominus, dies fortified with all the sacraments in his own house, and is buried in a crypt his family owns at the church door — and the 1806 marriage still calls him Dñi Georgij Uroda fifteen years later, with the village judge witnessing his son's wedding.

Not claimed: that ahnentafel 54 descends from him. Born about 1774, he would have been seventeen in 1791 and could be a second son — but a crypt-owning family producing a fisherman by 1846 is a descent that needs a document, not an inference. Karlobag births 1771–1804 (DGS 5481648, with its own index) would give it in one entry.

Five folios, seven years, every groom named — and a generation nobody had.

The window a daughter born 23 April 1810 allows is 1804–1810, and it is now read at the page: folio 2 (1804–06) Potocniak · Luksetich · Luccich · Sepst · Allagetich · Millatich · folio 3 (1806) Uroda · Mandekich · Kiricich · Smoyver · folio 4 (1807) Locatelli · Dovcich · Hudak · Gergas · Kriskovich · folio 5 (1807–09) Korpić · Medvidich · Kriskovich · Sesich · Kosner · Dorstiacich · Lenach · Sikka · folio 6 (1809–10) Miletich · Sirola · Vukelich · Kovačević.

No Uroda × Gerkacs anywhere in them. What is there is one Uroda entry, 10 February 1806:

«…habito mutuo consensu Joannis filii defuncti Dñi Georgij Uroda ac Mariæ filiæ Nicolai Barletich, hujatium… conjunxi ego Joës Antonius Frankovich Parochus loci, præsentibus Georgio Jerko et Gregorio Matthossich Judice Loci.»

A Georgius Uroda dead before February 1806, styled Dominus, with a son Joannes marrying before the village judge. Nothing in this archive has ever stood above ahnentafel 54.

It is not his marriage. Ahnentafel 55's death of 1834 reads «uxor piscatoris Georgii Uroda» — her husband was a Georgius, dead 1846 at 72. This groom is a Joannes. The likeliest shape is two brothers, Joannes and Georgius, sons of the dead Georgius senior — and that puts a question to the tree, which carries ahnentafel 54 as «Joannis Georgius Uroda», exactly what a tree program produces when it flattens Joannes filius Georgii. Nothing has been added to the tree.

Method, learned the hard way: the page is tilted, so cropping a wide entry as a left half and a right half lands on different lines. Read in three chunks with the same y-range and overlapping x, or the sentence assembles itself wrongly — as it did here, first making Georgius the groom.

Juraj's baptism is not reachable, and the reason rewrote the holdings table.

Two sittings took parish ranges from the collection waypoints. The catalogue item goes a level deeper and lists the contents of every film, volume by volume, with the DGS number that reopens it. The query term is q.keywords — q.text, q.anyPlace and q.placeString are all rejected by that service, which is very likely why no earlier sitting used it. Six calls produced sources/familysearch/holdings.psv: 79 films, named.

Krmpote is worse than recorded. One film, one item: Rođeni 1879–1896 and nothing else. Not 1815–1896. Juraj was born in the 1860s, so his baptism is not in this book and there is no other Krmpote book. The plan that called it «the reachable target» was working from a label.

Four parishes were missing from the table entirely — Bribir (its own parish, previously filed here as a village of Grižane, with registers back to 1678), Sv. Juraj kod Senja (1695–1868), Jurjevo, and Trsat.

And Rijeka, carried as «unknown — NOT CHECKED», is filmed 1590–1920 with alphabetical Kazalo indexes.

The catalogue as actually read is in notes/holdings-2026-09-14.md, and the map of where else the records are is in notes/parish-harvest-map.md — compiled by opening every relevant waypoint in Croatia, Church Books, 1516–1994 and reading its event ranges, because a catalogue label is a claim and the film is the evidence.

The first pass recorded ««Žubrinić» Šumećica = 0» and stopped. Šumećica on its own returns sixty-seven.

• Helységnévtára, 1913, Lika-Korbava vármegye, VII. Perušići járás, p. 240 — «… Otocko Staroselo 423 · Šumećica 200 …». Two hundred people in 1913.
• Degen Árpád, Flora Velebitica (1936), Ortsregister p. 446 — «Šumećica Häusergruppe SW von Otočac». A group of houses, not a village. Degen also puts a ponor at its foot that runs turbid when the Lika floods.
• Tiszti cím- és névtára, 1884, p. 2_64 — Šumećica listed as an administrative unit of Otočac in its own right, beside Prozor and Sinac.

And it bears directly on the census. Two hundred people is roughly twenty-five households. The Otočac status animarum lists seven or eight at Šumećica. That gap is independent evidence that the census's Šumećica block is not the whole village — which is where the missing Žubrinići sit.

Smojver — 650 hits. Tiszti cím- és névtára 1884, Névmutató S, p. 455: «Smojver Cecilia 210, 231 · Smojver Iván 154 · Smojver Károly 161 · Smojver Miklós 161» — four Smojvers holding posts in the Hungarian civil service in 1884, indexed to the pages that name their offices. Smojver is ahnentafel 53 and 106 here. None of those pages has been opened.

Method correction. The results page is client-rendered, not server-rendered as the first harvest recorded. fetch returns the shell and no hits; the tab has to navigate to the URL and the text be read off the rendered page.

The by-name has evidence, and it came from a search nobody here had run.

The Otočac baptisms 1846–1858 are INDEXED — both parents named, the mother with her maiden surname. Ninety-three Žubrinić baptisms at Otočac between 1846 and 1860. This archive has been reading Otočac off film for a fortnight without once searching the index.

Filtering to a father called Nicolaus gives exactly two:

• Maria Zubrinić, 15 September 1858 — parents Nicolaus Zubrinić and Anna Marić. The tree carries Marija as ABT 15 Sep 1858: the «about» comes off, and ahnentafel 11 has her surname from a register rather than a family tree.
• Stephanus «Bubrinić», 3 July 1856, line 49 — parents Nicolaus «Bubrinić» and Anna «Strumbulko». Bubrinić is the index misreading Žubrinić. A child this archive did not have.

«Strumbulko» occurs exactly once in the entire collection — every parish, every year — and it is this entry. So the same man, in the same parish, two years apart, has a wife written «Anna Strumbulko» in 1856 and «Anna Marić» in 1858.

That is what a nadimak looks like from the outside, and this archive has documented the pattern across ten surnames. «Ana Shambul Marić» is Marić plus a house name, and the priest who wrote the house name spelled it Šumbulko.

Both entries have since been read at the page, and they are one couple. The Conditio column of each gives the household: 3 July 1856 — «Rustici Confiniarii e Šumećica N° 2», and 15 September 1858 — «Rustica e Šumećica N° 2», with Žubrinić underlined by the scribe in both. One house, twenty-six months apart. So Anna Marić is Anna Štrumbulko, and the by-name is attested on a page.

Two corrections this reading forced. There is no Numerus Domus column in this book — the far-right column is Nrus Protocolli, the running entry number, and the village and house are written inside Conditio. And the house is N° 2, not the N° 24 of ahnentafel 10's own 1834 baptism — either he left his father's household, or the man at house 2 is another Nicolaus. The Status Animarum, read at Domus 2 and Domus 24 together, is what settles that.

And a negative that bears on something else: there is no Lucca born 1853 to a Nicolaus in the index. The tree gives Tereza a sister Lucca born 1853, which would make Nikola a father at nineteen — flagged this morning, and the index does not support it.

The page said «who among them was deported in July 1944 has not been checked here». It has now been checked.

Fourteen Codron memorials at Auschwitz, and eight of them share one date — 16 August 1944, the day the Rhodes transport arrived after the longest deportation journey of the Holocaust. Among them Rachele Codron, born 28 April 1939 — five years old; Alessandro, born 24 July 1933 — eleven; Elsa, born 1 September 1929 — fourteen; and two born in 1873. The married surnames carried into the family are Hasson, Simsolo, Capelluto, all Rhodes Sephardic names.

Santou Codron was thirty-one when this happened, and he was alive in 1997 to be buried in South Africa.

About twenty Codron graves are in the Jewish Cemetery of the Island of Rhodes, with row numbers, from 1768 to 1937 — Yaacov Codron in 1768, and Caden De Abraham Signoru Franco Codron, 1852–1941. The naming is the thing: De Abraham, De Nissim, De Joseph, De Haim, De Reuben, Mujer de — son, daughter, wife of. This archive has spent weeks on the Croatian equivalent, «Georgius Jellicich, Antonii». Two communities that never met, solving the same problem the same way.

And six Codrons lie at Pinelands, Cape Town — Leon (1972), Jack (1974), Albert (1985), Raie (1989), Guditha (14 October 1997, six months after Santou) and Isaac Nissim (2000), who carries both of the names around him: Santou's own full name is Santou Isaac Codron, and Nissim is a Codron name on Rhodes three times over.

Not one of them is joined to him by a document. Same surname, same island, same community. The Auschwitz entries are memorials, not graves, and the index is volunteer-compiled. Yad Vashem and the Rhodes Jewish Museum remain the place to settle it — but the two possibilities are no longer equally comfortable.

Six Žubrinić men of Otočac, and three of them are dead by February 1915.

• Zubrinić Nikola, ResInft., IR 79, 3. Komp., Otočac, 1886 — wounded
• Žubrinić Jure, ResInft., IR 79, 15. Komp., Otočac, 1887 — killed 13 December 1914
• Żubrinić Tomo, Inft., k.u. LIR 20, 13. Komp., Otočac, 1876 — killed 17 February 1915
• Žubrinic Toma, Ers.Res. Gefr., IR 79, 11. Komp., Otočac, 1886 — killed 29 January 1915
• Zubrinic Mijo, Inft., IR 79, 10. Komp., Otočac, 1890 — wounded
• Zubrinic Miklós, Gefr., IR 79, 3. Komp., Otočac — gunshot wound, in the hydropathic hospital at Bad Kreuzen, Upper Austria

Born 1876, 1886, 1886, 1887, 1890 — exactly the generation this archive said it was missing, and almost all in the same regiment, IR Nr. 79, which recruited Lika.

And Smojver — a direct-line surname — thirty hits. Smojver Blaž, ResKorp., IR 79, 6. Komp., Gospić, Karlobag, 1882, wounded. Two more taken prisoner: Dragutin at Penza in Russia, Jure on Asinara, the island off Sardinia where Austro-Hungarian prisoners died in thousands.

None is joined to this family by a document. What the lists give is a commune, a birth year and a fate — which is more than the parish registers give for this generation, because the parish registers for it are not filmed.

One in seven. The Compass gives the town: «Senj (Zengg), Komitat Lika-Krbava, kön. Freistadt, 3.600 Einwohner». The encyclopaedias give the factory: 120 workers in 1897, 500 by the 1920s.

Set those together and by the 1920s roughly one person in seven in Senj worked in the tobacco factory — which is no longer a detail in an occupation column. It is the town's economy, and it is why the brides of 1919 give tvorničarka seven times out of eight where the brides of 1909 gave it three times out of five.

The same directories name the town's other institutions and their officers — the Prva hrvatska štedionica branch at Senj, with Franjo Vukelić as its lawyer and F. Vukelić on the supervisory board.

Ahnentafel 13 has brothers and sisters.

Image 48, right-hand page, first family — written Pilepich, the parish's own spelling:

Pilepich Vicko, 17 Nov. 805 · Matia ux., 23 April 810 · Joso f., 14 Oct. 835 · Matia f., 18 Sept. 838 · Vice f., 16 Febr. 847 · Jure f. · Maria Jurka f., 24 lipnja 852.

Three of those are the direct line and all three agree to the day — ahnentafel 26, 27 and 13. Four are new. This archive had no siblings at all for ahnentafel 13; it now has a household of seven. The youngest child's month is written in Croatian (lipnja) inside a book with Latin headings.

The census does not give an age, it gives a date of birth to the day, and it carries one communion column per year from 1844 — so a household can be watched year by year.

A second Pilipić household sits below it: Pilepich Maria ved., 7 April 789, with six more, among them an Oliva — the given name of ahnentafel 53, recurring. Two further Pilipić households are on the facing page and on image 49. Four Pilipić households in one small town, none yet joined to another by a document. The openings either side are Perpić, a surname this archive knows from Krivi Put, forty kilometres away.

Two things this archive said about the book yesterday were wrong, and both are corrected. It is ordered by family number, not house number — Karlobag's registers of this period use no house numbers at all, and the 1838 baptism, re-read the same day, gives none either. And on the ordering — corrected again in the second sitting below — the book runs alphabetically once, images 8 to about 75; what follows is not a second census but later additions, households entered as they formed, some carrying dates into the 1870s.

Finding the household took a survey of the whole film: there is no index, and the house-number route in was a dead end. Reading the rest is about a hundred openings and would give a dated census of the whole town, twice, thirty years apart.

The label holds, and this time that is the good news. Karlobag is the best-read parish in this archive and its ranges had never once been checked — three unknowns in the parish table, and four walls on the chart reading «ranges not checked», which looks like a gap and is really an unopened door.

All three films were opened: 327 images of births in two bound volumes (HDA 426 and 427), 435 images carrying the 1804–1861 books and the older marriages 1736–1804 and deaths 1774–1804, and 122 images of a Church Census this archive did not know existed.

Read off the film, not the label: image 4 is 1723 and image 6 is the 1690s — the front leaves are not in chronological order. Image 140 is 1761, image 220 1782, image 260 1792. On the second film, image 300 is the marriages of 1767 and image 360 the deaths of 1775. The language changes under you: Croatian prose to the 1750s, Latin after, tabular from about 1780.

Four walls became reachable — Jacob Pilipić about 1741, Georgi Uroda about 1750, Vicentius Luckinić about 1700, and Josiph Smojver Vukić's own baptism of 1731. A fifth is answerable in a different way: Maria Uroda is on the chart under her husband's surname, and you cannot search for a name you do not have — but her marriage of about 1775 is inside the film, and a marriage entry names the bride's father. Maria Luckinić misses by eleven years: her marriage falls about 1725 and the book begins in 1736.

And the Stanje duša is the prize nobody was looking for: a date of birth to the day for every soul, and a communion column for every year from 1844. It was read the same day — see the next row — and two things said here first were wrong: it is ordered by family number, not house number, and it is not one census but two.

Lika and the Kvarner were administered from Budapest, this archive's own place strings still say so — Ledenice, Modruš-Fiume, Magyarország — and nobody in this estate had ever run a search in that administration's press. One afternoon in it produced:

• A number for the tobacco factory. A Pallas nagy lexikona (1897): Zengg's dohánygyára 120 munkás. Révai Nagy Lexikona (1926): 500 munkás. This archive's most-quoted finding — the brides' occupation column going from three of five in 1909 to seven of eight in 1919 — now has the arithmetic behind it. A four-fold factory in a town of a few thousand.

• A Žubrinić who kept a bank's cash. Magyar Compass 1908: the Srpska štedionica of Otočac, founded 1904, Kassier Venzeslav Žubrinić. A merchant, Daniel Žubrinić, Handelsmann in Otočac, in the Wiener Zeitung of 1862. And a Daniel Žubrinić, priest of the Senj-Modruš diocese, posted to Otočac in 1885 — the very diocese whose registers this archive reads.

• A man born at Otočac in 1886, in three Austrian papers at once: Mijo Zubrinic … 1886 geboren, aus Otocac, Kom. Lika-Krbava. The archive holds nobody born at Otočac between 1875 and 1900.

• A patronymic in a gazette — Službeni list, 1966: “Zubrinić Franje iz Prozora sina Jure”, Općinski sud Otočac.

• Three Kalanj men of Brinje in the First World War casualty lists, with birth years and fates — Ivan b. 1891 a prisoner at Prokuplje, Franjo b. 1893 killed 6 March 1915. This archive had never opened a First World War record.

• A third emigration. Feldkircher Anzeiger, 1902: Blaževići of Staroselo, Krmpote, working as masons in Vorarlberg, with birth years and home commune. The archive knew America and Australia. It did not know about the Alps.

Everything is a snippet: Arcanum gives the text and paywalls the page image, so none of it has been read at the page, and none of it is in the tree.

The first cemetery source this archive has ever used, and it gave a woman her dates.

John Zubrinich lies at Port Pirie in CC, Lot 26, and beside him in grave 2 is Rose Zubrinich, 17 March 1860 – 24 September 1949 — the Rose Gormley he married at St Luke's in 1884, who had no dates in this archive at all and was born within a fortnight of her husband. In his own grave are two of their children, Susannah and Stanley, who died at eight years and at six months.

Sixteen of the seventy-two are people on this site. Fifty-six are not — and the plot numbers say who they were. PRF, Lot 5, 10 holds Thomas Leo and a Una Blanche nobody here has heard of; CR, Lot 44, 1 holds Arthur Leslie and a Florence Johanna; Broken Hill's Catholic XC row 6 plot 33 holds Leonard James and an Eveline Frances. A lot number is a household claim, and it is one a parish register cannot make.

Not one of the 72 is in Croatia. Twenty-nine are at Port Pirie, thirteen at Enfield in Adelaide, six at Timmins, Ontario — which is where the 1928 Liverpool–Halifax arrival was going — four at Whyalla, two at Broken Hill, two in Pennsylvania, one in California.

And Stanley J Zubrinich, a veteran, died 8 July 2001 at the South Australian Garden of Remembrance — very likely the Stanley Joseph who married in Queensland in 1947 and whom this archive could not place.

Seven pages, and the best-read parish in the archive. A Dominus honorific, a Giustiniani godfather, a Pro-Colonel, a Captain, a Baron von Holstein — and one volume kept in Croatian rather than Latin.

Two sittings in September closed two more: ahnentafel 27's baptism of 1810, confirming the tree to the day, and ahnentafel 13's of 18 September 1838, which gave the archive its first people who worked at sea — her father a cammeralis nauclerus, a chamber shipmaster, and her grandfather a mercator.

Both readings nearly went wrong. The 1810 month read as 7ma — September — at page scale and is a ditto mark at 3.4×; it would have been published as a five-month correction to a tree that was right.

The parish is Selce, not Vrbnik — and this archive carried the wrong label for weeks on the strength of a modern pencil annotation.

What settled it was not the page but the priest. The baptism is signed “Mich: Rombol Capell: Loci”; the Selce deaths of 1806, on a different film, are kept by the same man under the same title. Same hand, same office, same year.

The page also answered question 5: three underlined by-names in one entry — Antich Papa, Loncsarich Franich, Antich Dudin.

1809, entry 70, house 110 — the tree's 22 March confirmed, ahnentafel 50 and 51 named, and a ninth by-name pair, “Jellichich dictis Jurešina”, underlined by the priest exactly as his successor underlined “Antich Papa” a generation later.

1838, image 186, domus 51 — ahnentafel 12's own baptism on 11 March, the tree's exact date, in the same house as his parents' marriage three years before and by the same priest. His father is entered “Josephi Antich Papa”, which carries the by-name to the font.

One thing got worse: the child's name is written Gregorium, not Georgium. The identification is beyond doubt; the given name now is not.

Both volumes were on disk the whole time, attached in the tree and counted merely as scanned.

The label holds and the hand is the surprise. The film target says 1650–1786 and the earliest leaves are in Croatian, not Latin — the glagolitic littoral's own practice, a century before the Latin registers this archive is used to.

One hundred and twenty events from this family are reachable in the Novi Vinodolski books. Nobody has read a line of them.

Written up in notes/novi-vinodolski-1650.md, which records the rule this reading produced: open the film before trusting the label.

Household lists in Croatian, at images ~100–140 of a 579-image film — and the by-names again, in 1738, in a parish a day's walk from the others. The practice this archive documented across ten surnames between 1806 and 1885 is visibly older and wider than its evidence.

The Blaževići on this page are not claimed. They are Blaževići at Grižane in 1738 and nothing yet joins them to this family.

Written up in notes/grizane-1738-census.md — a household census a century older than Otočac's, and in Croatian rather than Latin.

Repeatedly the best source in the building. The 1835 Selce marriage, the 1809 baptism and the 1838 baptism were each “awaiting a trip to Croatia” and each was already attached to the tree at 2,987 pixels.

The same sweep turned up three Arolsen Archives cards filed under Hedviga's husband that nobody had opened, and they place him in a Württemberg factory at sixteen.

The coverage tool now separates scanned from read, because the difference was hiding a dozen documents in plain sight.

Šumećica is an emigration village and this archive did not know it. Franjo Zubrinic, b. 1883, Noordam, 1910, residence “Sumenica”, wife left behind, brother already in New York. Šumećica is ahnentafel 10's own hamlet, and the archive's emigration page had Prozor and nothing else.

Three Otočac men, one naming his father Marko; a Prozor man naming his father Sandro; and the Kostelac link — a nephew and an uncle of that name meeting two different Žubrinići off two different ships.

Also a warning worth as much as the finds: only the ELLIS2 dataset carries residence and relations. Records whose id begins R_ or US/PASSENGERLISTS will not tell you where in Croatia anyone came from, and the …/2 and …/3 suffixes are relations named on a record, not passengers — they surface in the index as though they had travelled.

They were, and it flattered the archive. A person could be graded scanned — an image attached, nothing read out — while the document had in fact been read weeks earlier, because a reading lives in prose and not in data.

A file of readings now carries the citation for every document actually read out. Read went from 19 to 31 and scanned from 12 to zero, which is not progress: it is the same evidence, counted honestly.

519 events are reachable — births, marriages and deaths whose parish is known and whose book is filmed and in range.

One hundred and thirty-nine of them appeared only after the village parser was fixed. House numbers were sitting inside the village field — “Klenovica 22”, “#6 Mrzli Dol” — and every person so recorded was invisible to the match. A parsing bug had been hiding a fifth of the harvest.

Sixteen phrases, thirteen pairs, ten surnames, 1806–1885 — and eight of them underlined by the scribe. The underline is the tell: the priest is marking the household name, not decorating.

It makes Antić and Papić one family rather than two, and it is the reason this archive can read a Senj marriage of 1885 and a Selce baptism of 1806 as the same line.

Eleven marriages, and every other bride on each page. Pages 303, 307, 315, 322, 324, 326, 333, 348, 350, 355, 359 and — at full resolution on 13 September — 192, 294 and 366.

The pages carry more than the family. The tobacco factory shows up as a decade-long trend: three of five brides in 1909 give tvorničarka as their occupation, seven of eight by 1919. That is not a household fact; it is an industrial one, and it is only visible because the whole page was read rather than the one entry.

The film was also verified end to end — image 196 is page 192 (1885), image 371 is page 366 (1920).

The label is wrong by sixty-four years. Image 10 is page 2 and reads Godine 1879; image 188 is page 177 and reads Godine 1896. The film is 1879–1896.

This is the parish that should hold every Blažević above Toma, and Jurko Blažević — born about the 1860s — is outside it. Two published plans died here as well. The lesson has been written into the harvest map: the label on a waypoint is a claim about the parish, not about the film.

This archive twice published that it could not be done, and was twice wrong. The Deep Zoom tiles do 401 and taint the canvas — from sg30p0.familysearch.org. The same tiles are served from www.familysearch.org, which is same-origin with the viewer: no preflight, no tainted canvas, cookies sent.

So the register can be read at six times the resolution of the 960-pixel copies this archive had been squinting at, and the method is committed as a tool rather than retold each time.

It matters more than it sounds. At page scale a 19 reads as 1, a flat-topped 2 reads as 7, and Prpić reads as Papić. Two of those nearly reached this site as corrections to a tree that was right.

Ivan Žubrinić's 1884 marriage at St Luke, Port Pirie names his father — civil confirmation of a link this archive held only from the tree — and gives his wife Rose Garmly a father, Thomas Garmly, where she previously had no parents at all.

Mate Žubrinić of Prozor 50, whose record here stopped at his birth in 1867, sailed to New York in 1911 leaving a wife, Roza.

And the method finding that shaped everything after: post-1906 American manifests carry a last residence and the relative left behind. That is a Croatian village, named by the emigrant, in an English-language index.

The one finding that changed the Croatian research. A 1910 manifest gave a Kalanj's residence as Brinje; the re-read of their own 1864 baptism then said the same thing in Latin. They are not a Klenovica family.

Three of this archive's surnames meet at Brinje — Kalanj, Perković and Borić — and a Borić of Brinje married a Papić of Senj.

Georgius: «Dominus Georgius Vroda aetatis annorum 60», dead on 17 August 1754, buried in the Dominicans' church of S. Dominic (image 254; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-death-1754-08-dominus-georgius-vroda-aged-60)) — very probably the Magister Georgius alive on 4 August 1746 and dead by 13 February 1757, born about 1694; a daughter Magdalena, «filia Magistri Georgii Vrode», was buried on 29 October 1740 (image 222; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-death-1740-10-magdalena-daughter-of-magister-georgius-vrode)). Dominicus: an infant son Paulus of Magister Dominicus and Floria Vrodda, buried 7 January 1744 (image 236; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-death-1744-01-paulus-infant-son-of-magister-dominicus-and-floria-vrodda)); and Lucia, «ux. q. Mag. Dominici Vrodda», aged about 77, dead 21 June 1746 (image 241; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-death-1746-06-lucia-of-the-late-magister-dominicus-vrodda-aged-77)) — the widow of an elder Magister Dominicus Vroda, dead by June 1746. A third master, Antonius: daughters Marietta, «filia Magistri Antonij Vroda», buried 18 January 1742 (image 231; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-death-1742-01-marietta-daughter-of-magister-antonius-vroda)) and Dominica, aged about 13, «filia Magistri Antonij, et Antoniae Conjugum Vrodda», 19 July 1742 (image 233; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-death-1742-07-dominica-daughter-of-magister-antonius-and-antonia-vrodda)) — the Antonius, son of Lucas, who married Antonia in 1718. Page map: 215 = Aug–Sep 1738, 222 = Sep–Nov 1740, 223 = Nov–Dec 1740, 224 = Jan 1741, 225 = Feb–Apr 1741, 226 = Apr–May 1741, 227 = Apr–Jun 1741, 228 = Jun–Jul 1741, 229 = Jul 1741, 230 = Aug–Oct 1741, 231 = Nov 1741–Jan 1742, 232 = Jan–Apr 1742, 233 = Apr–Jul 1742, 234 = Aug 1742–Jan 1743, 235 = Jan–Aug 1743, 236 = Jan–Aug 1744, 237 = Aug–Oct 1744, 238 = Jan–Aug 1745, 239 = Aug–Dec 1745, 240 = Dec 1745–Feb 1746, 241 = Jun–Oct 1746, 242 = Jan–Mar 1747, 243 = Apr–Nov 1747, 244 = Nov 1747–Mar 1748, 245 = Mar 1748–Mar 1749, 246 = Apr–Aug 1749, 247 = Aug 1749–May 1750, 248 = May–Jul 1750, 249 = Aug 1750–Mar 1752, 250 = Mar 1751–Sep 1751 and 1752, 251 = 1752–Jan 1753, 252 = Aug 1753–Nov 1753, 253 = Dec 1753–Aug 1754, 254 = Aug–Oct 1754. Not found in the pages read: Franciscus Uroda (dead by 6 May 1742; probably August 1738 – April 1742, partly in the unread images 216–221), a Dume Uroda (dead by 7 June 1739: unread, images before 215), or a death of Georgius's wife.

Georgius, baptised 10 October 1694 (born 6 October), «ex Coniugibus Dominico et Lucietta Vroda» (image 272; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-cathedral-birth-1694-10-georgius-son-of-dominicus-and-lucietta-vroda)) — the age of the Georgius who died on 17 August 1754 «aetatis annorum 60», to the month; his parents' names are those of the elder Magister Dominicus Vrodda and his widow Lucia (d. 21 June 1746, aged about 77). Simeon, son of «Magistro Domco ac Lucia Vrodda» of the parish of S. Marci, 14 [October] 1696 (image 286; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-cathedral-birth-1696-10-simeon-son-of-magister-dominicus-and-lucia-vrodda)). Michaela, daughter of «Magistri Lucae et Mariae Vrodal», January 1694 (image 268; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-cathedral-birth-1694-01-michaela-daughter-of-magister-lucas-and-maria-vroda)). All three were baptised in the cathedral baptistery and are in no Dolac book, so the Dolac baptism books are not complete for the Uroda.

Two children of Magister Dominicus and Flora Vroda of the parish of S. Marci — baptised at home for danger of death and the ceremonies supplied at the cathedral: Joseph Joannes, born 16 December 1739, ceremonies 7 June 1740 (image 31; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-cathedral-birth-1740-06-joseph-joannes-son-of-magister-dominicus-and-flora-vroda)) and Anna, born May 1741, ceremonies 6 August 1741 (image 41; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-cathedral-birth-1741-08-anna-daughter-of-magister-dominicus-and-flora-vroda)). The Joannes of 1739 is very probably the «Joannes filius Dominici Uroda» of 1757. No Georgius Vroda baptism in the window — no son Georgius of the master Georgius born December 1737 – 1743 at the cathedral. Image 60 (December 1743) names a «Dominus Georgius Vrode» as godfather of a girl of S. Marci baptised in the cathedral — Georgius the master, alive in 1743; no new person. A «Cecilia V. Fondra» of the parish of All Saints (image 52) is not a Vroda.

Franciscus: «Magister Franciscus Vroda … animam Deo reddidit», 15 November 1738, buried in the church of the Holy Trinity (image 216; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-death-1738-11-magister-franciscus-vroda)) — a month after he last stood godfather (12 October 1738). No Dume Uroda, no death of Georgius's wife and no Dominicus in the pages read: nothing in September 1738 – September 1740 or October 1754 – March 1756 beyond Franciscus.

No Uroda groom or bride, but a witness: «Dno Dominico Uroda» at the marriage of Joannes Grubisich and Ariana, daughter of the late Michael Boydanovich alias Pancora, on 3 June 1767 (image 373, left, first entry; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-marriage-1767-06-grubisich-witness-dominicus-uroda)). The first living Uroda in the Šibenik registers; no father, place or age is given, so he is not tied to the Karlobag Dominicus or Dume. Page map: 360 = Dec 1763–May 1764, 361 = May–Aug 1764, 362 = Nov 1764–Feb 1765, 363 = Feb–Aug 1765, 364 = Sep–Oct 1765, 365 = Nov 1765–Nov 1766 (sparse), 366 = Jan–Aug 1766 (a later hand), 367 = Feb–Apr 1766, 368 = Apr–Aug 1766, 369 = Aug–Nov 1766, 370 = Nov 1766–Jan 1767, 371 = Feb 1767, 372 = Feb–May 1767, 373 = Jun–Sep 1767, 374 = Sep–Nov 1767, 375 = Nov 1767–Feb 1768, 376 = Feb 1768, 377 = May–Oct 1768, 378 = Oct–Dec 1768, 379 = Dec 1768–Jan 1769, 380 = Feb 1769, 381 = May–Aug 1769, 382 = Aug 1769–Jan 1770. With 313–359 (the row above) the whole book is read from its first entry, May 1752, to January 1770: eighteen years, one Uroda, a witness.

No Uroda groom or bride, and no Georgius × Maria, but FIVE sightings of a living Dominicus Uroda as a witness at marriages: 11 Jan 1756 («Dominico Uroda», image 446), 27 Sept 1757 (his son «Joanne filio Dominici Uroda», image 450), 11 Sept 1759 («Magistro Domico [Dominico] Uroda», image 458), 10 Aug 1762 («Dno Dominico Uroda», image 469) and, in the cathedral parish, 3 June 1767. Snapshots: [1756](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1756-01-clavich-witness-dominicus-uroda), [1757](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1757-09-kvancich-witness-joannes-son-of-dominicus-uroda), [1759](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1759-09-meich-witness-magister-dominicus-uroda), [1762](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1762-08-loccasovich-witness-dominicus-uroda). The book is a booklet of small pages, one marriage to a half-page in the hand of the rector Thomas Jadovon (S. Marci in Suburbio Maris); about 1.3 months to an image. Page map: 440 = Jun 1752–Mar 1753, 441 = Mar–Dec 1753, 442 = Feb–Sep 1754, 443 = Sep–Nov 1754, 444 = Nov 1754–Jan 1755, 445 = Apr–Aug 1755, 446 = Sep 1755–Jan 1756, 447 = Jan–Jul 1756, 448 = Jan–Jul 1757 (Jan 1757 on the left), 449 = Apr–Jul 1757, 450 = Aug–Sep 1757, 451 = Oct–Nov 1757, 452 = Oct–Nov 1757, 453 = Nov 1757–Jan 1758, 454 = Jan–Feb 1758, 455 = Feb 1758, 456 = May–Aug 1758, 457 = Sep 1758–Feb 1759, 458 = Feb–Sep 1759, 459 = Nov 1759, 460 = Jan–Apr 1760, 461 = Apr–May 1760, 462 = Jun–Aug 1760, 463 = Aug–Oct 1760, 464 = Nov 1760, 465 = Nov 1760–Apr 1761, 466 = Aug–Sep 1761, 467 = Oct–Dec 1761, 468 = Jan–Feb 1762, 469 = Jun–Aug 1762, 470 = Nov 1762–Jan 1764, 471 = Jan–Jun 1764, 472 = Jul 1764 (not read past the first entry). Georgius and Maria's marriage is therefore not in Šibenik's cathedral or Dolac marriage books in 1752–1764.

No child of any Uroda baptised in the Dolac parish in August 1731 – March 1744, but seven sightings of the Šibenik Uroda, which are the first of the family in any register, and one that names a LATE Franciscus Uroda with a daughter: Franciscus Uroda godfather 25 Apr 1733 («Mr Franciscus Vroda», image 109), 30 Jan 1735 (image 111) and, as «Magister», 12 Oct 1738 (image 118); «Dna … uxor Mri Georgij Vroda», wife of a Magister Georgius Uroda, godmother 19 May 1738 (image 117); Magister Dominicus Vroda godfather 1 Jan 1741 (image 123) and 23 Apr 1741 (image 125); «Antoniae filiae q. Francisci Vrodda de hac Parochia S. Marci», 6 May 1742 (image 126): Franciscus is dead by then and has a daughter Antonia, wife of a Joannes Biliznich, mother of a Georgius Biliznich. Snapshots: [1733](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1733-04-maria-maraglia-godfather-magister-franciscus-uroda), [1735](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1735-01-domica-godfather-magister-franciscus-uroda), [1738 Georgius](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1738-05-lucia-dragovich-godmother-wife-of-georgius-uroda), [1738 Franciscus](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1738-10-maria-vidovich-godfather-magister-franciscus-uroda), [1741 January](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1741-01-joana-peresich-godfather-magister-dominicus-uroda), [1741 April](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1741-04-domica-maraglia-godfather-magister-dominicus-uroda), [1742](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1742-05-georgius-biliznich-mother-antonia-daughter-of-franciscus-uroda). Image 107 is the cover of the book («ŠIBENIK (DOLAC) KNJ. KRŠTENIH 22.VIII.1731 – 14.III.1762», «Liber Baptizatorum Parochiae S. Marci 1731 a die 23 Augusti … 1762»); the book is in Latin, one baptism to a short paragraph, the child's surname in the left margin. About 2.3 images a year: 108 = Aug 1731–Aug 1732, 109 = Aug 1732–Jul 1733, 110 = Aug 1733–May 1734, 111 = Aug 1734–Aug 1735, 112 = Aug 1735–Mar 1736, 113 = Mar–Apr 1736 (and a few entries out of order), 114 = Mar 1736–Oct 1737, 115 = Oct 1736–Jun 1737, 116 = Jun 1737–Jan 1738, 117 = Jan–Aug 1738, 118 = Aug–Dec 1738, 119 = Jan–Aug 1739, 120 = Aug 1739–Jan 1740, 121 = Jan–Apr 1740, 122 = Apr–Sep 1740, 123 = Sep 1740–Apr 1741. 124 = Jan–Apr 1741 (a repeat frame of 123), 125 = Apr–Aug 1741 and Oct 1741–Apr 1742, 126 = Mar–Dec 1742, 127 = Jul–Oct 1742, 128 = Oct 1742–Apr 1743, 129 = Apr 1743–Mar 1744. From image 126 on the book is in a new hand (the parish priest Angelus Trapileo) with the surname in a larger margin hand.

Four Uroda households in the first fifteen years of the book, baptising sons and daughters: Joannes and Ursula Vroda, son Paulus (28 Jan 1703, image 12 left; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1703-01-paulus-son-of-joannes-uroda-and-ursula)) and son Antonius (31 May 1705, image 19 right; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1705-05-antonius-son-of-joannes-and-ursula-vrodich)); Lucas Vrodich, son Simeon (27 Oct 1705, image 20 right; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1705-10-simeon-son-of-lucas-vrodich)); Thomas and Anastasia Vrodich, son Paulus (14 May 1706, image 22 left; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1706-05-paulus-son-of-thomas-vrodich)); Lucas Vrodich again, son Paulus Antonius (16 Jan 1710, image 35 right; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1710-01-paulus-antonius-son-of-lucas-vrodich)); and FRANCISCUS and Anna Vrodich, son Paulus (23 Oct 1710, image 38 left; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1710-10-paulus-son-of-franciscus-vrodich)) — the first Franciscus — whose second child Stanislava follows on 21 Nov 1712 (image 44; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1712-11-stanislava-daughter-of-franciscus-vrodich)) and whose daughter SIMONA (born 21 Oct 1715, baptised 28 Oct, image 53; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1715-10-simona-daughter-of-franciscus-vrodich)) has the mother written «Lucia» (a second wife, or a second Franciscus), with a godfather «D. Georgius Vrodi[ch?]». The book opens at image 6 (20 March 1701, in a clerk's hand, the parish priest Fr. Andreas Rovich/Kovich, and from January 1703 Fr. Paulus Nicolich); about 3 images a year. Page map: 6 = Mar–Aug 1701, 7 = Sep–Dec 1701, 8 = Dec 1701–Feb 1702, 9 = Mar–Aug 1702, 10 = Aug–Oct 1702, 11 = Oct 1702–Jan 1703, 12 = Jan–Mar 1703, 13 = Apr–Aug 1703, 14 = Aug–Oct 1703, 15 = Oct 1703–Apr 1704, 16 = May–Aug 1704, 17 = Aug–Oct 1704, 18 = Oct 1704–May 1705, 19 = May–Jul 1705, 20 = Aug–Oct 1705, 21 = Oct 1705–May 1706, 22 = May–Jun 1706, 23 = Aug–Oct 1706, 24 = Oct 1706–Feb 1707, 25 = Feb–Apr 1707, 26 = repeat of 25, 27 = May–Jul 1707, 28 = Aug–Oct 1707, 29 = Oct 1707–Aug 1708, 30 = May–Aug 1708, 31 = Jul–Aug 1708, 32 = Aug–Dec 1708, 33 = Jan–Mar 1709, 34 = Mar–Dec 1709, 35 = Jan 1710, 36 = Jan–Jun 1710, 37 = Jul–Oct 1710, 38 = Oct 1710–Jan 1711, 39 = repeat of 38, 40 = Jan–Aug 1711, 41 = Aug 1711–Feb 1712, 42 = Mar–Jun 1712, 43 = Jun–Aug 1712, 44 = Nov 1712–Jan 1713, 45 = Jan–Jun 1713, 46 = Sep–Dec 1713, 47 = repeat of 46, 48 = Mar–Aug 1714, 49 = Oct 1714, 50 = Nov 1714–Feb 1715, 51 = Feb–Aug 1715, 52 = Feb–Oct 1715, 53 = Oct 1715–Mar 1716 (with pasted slips), 54–55 = repeat frames of 53, 56 = Jan–Apr 1716 (a new hand: Fr. Bonaventura Paulinovich), 57 = May–Aug 1716, 58 = Aug–Oct 1716, 59 = Oct 1716–Jan 1717. Franciscus Uroda is here by 1710 (so the Magister Franciscus of 1733–1738, dead by 1742, is this man or his son); Georgius, Dominicus and Dume are not yet met as fathers in 1701–1712. Images 60–103 (January 1717 – August 1731): no child of an Uroda, but the name stands at the font again and again. 1721, a son: Franciscus Antonius, son of Franciscus URODE and Anna, born 3 [October] 1721 (image 75 left; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1721-10-franciscus-antonius-son-of-franciscus-urode-and-anna)) — Anna is the wife of the Franciscus Vrodich of 1710 and 1712, so these are one household with children of 1710, 1712 and 1721 (and Simona 1715, mother «Lucia?»). A Georgius URODICH, godfather on 28 January 1720 (image 69 right; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1720-01-paulus-son-of-stephanus-godfather-georgius-urodich)) and 27 December 1721 (image 75 right; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1721-12-thomasa-karmelich-godfather-georgius-urodich)), perhaps the «Georgius Vrodi[ch?]» of October 1715 and perhaps the Magister Georgius of 1738. A Magister Franciscus VRODA as a regular godfather, 1725–1730: 19 March 1725 (image 88; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1725-03-antonia-tintich-godfather-magister-franciscus-vroda)), 6 July 1728 (image 98; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1728-07-matthaeus-son-of-joannes-godfather-franciscus-vroda)), 26 October 1728 (image 98; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1728-10-simeona-scalabrin-godfather-franciscus-vroda)), 7 January 1729 (image 99; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1729-01-stephanus-son-of-jacobus-godfather-franciscus-vroda)), 23 August 1729 (image 102; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1729-08-bartolomea-godfather-franciscus-vroda)), 12 September 1729 (image 99; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1729-09-simeon-son-of-marcus-godfather-franciscus-vroda)) and 12 February 1730 (image 99; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1730-02-twins-matthaeus-and-joanna-godfather-franciscus-vroda)), nearly always beside an Angela Julioli, who stands beside many godfathers. A Mr. Dominicus [?] VRODA, godfather, 27 January 1726 (image 91 right; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1726-01-paula-bratich-godfather-magister-dominicus-vroda)) — the forename is abbreviated «Domcus». Page map for the second half: 60 = Jan–Feb 1717, 61 = May–Aug 1717, 62 = Aug–Dec 1717, 63 = Dec 1717–Mar 1718, 64 = Mar–Aug 1718, 65 = Jul–Dec 1718, 66 = Dec 1718–Jan 1719, 67 = Jan–May 1719, 68 = May–Aug 1719, 69 = Sep 1719–Jan 1720, 70 = Feb–Sep 1720, 71 = Sep–Dec 1720, 72 = Dec 1720–Mar 1721, 73 = Apr–Jun 1721, 74 = Jul–Oct 1721, 75 = Oct 1721–Jan 1722, 76 = Jan–May 1722, 77 = May–Oct 1722, 78 = Oct 1722–Feb 1723, 79 = Jan–Jul 1723, 80 = Jul–Oct 1723, 81 = Oct–Nov 1723, 82 and 83 = Nov 1723–Mar 1724, 84 = Mar–Jun 1724, 85 = Jun–Jul 1724, 86 = Jul–Oct 1724, 87 = Oct 1724–Jan 1725, 88 = Mar–Jun 1725, 89 = Aug–Nov 1725, 90 = Nov 1725–Jan 1726, 91 = Jan–Jun 1726, 92 = Jul–Dec 1726, 93 = Nov 1726–Jan 1727, 94 = Dec 1726–Feb 1727, 95 = Feb–Apr 1727, 96 = Nov 1727–Mar 1728, 97 = Mar–Jun 1728, 98 = Jul–Dec 1728, 99 = Jan 1729–Mar 1730, 100 = Apr–Nov 1730, 101 = Nov 1730–Feb 1731, 102 = out-of-order entries of 1729–1731, 103 = Apr–Aug 1731 and the seal. So the Uroda are at Dolac without a break from 1703 to 1767: Joannes (1703–05), Lucas (1705–10), Thomas (1706), Franciscus with Anna (1710–1721) who is a master by 1725 and a godfather to 1738, Georgius (1715?–1738), Dominicus (1726?–1767).

No child of Georgius or Joannes Uroda, but a father named for the first time: on 13 February 1757 a godfather is written «D. Dominicus filius qd. Georgij Vroda» — Dominicus, son of the late Georgius Vroda (image 159; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1757-02-lucia-pajanin-godfather-dominicus-son-of-late-georgius-vroda)). Dominicus Vroda is a father and a master: a daughter LUCIA (born 12 December 1744, baptised 15th; mother Floria; the father written «magistri Dolcarij [?] Dominici»; image 131; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1744-12-lucia-daughter-of-magister-dominicus-vroda)) and a daughter VITTORIA (born 10 May 1745, baptised 16 May; image 132; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1745-05-vittoria-daughter-of-dominicus-and-floria-vrodda)). He stands godfather on 27 June 1749 (image 140; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1749-06-antonia-pagen-godfather-dominicus-vroda)), 20 March 1752 (image 143; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1752-03-joseph-bodulovich-godfather-dominicus-uroda)) and 6 July 1755 as «assistens» (image 153; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1755-07-vitus-antonius-pajanin-assistant-dominicus-vroda)), and on 11 September 1757 is written «Dominicus Vroda Pictor» — a painter (image 161; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1757-09-helena-raich-godfather-dominicus-vroda-pictor)). An Uroda daughter, ANTONIA VRODDA, is the wife of Joannes Mestrovich alias Calafat and mother of Franceschina (baptised 23 October 1746; image 135; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1746-10-franceschina-mestrovich-mother-antonia-vrodda)). Page map: 130 = Mar–Apr 1744 … 131 = Oct 1744–Feb 1745, 132 = Mar–Sep 1745, 133 = Oct 1745–Feb 1746, 134 = Mar–May 1746, 135 = Sep–Nov 1746, 136 = Nov 1746–Mar 1747, 137 = Apr–Sep 1747, 138 = Oct 1747–Apr 1748, 139 = May–Dec 1748, 140 = Jan–Jul 1749, 141 = Aug 1749–Jul 1750, 142 = Jul 1750–Jan 1751, 143 = Aug 1751–Apr 1752, 144 = Jun 1752 (a new hand: Fr. Angelus de Venetiis) – Sep 1752, 145 = Dec 1752–Jul 1753, 146 = Aug–Oct 1753, 147 = Oct 1753–Jan 1754, 148 = Dec 1753–Mar 1754, 149 = Mar–Oct 1754, 150 = Oct–Dec 1754, 151 = Jan–Mar 1755, 152 = Mar–May 1755, 153 = Jul–Aug 1755, 154 = Oct–Nov 1755, 155 = Nov 1755–Feb 1756, 156 = Feb–May 1756, 157 = Jun–Sep 1756, 158 = Sep–Nov 1756, 159 = Dec 1756–Apr 1757, 160 = May–Jul 1757, 161 = Jul–Dec 1757, 162 = Sep 1757–Jan 1758, 163 = Nov 1757–Feb 1758, 164 = Feb–May 1758, 165 = Jul–Sep 1758, 166 = Oct–Dec 1758, 167 = Dec 1758–Feb 1759, 168 = Feb–May 1759, 169 = May–Jul 1759, 170 = Jul–Dec 1759, 171 = Jan–Apr 1760, 172 = Apr–May 1760, 173 = May–Jul 1760, 174 = Aug–Oct 1760, 175 = Oct–Nov 1760, 176 = Dec 1760–Jan 1761, 177 = Feb–Mar 1761, 178 = Apr–Jul 1761, 179 = Jul–Sep 1761, 180 = Sep–Nov 1761, 181 = Nov 1761–Jan 1762 (with the Bishop's visitation note of 1761), 182 = Jan–14 Mar 1762. No Georgius or Joannes «filius Dominici Uroda» was baptised in 1744–1762, no Uroda child baptised after 1745, and no Uroda marriage is recorded here (the book holds baptisms only).

The Uroda are at Dolac from the first pages of the first book — four men by 1692 — but no Georgius, Franciscus or Dume is met, and no child of a Georgius. Dominicus Vroda (godfather 19 April 1687, [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1687-04-anastasia-godparents-dominicus-vroda-and-catarina-wife-of-thomas-vrodich)), «Dominus Vrodich & Vrsula eius coniunx» (January 1689, [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1689-01-joanna-sevelich-godparents-dominus-vrodich-and-ursula)), father with Ursula of Lucia (31 July 1692, [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1692-07-lucia-daughter-of-dominicus-vrodi-and-ursula)), godfather 22 February 1693 ([snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1693-02-catharina-croglienich-godfather-dominicus-vrodi)) and perhaps father of an Aurelia, 17 September 1693 ([snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1693-09-aurelia-daughter-of-domini-and-silvia-vroda), doubtful). Thomas Vrodich/Vroda, wife Catarina/Catharina (April 1687; 17 September 1692, [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1692-09-joannes-galiotovich-godmother-catharina-wife-of-thomas-vroda)) and a daughter Justina old enough to be a godmother on 2 August 1692 ([snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1692-08-elias-boghcrich-godmother-justina-daughter-of-thomas-vroda)). Lucas Vrodi/Vrodich, wife Mariota/Marieta: son Antonius (6 August 1692, [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1692-08-antonius-son-of-luca-vrodi)) and son Michael (13 July 1698, [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1698-07-michael-son-of-lucas-and-marieta-vrodich)) — the household that has Simeon (1705) and Paulus Antonius (1710) in the next book. Paulus Vroda, wife Anastasia (2 December 1691, [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1691-12-catharina-sintich-godparents-anastasia-wife-of-paulus-vroda)) or Stanislava [?] (24 August 1693, [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1693-08-paulina-miglianich-godparents-paulus-vroda-and-stanislava)); a «Stanca Vroda» godmother July 1695 ([snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1695-07-joanna-godmother-stanca-vroda)); a doubtful «Lucia Vrodna» May 1696 ([snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-baptism-1696-05-jacoba-godmother-lucia-vrodna-doubtful)). Page map: 6 = Oct 1685–Mar 1686, 7 = Apr–Jul 1686, 8 = Aug–Dec 1686, 9 = Jan–Jun 1687, 10 = Jun 1687–Mar 1688, 11 = Mar–Dec 1688 and Jan 1689, 12 = Nov 1688–Jan 1689, 13 = Mar–Apr 1689, 14 = Apr–Jul 1689, 15 = Jul–Oct 1689, 16 = Oct 1689–Jan 1690, 17 = Jan–Aug 1690, 18 = Nov 1690–Jan 1691, 19 = Mar–Jun 1691, 20 = Jun–Dec 1691, 21 = Feb–Mar 1692, 22 = Mar–Jun 1692, 23 = Jun–Aug 1692, 24 = Aug–Dec 1692, 25 = Feb–Aug 1693, 26 = Aug–Sep 1693, 27 = Jan–Jul 1694, 28 = Jan–Sep 1695, 29 = Sep–Dec 1695, 30 = Jan–May 1696, 31 = May–Nov 1696, 32 = Jul–Dec 1697, 33 = Oct 1697–Jan 1698, 34 = Jan–Dec 1698, 35 = Nov 1698–Aug 1699, 36 = Aug–Sep 1699, 37 = 1699, 38 = Nov 1699–Jul 1700, 39 = Jul–Dec 1700 and the closing entry. So the Dolac Uroda run from 1687 to 1767 without a gap, and the names Dominicus, Lucas, Thomas, Paulus, Franciscus, Joannes and Georgius are all there; no baptism of a Georgius, a Dominicus son of Georgius, a Franciscus or a Dume — they were born before 1685, in the cathedral or Varoš registers, or elsewhere.

No marriage of Georgius, of Dominicus or of Dume Uroda in forty-nine years of the Dolac marriage book — but six Uroda marriages and a father named. Lucas, son of the late ANTONIUS Vroda, marries Francisca, daughter of the late Joannes Loveta, 13 November 1701 (image 372; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1701-11-lucas-son-of-the-late-antonius-vroda-and-francisca)). Thomas Vrodich marries Anastasia, 8 January 1702 (image 373; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1702-01-thomas-vrodich-and-anastasia-daughter-of-jacobus)) — the Thomas and Anastasia of the 1706 baptism. Antonius, son of the late Paulus Vrodich, marries the widow Anna, October 1710 (image 382; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1710-10-antonius-son-of-the-late-paulus-vrodich-and-anna-widow)). Antonius, son of Lucas Vrodich, marries Antonia, daughter of Matthaeus Merra [?], 30 October 1718 (image 395; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1718-10-antonius-son-of-lucas-vrodich-and-antonia)). A Franciscus Vrodich as witness on 7 February 1717 (doubtful; image 391; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1717-02-witness-franciscus-vrodich)) and Franco Vroda on 25 November 1725 (image 403; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1725-11-michael-lestanovich-and-matthea-kymcevich-witness-franciscus-vroda)). A Magister Dominicus Vroda as witness, 13 January 1739 (images 419–420; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1739-01-joannes-buyas-and-franceschina-toglian-witness-dominicus-vroda)). And the entry that names Dominicus's father: on 4 August 1746 a witness is «Dominico Vrodda, filio Magistri Georgii de hac Parochia» (image 433; [snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#sibenik-dolac-marriage-1746-08-matheus-darin-and-vincentia-pavicich-witness-dominicus-vrodda-son-of-magister-georgius)) — so the Magister Georgius Uroda of the baptisms of 1715–1738 was alive on 4 August 1746, and dead by 13 February 1757. Page map: 371 = Feb–Apr 1701, 372 = May–Nov 1701, 373 = Dec 1701–Jan 1702, 382 = Oct 1710–Jan 1711, 383 = Feb–Oct 1711, 391 = Jan–Jun 1717, 395 = Jun–Nov 1718, 396 = Nov 1718–Jan 1719, 400 = Jun 1723–Jan 1724, 403 = Nov 1725, 413 = Feb 1733–Jan 1734, 419 = Nov 1738–Jan 1739, 420 = Jan–Jun 1739, 424 = Jul–Dec 1741, 426 = Jun–Aug 1743, 430 = Jan 1745, 433 = Aug 1746, 437 = Oct 1749–Aug 1750, 439 = Oct 1751–Aug 1752. No groom or bride named Uroda who could be Dominicus, Georgius or Dume: no Dominicus × Floria marriage (c. 1743) is in the book either — the couple of Lucia (1744) must have married elsewhere, before 1743 in a parish not filmed, or in an entry not read.

Found: «Koskina Franciscus Xaverius», son of «Lucas et Helena Kosina», baptised 3 December 1775, locus «S. Thomae» house 10 (page 330, right-hand page, second entry). The month is December because the spread's left page opens December and the next spread's left page runs to 28 December and then carries the heading «1776 Januarij»; 3 December is the feast of St Francis Xavier. It is inside the window the two ages allow (28 October 1775 – 22 January 1776) and the house number 10 is the number Franz Kosinar's marriage (1800) and death (1849) entries give. Probable, not proved: the book spells the surname Kosina where the later entries write Kosinar, and the child is not called Franz. The index's K section (sig. 00872) did not list him. This makes Lukas Kosina the elder and Helena Perner the probable parents of Franz. In found.psv and on /kosina/.

Found: «Die 18° 9bris [1798] … junxi Matrimonio Joannem filium Defunctorum Anto[nii] et Ursulae Antich, cum Martha filia Pauli et Annae Lončarich», witnesses Mathia Jellichich and Georgio Antich, house 27 as read, with a dispensation for double consanguinity in the fourth degree. It names the parents of both ahnentafel 48 and 49: Antonius and Ursula Antić (ahnentafel 96 and 97) and Paulus and Anna Lončarić (98 and 99), and it gives the groom's father as ANTONIUS, agreeing with the 1793 death entry and not with the tree's Joannis (on /corrections). Date 18 November 1798, found from image 248 after the marriage book was located by sampling (1791 at image 240, 1806 at 258). notes/selce-marriage-1798-antic-loncaric.md The page itself (snapshot, kept on the site).

Found: «Die 14. 9bris A° 1800 … junxi Matrimonio Georgium filium Mathiae et Margaritae Jellichich, cum Margarita filia Joannis et Catharinae Drozovich», witnesses Laurentio Alloy(?) and Joanne Drozovich. It names the parents of ahnentafel 50 and 51: Mathias and Margarita Jelličić (100, 101) and Joannes and Catharina (102, 103) — written DROZOVICH, not Brozović; the surname is on /corrections together with Margarita's birth year (1784 would make her sixteen at the wedding). The earlier negative (1806–1811, and the 1783–85 baptisms) is explained: she married in 1800 and was born before 1783. The 1784 baptism of a Petrus to Joannes and Catharina «Brozovich» read on 10 October is a Drozovich baptism and probably her brother's. notes/selce-marriage-1800-jellicic-drozovic.md The page itself (snapshot, kept on the site).

Found: «Dan 22. Novembra … sakupih u S. Matrimonij Jakova Pillepicha ij Kattu heer pokoin[og] Vicha Luckinicha» — Jakov Pilepich and Katta, daughter of the late Vicko Luckinich, witnesses the priest Nikola Jurić and Sig. Mattio Borri. The tree's date is confirmed and Catta's father is named and dead by then (ahnentafel 210). Nothing in it dates her birth, so her baptism is still the open question and the draft parish letter keeps asking it. The book is Croatian to the late 1740s then Latin, short entries, and the bride's father appears only sometimes. notes/karlobag-marriage-1747-pilepich-luckinic.md The page itself (snapshot, kept on the site).

Probably found: 14 February 1798, «consensu Josephi viduei [Pilepich?] et Mariae filiae Vincenti [Smojver?]», married by the chaplain Andreas Bagetich, witnesses Michael Barach and Josef Lazarich. The date, the first names and the bride's father's given name (Vincentius, ahnentafel 106) fit the tree, and the groom is a widower. Both surnames are faint, so it is recorded as probable. notes/karlobag-marriage-1798-pilepich-smojver.md The page itself (snapshot, kept on the site).

Not in 1778–1780 because it was earlier: FOUND on 2 May 1774 (image 306 right): «Vincentii filii Josephi Smojver, vulgo nuncupati Vukich, ac Olivae filiae defuncti Caetani Bacchi». See the next row. In 1778–1780 a Vito Smojver appears twice as witness (April 1778, November 1779). No Smojver × Bacchi marriage in the entries read of 1778 – August 1780. A Vito Smojver appears twice as a witness (April 1778 and November 1779). The Latin of the 1770s is dense, heavily abbreviated and written on several lines an entry, with the bride's and groom's fathers named; each entry gives «filii quondam X et Y filiae Z».

Found: «2. Novembris [1785] … consensu Michaelis filii defuncti Nicolai Gergacs et Luciae Pauli Tomljenovich, loci Mostani [Montani] Stanize», married by the parish priest Joes Antonius Frankovich, witnesses Antonius Gergacs and Joannes Kovacevich. It names the groom's father (the late Nicolaus Gerkacs, ahnentafel 220, d. 30 October 1783) and the bride's father Paul Tomljanović, «of Montani Stanize» (ahnentafel 222), which is the first page-evidence for the settlement the tree gives and that parishes.psv records as unknown. notes/karlobag-marriage-1785-gerkacs-tomljanovic.md The page itself (snapshot, kept on the site).

Found: «2. Maij [1774] … consensu Vincentii filii Josephi Smojver, vulgo nuncupati Vukich, ac Olivae filiae defuncti Caetani Bacchi, eos per verba de praesenti solemniter conjunxi», witnesses Dno Nicolao Jurich and Francisco [Lukulich?]. It names the groom's father (Josephus Smojver, ahnentafel 212) and the bride's father Caetanus Bacchi, already dead (ahnentafel 214), which contradicts the tree's Caetano Bacchi born 12 January 1779 and with him ahnentafel 428 and 429 (on /corrections). Ahnentafel 53's baptism of 1781 is seven years after the marriage. notes/karlobag-marriage-1774-smojver-bacchi.md The page itself (snapshot, kept on the site).

No baptism of an Oliva Bacchi on the pages read — but the parents turn up: a «Caietan Bachi» with his wife Anna as sponsors on 18 March 1753 (page 211), again on 27 May 1753 and in late October 1755, and a son Silvester, «sina Gajetana y Anne Bachi», baptised in early January 1754 (page 215). With the 1760 marriage of Anna, «viduam Caetani Bachi», to Paulus Perpich, this fixes Caetanus alive March 1753 – October 1755 and dead by 20 October 1760. The page itself (snapshot, kept on the site).

Found: 4 February 1753, «Cajetanum Bachi et Annam filiam defuncti Alexii [Lukatelli]» (image 287 right), with witnesses Wolffgango Suvich and Joanne Radkovich. He is also a witness on 10 February 1754 and 30 January 1755. No Georgius Uroda marriage in these pages; a Dominicus Uroda's daughter Magdalena married Matthias Kriskovich on 5 February 1755, and a Jacobus Uroda is a witness in July 1754. Images 280–286 (January 1742 to November 1751) hold no Bacchi and no Uroda groom or bride; «Dume»/«Dominico Uroda» is a witness at about ten entries from 1744 to 1749 (Dominicus, dead by 1767, father of the 1755 and 1767 brides). The page itself (snapshot, kept on the site).

Entry 51: born 12 May 1859, baptised 15 May 1859, «Antonia Perpić», legit., «Joannis et Lucia Perpić», Krivi put No 136, godparents Lucas and Anna Tomljanović. Agrees with the index and the tree to the day, and puts her at house 136 with her brother Stephanus (1861). The mother's maiden name is not given. notes/krivi-put-antonija-perpic-1859-read-from-the-image.md The page itself (snapshot).

All six openings read and kept: snapshots. Antonia Perpić's parents are «Ivan Perpić i Luca rođena Perpić» (1885); Martin Kozina's origin is «Kranjska župa sv. Martina kod Kranjburg» (1888); the Blažević sisters' parents are Pavao Blažević and Marija r. Tomljanović (1913, 1918, 1919). Both Kosina grooms of November 1919 name «Martin Kozina i Anđelika r. Boras».

Three entries re-read and kept as snapshots: Matija Pilepić 9 February 1886 aged 78; Vicko Pilepić 14 November 1897, widower, age hearsay 93; Toma Blažević 26 July 1907, widower of the late Tereza, aged 69.

Three entries re-read and kept as snapshots. The September 1858 baptism of Marija was looked for at images 86–88 and not found: image 87's left page is a loose sheet laid over the book.

Both halves kept as snapshots: the ninth row of November 1841, Oberfeichting house 9, Martin; the mother's cell reads Gertraud Kosina and the father's is empty.

Both halves kept as snapshots: the first row of the 1833 page, Oberfeichting house 9, groom 30, bride of house 3 aged 38; the parents' columns are on the right-hand half.

Kept as snapshots. Page map for sig. 00901: viewer pg 30 = 1798, pg 33 = June–November 1800, pg 40 = 1805.

Kept as snapshots. Page map for sig. 00885: viewer pg 15 = March–April 1814, pg 29 = August–September 1816.

Three pages kept as snapshots. Map for this film (9R2D-N32, 117 images): image 18 = March 1829, 19 = 1829–30, 54 = October 1850 (the cholera page), 111 = Feb–July 1882. Images are single pages or two-page spreads, so check before counting pages.

Three pages kept as snapshots. Map for the births film (9R2M-BZF, 294 images): image 47 = Jan–Apr 1806, 52 R = March 1808, 56 R = Jan–Mar 1809, 57 L = 22–29 March 1809, 58 = Sept–Oct 1809, 60 = 1810, 62 = Feb–Apr 1811, 186 R = March 1838.

Kept as snapshots: entry 81 of 1835, domus 51. Map for the Selce marriages 1815–1878 (9R2D-N35, 66 images): image 12 = November 1823, 20 = 1831, 24 = 1834, 26 = July–November 1835, 28 = 1837.

Kept as snapshots. Map for Senj births 1756–1858 (9R2M-L27, 589 images): 562 = Feb 1857, 570 = Aug–Sep 1857, 571 R = 1 Nov 1857, 572 = 4–22 Nov and Dec 1857, 574 = Feb 1858, 581 = Oct 1858. Also in this volume: the Senj Latin entries are numbered per year and carry the baptising priest and godparents.

Kept as snapshots. Map for Karlobag births 1804–1861 in this film (9RK1-HZK, same 435 images as the marriage books): image 12 = 1805, 16 = 1808, 18 = 1809, 19 = 1809 L / 1810 R, 20 = 1810–11. Godfather Jacobus Blazevich. The 18 September 1838 baptism (ahnentafel 13) is on image 58 left, kept as a snapshot; image 59 = Sept 1839–1840, 60 = 1840–41.

Found: 2 November 1763, Georgius and his wife Maria Uroda godparents to a child of Paulus and Ursula Smojver (image 149), and the 6 May 1764 baptism of Joannes Dominicus (image 151), both kept as snapshots. In July 1763 (image 148) a godmother reads as «Francesca Uroda» at one zoom, not checked. No Uroda appears as a parent on the other pages read. Map: image 145 = Jan 1763, 147 = Feb–Jun 1763, 148 = Jul–Dec 1763, 149 = Nov 1763–Feb 1764, 150 = Feb–Apr 1764, 151 = May–Jul 1764; image 324 is the END card of the 1771–1804 item and there is no births index in this film.

No Uroda child baptised. Found five godparent entries (snapshots): a widow Jerolima «udova … Dume Uroda» godmother on 23 Apr 1750, 25 Apr 1751, 21 Mar and 3 Apr 1752, and «Jure Uroda» godfather with her on 12 Mar 1752. Dume (Dominicus) Uroda was therefore dead by April 1750. Map: image 112 = Jan–Jun 1750 (book page 200), 113 = Sep 1750 – Feb 1751, 114 = Feb–Aug 1751, 115 = Aug 1751 – Feb 1752, 116 = Feb–Jun 1752.

No baptism of a Jure/Georgius Uroda. One baptism of a child of Dume Uroda and Jerolina, 11 August 1745 (image 100 left; snapshot). Dume and Jerolina are the parish's regular godparents 1745–49 (so a Uroda godparent proves nothing about kin). Dume still alive in December 1748, «udova» from April 1750. Map: image 98 = Nov 1744–Feb 1745, 99 = Feb–Jun 1745, 100 = Jun–Dec 1745, 101 = Nov 1745–Jan 1746, 102 = Jan–Apr 1746, 103 = Apr–Jun 1746, 104 = Aug–Oct 1746, 105 = Nov 1746–Mar 1747, 106 = Mar–Oct 1747, 107 = Nov 1747–Mar 1748, 108 = Mar–Aug 1748, 109 = Aug 1748–Apr 1749, 110 = Apr–Oct 1749, 111 = Oct 1749. Also a son of Dume Uroda and Jerolime baptised 10 May 1744 (image 96 left; snapshot), and the godparent pattern holds back to June 1743. Map: image 94 = Jun–Nov 1743, 95 = Dec 1743–Mar 1744, 96 = Apr–Aug 1744, 97 = Oct–Nov 1744. Also (image 91 right, mid-1742): a baptism of a SON of Dume Uroda whose name ends in «Juria» — a possible Georgius; snapshot. Map: image 90 = Jan–Mar 1742, 91 = Mar–Jul 1742, 92 = Jun–Oct 1742, 93 = Oct 1742–Jun 1743. Also: Dume Uroda's first wife was Eva — a daughter Franica to «Dume urode i njegove xene Eve» in December 1739 (image 82 right; snapshot). Map: image 80 = Mar–Aug 1739, 81 = Jun–Nov 1739, 82 = Sep 1739–Jan 1740, 83 = Feb–May 1740, 85 = May–Aug 1740 (84 duplicate), 86 = Aug 1740–Apr 1741, 87 = May–Aug 1741. Images 56–74 (January 1733 – January 1738): a daughter Antona to «[Sime/Dume?] urode and Eva» on 16 January 1733 (image 57 left; the index reads the father as Sime; snapshot); a child of Dume Uroda «alias Horaca» and Eva, 8 March 1734 (image 61 left; snapshot); «kuma Eva xena Dume urode» 12 January 1737 (image 70 right; snapshot); «Dume vrode» kum 8 June 1737 (image 72). Map: 56/57 = Jan–Aug 1733 (book page 100 begins 1 Jan 1733), 59 = Sep–Nov 1733, 60 = Dec 1733–Feb 1734, 61 = Feb–Jun 1734, 62 = May–Sep 1734, 63 = Sep 1734–Jan 1735; 64–69 about 1735–36; 70 reaches January 1737, 72 June 1737, 74 ends 20 January 1738. No other Uroda parent.

7 June 1739: Martin Svjata married «Simonu pokoi[nog] Dume urode od Šibenika» — Simona, daughter of the late Dume Uroda of Šibenik (image 279 left; snapshot). A second Dume Uroda, from Dalmatia, dead by 1739; the living Dume with Eva and Jerolina is a different man. «Dume Uroda» is a witness on 15 and 17 February 1744. No Uroda groom or bride in the book from 1736 to 1744 — so Dume's marriages are not here (the first, before January 1733, is before the book starts; the second, 1740–42, is a probable negative at about 2x). Map: 278 = 1 Feb 1736 – 1738, 279 = 1738 – Oct 1740, 280 = 1741 – Nov 1742, 281 = Nov 1742 – 1744.

Pompeo/Giampaolo/Tomaso Uroda × Maria Anna Bachi had their children baptised at Drniš (Šibenik): 13 March 1770, 5 April 1771, 26 August 1778, 23 October 1780 (four indexer spellings of probably one couple). Nothing links them to the Bacchi of Karlobag. Betina (Šibenik) has another Uroda family, with Simeone as the usual first name (children 1835–1854). Barach is a large Karlobag family (baptisms 1751–1825); Margvart is one household, Joannes × Vincentia (daughter baptised 7 November 1761). So the 1764 godparents are ordinary townspeople, and either surname is a candidate for Maria's maiden name. Then the Drniš originals were opened (1770, 1778, 1780): 1770 «Pampao Uroda … Militum», 1778 «Caporal Pompeo Uroda», 1780 «Caporal Pompeo Uroda» — the index's «Tomaso» is Pompeo, so one man, a corporal of the Dalmatian garrison, with Maria Anna Bachi.

Exact spellings counted by place. Smojver 522: Cesarica 138 (1810–1858), Karlobag 67 (1768–1861). Pilipich/Pilepich : Vitipolis 107+42, Fiume 58+8 (from 1632), Kastav 50, Perušić 9, Pakrac 12, Karlobag 37+6 (from 1814). Gergacs 25: Karlobag 17. Luckinich 12: Karlobag 10. Bachi 61: Pag 12 (1725–1778), Karlobag 2, Drniš 2. At Pag: Caietanus Antonius Gregorius, 14 March 1728, son of Dno Angelo Bachi, patrician — a candidate for the Caetanus Bachi of Karlobag 1753. Also read: Karlobag, 12 Jan 1779, Caetanus Antonius, son of Angelo and Catharina Bachi, Maria Uroda godmother and 17 May 1780, Vitus, son of Paulo and Barbara Smojver.

30 hits, all 30 contain the name; 22 not already held, 4 entered. Nearly all are the Broken Hill family of Leonard James Zubrinich and Eva Uhe, already on the Port Pirie page from earlier sweeps. The new finding is on the other branch: a funeral notice of 27 June 1914 names «K. and J. Zubrinich» beside «Mrs. Alice Murphy», and the funeral notice of 16 July 1921 for Alice Murphy, relict of Stephen, lists «Mr. and Mrs. J. Zubrinich» among her children and their spouses. With the 1917 In Memoriam (Kate and Jack, Stephen Murphy) this makes three notices over seven years of one Zubrinich couple inside the Murphy family; John William Zubrinich's tree spouse is Catherine Lucy Murphy and his eldest son is John Stephen. Probable, not proved — recorded on the Port Pirie page. Also entered: the burial of Eva Uhe's father William Ferdinand Uhe, Broken Hill, 19 January 1953.

Four direct ancestors named in one entry — 48, 49, 50 and 51, all four already dead — at houses 51 and 80, pages 21–22.

The groom is entered “Josephum Antich Papa”; his sister, marrying the bride's brother the same day, is “Euphemia Antich aliter Papa”. Five more aliter pairs sit on the same opening. This is the page that turned a curiosity into a system.

The spine of the archive, and the thing it is most careful about. One GEDCOM feeds seven sibling archives. It is not evidence — it is somebody's assembled belief, and this site's whole method is to say which parts of it a document actually holds up.

Where it has been checked against a register it has been right far more often than wrong, including on dates this archive briefly tried to correct.

A sixteen-year-old in a Württemberg factory. Iwan/Jvan Defranceski, born 25 June 1925 at Crikvenica — the same day and place as the 1951 Yugoslav birth extract — lodging at Pfullingen, Brunnenstraße 7, working as a Hilfsarbeiter for Licht u. Kraft, Reutlingen from 21 October 1941, and stamped DOCUMENT EXPLOITÉ by the French occupation authority.

The cards came through the family tree, not through Arolsen. Nobody had ever searched the Arolsen collections themselves.

Neither candidate is at house 136. Martha 1853: image 34 right page, entry 63, house 177 as read, father Ivan Perpić, mother «Lucia rodjenja Perpić». Toma 1856: image 46 right page, entry 88, house 111, father Ivan Perpić, mother «Luce Perpić», with a later marginal note of his marriage on 23 January 1930. Ahnentafel 7 (Antonija, 1859, entry 51) is at Krivi Put 136, and the house number is how the register identifies a household, so these look like children of other Ivan × Lucia Perpić households. That is a strong sign and not a proof: the parents' names are the same pair, and a family can change house. Both rows in found.psv now say so. notes/krivi-put-candidates-are-at-other-houses.md And, in the same sitting, Stephanus 1861 was read: image 78 left page, entry 109, born 13 December 1861 (the month is «10bris»), baptised 16 December, Joannes and Lucia Perpić, house 136 — the index was right and the tree's 13 October is wrong. notes/stephanus-perpic-was-born-in-december-1861.md

Two of the three are at house 135, one number from ahnentafel 7's 136; the third is somewhere else. Georgius 1868: image 122 left, entry 51, born 22 April / baptised 23 April, «Joannes Perpić et Lucia nata Perpić», Krivi put N° 135. Joanna 1874: image 181 left, entry 11, born 6 / baptised 12 January, the same parents, Krivi put N° D. 135 (facing page). Josephus 1876: image 226 left, entry 97, 7 July, «Joannes Perpić et Lucia nata», «Klaričevac N° D. 82 / N° 163», with Josephus and Mathia Perpić as godparents. Ahnentafel 7 (1859) and Stephanus (1861) are at 136. So Georgius and Joanna are probable siblings (same parents' names, adjacent number, a later renumbering is possible) and Josephus is not shown to be one. All three dates agree with the index. notes/krivi-put-the-younger-children-and-their-houses.md

South Australia, all 240: 218 articles contain the name, 211 new. Verified by fetching each article's OCR. Decades: 1910s 6, 1920s 11, 1930s 27, 1940s 99, 1950s 63, 1970s 3, 1990s 2. Twelve of the pre-1941 ones are now in trove.psv, including: John Zubrinich's death, 15 December 1930, aged 72 (the tree has 15 December 1930 and a birth of 6 March 1860, which makes him 70 — recorded as a disagreement on /corrections); the widow, sons and daughters; a 1921 birth announced as «James Bernard» on the 10th and «Leslie Bernard» on the 12th (a correction, not twins); the marriages of Phyllis (1936), Laurel (1937), Vida (1937) and Keith Leo (1938); and Arthur Clive Zubrinich, 8 April 1940, aged 7, who is in no tree. Victoria and Western Australia: 0 Family Notices for Zubrinich; Queensland 1. Other surnames: Kalanj 2 (a 1989 Canberra birthday), Prpić 3 (a 1994 birthday), Blažević 3 (two June 1952 Broken Hill funeral notices for Ivica Blažević), Zubrinic 4 (the same Broken Hill family) — the Kalanj and Prpić hits are living-person birthday columns and are not recorded. Later the same day the 1940s–50s death notices were read (deaths only, the dead only): Rose Zubrinich, widow of John, died 24 September 1949 aged 89 (in no tree); John William Zubrinich's death is given three ways — 16 December 1953 in the tree, 17 December in the death notice, 19 December in his daughters' in-memoriam (a disagreement on /corrections); and John Frederick Zubrinich died at Melbourne on 29 July 1948 aged 14, a son of John Stephen. The 1953 notice names Catherine as his wife and Jack, Len, Morrie and Terence as his children, which strengthens (and does not prove) the 1917 «Kate and Jack Zubrinich / Alice Murphy» lead: John William's wife in the tree is Catherine Lucy Murphy. Later still the same day the 1940–46 marriage and engagement notices were read (15 more rows in trove.psv): the children of four brothers — Thomas Leo (Phyllis B. 1940, Kevin Edward 1943 and 1945, Betty Patricia 1945), Arthur Leslie (Gwenyth Florence engaged 1940 and married November 1941; Leslie Bernard married 1944 and is the baby whose first name was corrected from James to Leslie in December 1921; Stanley Joseph engaged 1946), Edward Malcolm (Malcolm Theodore engaged 1942, married 24 June 1944; Joy engaged 1943, married 29 September 1945) and Maurice Joseph (Edith Claire engaged May, married 27 July 1946) — and Maurice, third son of John William (engaged January 1943). None of these children is in the tree, and the fathers match the tree's brothers by INITIALS only (T. L., A. L., E. M., M. J.), which is why each row says so; the Maurice of 1943 is the exception, tied by the 1953 death notice's address and its son named Morrie.

Found. Page 358, right-hand page, entry 26: «Idem [26 April] Helena — Lucas Kosina et Helena Pernerza, Rustici», godparents Michael … et Nescha Zhekirnza, baptised by the parish priest of St Martin, locus «Sti Thomae», house read as 17. St Thomas (Sv. Tomaž) is the filial church of Zgornje Bitnje, so this Lukas Kosina lives in the Zgornje Bitnje neighbourhood — the place fits Franz Kosinar's village and the house number (17 against Franz's later 9) is inconclusive, because 1779 and 1800 numbering are not known to be the same series. His wife is Helena Perner (as read). A first reading of this entry, hours earlier, took «Sti Thomae» for another village and wrote that the house «points away»; that was wrong and is withdrawn. Page 358 is March–May 1779 (1779 = pages 358–362).

Two of the three are clean; one has the wrong first name. Ahnentafel 99, image 110 left: «24 Augusti 1807 Anna uxor Pauli Lončarich Papich annorum circiter 65», house 134 — the tree's day, month and age, and her first document as a Papić. Ahnentafel 98, image 120 left (printed page 111): «29 7bis 1811 Paulus Lončarich viduus annorum circiter 70», house 134 again — the tree's date and age, and viduus fits a man widowed in 1807. Ahnentafel 96, image 81 left: «27 Februarii 793 Antonius Antich Martini annorum circiter 54» — the tree's day, month and age, but the register says Antonius where the tree says Joannis and Martini is not Papa; recorded as an Antich of the right age who died that day, not confirmed as ahnentafel 96. notes/selce-deaths-1793-1807-1811.md

Found, and in the volume before the one that had been walked. Image 134, left-hand page: «Die 2da Octobris 1826. Ursula filia legitima Andreae Sedej rustici et ejus conjugis Gertrudis natae Roje … nata hodie mane hora 9ª …», village read as Habouske, house 8 (letters uncertain), baptised by Joannes Nemitz, Parochus. Born and baptised 2 October 1826, so her age of 46 in May 1873 is exact. Father Andreas Sedej, mother Gertrudis Roje (Jera is the short form) — the 1873 marriage's «Andrej Sedej … Jera Roje» confirmed from the other end. It removes the reading that Maria Briz, wife of an Andre Sedej in about 1829–30, was an earlier wife: Gertrudis is Andreas's wife in October 1826. notes/ursula-sedej-was-born-on-2-october-1826.md

Both are read from the images, and neither is clean. Ahnentafel 111, image 125 left, page 12: «19 [Sept.] Lucia, vulgo Maja, uxor Michaelis Gergacs, annorum 34» — the tree's day and month, the tree's by-name and the tree's husband, but an age that cannot be the mother of a child baptised in 1789 (unresolved; a second wife of the same husband is not ruled out). She is not in the KAZALO under Tomljanović: found by turning to the September page. Ahnentafel 52, image 138 right, page 35: «Josephus Pilepich Carlobagensis annorum 61», margin read as 28 June 1828 (the KAZALO also reads 28) with burial on the 29th — the tree has 26 June, so the tree is two days out against two readings, and the age is a year over. A probable match, not a proven one: no wife or parent is named. Both rows are in readings.psv. Method: the waypoint enumerates 435 images; register images ~120–165, KAZALO ~168–192, left-hand page numbers run two to an image. notes/karlobag-deaths-1809-1828.md

Opened and read to its end, 6 October 2026: Brinje's Matična knjiga umrlih 1888–1899, the Umrli (deaths) volume, DGS 005498263, FamilySearch waypoint 9R2D-W32 (the Atlas lists it as «Deaths (Umrli) 1888-1899»). These are the images of the deaths film, not the births images: 338 images in all, two printed pages to an image (image N shows pages 2(N−8) and 2(N−8)+1), two entries to a page, entry numbers restarting each January. Image 8 holds the cover pages, images 9 to 337 carry the entries (pages 2 to 658, the last entry No. 72 of 1899, 31 December 1899, the remaining forms blank) and image 338 is the END OF ITEM card (ITEM 1, roll 682). Method, stated plainly: the volume was read twice. The first pass took every image as a whole spread at the full-spread view of an 800-pixel pane and opened every Kalanj, Borić, Perković and near-miss (Kalauj, Galanj, Perhonić, Perkonić) at readable zoom. The births volume had shown that a fit-scale scan misses about one person in three images, so the whole volume was then RE-READ PAGE BY PAGE at readable zoom (one printed page per view, both pages of every image, images 9 to 337, name, age, house and parents rows legible on every entry), with each month word checked against the entry-number sequence of its year and every doubtful surname opened further on a narrow band. The re-read reproduced all 47 entries of the first pass and found ONE the first pass had missed (Petar Kalanj, 18 October 1894, image 201). Near-misses opened and rejected on the re-read: Karakaš (two entries and a 74-year-old Mijo at house 217), Rajković written Rajhonić, Crnković, Benić (twice, with a visible e), Bosnić (twice) and the Koran family of Lučane. This is a read count, not a proof against every possible misreading of an unusual hand; but it is now a count taken page by page, which the first pass was not. What it gave: 48 deaths on record in sources/found.psv, 23 Kalanj (two of them with the surname written Galanj) and 25 Borić, and NO Perković death anywhere in the volume. Documented links the births and marriages could not give: (1) Janja Kalanj, a widow of house 231, died on 4 July 1889; Janja is the mother's name on the marriage of Jure Kalanj, son of Vid and Janja, of house 231 (13 August 1888), so she is almost certainly his mother. (2) The twin sons born on 22 February 1896 to Viol Kalanj and Kate Zoričić of house 188 died on 25 and 26 May 1897, each at fifteen months. (3) Ane Kalanj, 17, of house 231, died on 7 August 1892; her parents Joso and Ruže are those of her sister Marija, bride of 24 January 1892. (4) Mijo Kalanj, widower at his marriage of 15 February 1892, lost a wife Bare on 8 October 1891 (probable, since the entry gives no house). (5) Two entries written Galanj (Mile, 74, d. 27 July 1895; Tome, 1½, March 1897) at house 151 look like the household of the Marko Kalanj of house 151 and of the parents of the 1893 bride Bare Kalanj (Mijo and Manole): probable, not proven. (6) Several children are shown to have died who were known only from a baptism: Josip Borić (20 days), Tome Borić of Kamenica 23 (2 years 3 months), the Jure and Marko of the two Vučetić households and the first Marko of house 188. (7) Petar Kalanj, 3, died on 18 October 1894 (entry 111 of 1894, image 201, house read 181): almost certainly the Petar baptised on 14 November 1891 to Tome Kalanj and Mesić Marija of house 188, whose household therefore lost him before the births of Manole (1895) and Franciska (1898) and the Gjuro or Grgo who died aged two in 1899. (8) One conflict is opened rather than closed: Viktorija, wife of Niko Kalanj of house 188, died on 4 December 1889, yet a Niko Kalanj of house 231 married on 16 February 1890 as a bachelor (momak) aged 48; either the status is a clerk's error or these are two men. What it did NOT settle: how any Brinje Kalanj, Perković or Borić household connects to Josephus Kalanj of Klenovica or to anyone in the tree. No death entry names Klenovica, Senj or America, and no Perković death exists in the volume to join the Kalanj–Perković marriage the Gospić letter asks about.

A Papić plaque in a cemetery this archive has never surveyed, and a first read done entirely in the field. David sent a phone photograph of a plaque reading «OBITELJI PAPIĆ» on a family monument in Klenovica belonging to the STIPANIĆ family — whether that placement marks a Papić who married into the Stipanić family, or two plots that simply share a wall, is not established. The photograph itself was too low-resolution for this archive to read the carved digits; what got read came from David standing in front of the stone and reading the worn digits by eye, then relaying them here, which is a different kind of evidence from this archive's own crop-and-enlarge practice at Otočac and Senj and is graded accordingly — recorded as sources/graves/klenovica-2026-09-29.psv, this archive's third photographed cemetery survey and its first single-plaque one.

Three names, none matched. Milka Papić — died 1922, born either 1822 or 1870 (the two readings not distinguished on site); Nikola Papić — born 1868, died 1942; [A]ntonija Papić — first letter of the given name worn, read as Antonija — born 1882, died 1956. Checked against both people.json and found.psv: no match on any of the three, and no Papić in this tree is tied to Klenovica at all. The one existing Papić cemetery record this archive holds is a different Milka Papić — ahnentafel 3, 1886–1971, carved under her married name at Senj (sources/graves/senj-2024-10-09.psv) — whose years do not overlap this one's under any reading. Same surname, same given name once, not the same woman, and Klenovica is a new place for the surname rather than a new fact about a line already held.

What is not established, stated plainly: any relationship between Milka, Nikola and Antonija — siblings, a couple and a sibling, parent and children, all remain open; any connection to this archive's Senj-attested Papić line; and Milka's actual birth year. A closer photograph, or a second on-site look with raking light across the worn digits, would settle more of it than anything remote can.

A new parish, confirmed on Matricula, free, no login — eleven volumes. Krstna knjiga 1762–1784, 1785–1826, 1826–1862 (sig. 01584), 1862–1897; Mrliška knjiga 1762–1784, 1785–1841, 1842–1882, 1883–1908; Poročna knjiga 1763–1784, 1785–1826 (sig. 01589), 1826–1908 (sig. 01590).

Neither register has a name index. Both are chronological, and this parish's baptismal book is a printed grid without the Kranj–Šmartin volumes' own index pages — a straight walk was the only method.

SEDEJ IS CONFIRMED AS A REAL, RESIDENT FAMILY. The marriage register (sig. 01590) gives GERTRAUD SEDEJ and CATHARINA SEDEJ as mothers of two different brides marrying in January 1827 — different women, same surname, same parish, the ordinary evidence of a settled family rather than one household. AGNES SEDEJ stands godmother in the same years.

And an ANDRE SEDEJ turns up as a father — «½ Hüblor», with wife MARIA BRIZ, a child baptised about 1829–30 (sig. 01584 image 14). The wife's name does not match: Ursula's mother in 1873 is Jera Roje. Two readings, neither settled: a different Andrej of the same parish and generation, or Maria Briz is a first wife who died before Jera Roje married him — which is exactly the pattern already found once at Johann Kozina's own house.

What was actually walked, so the next session does not repeat it: baptisms sig. 01584, images 3–25 (roughly 1826 to 1832), full name-column crops. Marriages sig. 01589, the last seven images (38–44, June 1824 to January 1826) — the volume's final pages, checked because Ursula's birth window falls at its very end. Marriages sig. 01590, the first eight images (1–8, 1826–1828). No Ursula Sedej baptism and no Andrej Sedej × Jera Roje marriage in any of it.

What is still unread: sig. 01584 beyond image 25 (1832 onward — if Ursula was born later than estimated); sig. 01589 before image 38 (1785–1824, where their marriage would be if it came well before her birth); sig. 01590 beyond image 8; and the two volumes before those, 01583 (baptisms 1785–1826) and 01588 (marriages 1763–1784).

Extended 28 September 2026, later the same session. Baptisms sig. 01584 walked further, images 26–36 (roughly 1830–1834). Six more Sedej women turn up as mothers — Mariana Sedej, Gertraud Sedej (twice, possibly the same woman with two husbands or two women), Maria Sedej — and Anton Sedej and Casper Sedej as godfathers, Agnes Sedej repeatedly as godmother. The family is thoroughly resident. Still no Andrej Sedej as father, and no Jera Roje as mother, in this stretch either.

And ROJE is independently confirmed as a real Nova Oselica surname, separate from Sedej. Image 36 names a mother «Agnes Roj[s]ka» — the adjectival feminine form Slovene clerks give a woman surnamed Roje. A different woman, an unrelated case (a child born outside marriage, later legitimised) — but it means both halves of «Jera Roje» belong to this parish, not one verified name propping up an invented one.

Also checked: the tail of the prior baptismal volume, sig. 01583 (1785–1826), its last content page — image 135, dated 4 and 9 November 1826. This is later than 01584's own start of February 1826, so the two volumes overlap in time rather than joining cleanly; a very late entry can be in either book. No Sedej on this page. Filed here so the overlap itself is on record.

Where this leaves it. Sedej is now attested at Nova Oselica across at least four different women (Gertraud, Catharina, Mariana, Maria, Agnes) and three men (Anton, Casper, Andre) over roughly a decade. That is not one household's worth of people — it is a settled kin-group, which makes it more rather than less likely that Andrej and Jera belong to it. But the specific pairing has still not surfaced, across 34 images of one register and 16 images across two others.

TWO OF THE THREE. The death index is letter-tabbed, and the whole K section holds exactly two Kozina.

FRANZ. Book p.61: «22. — 24. [Jänner 1849] · Ob. Feichtg · 9 · FRANZ KOSINA, Ausnehmer · katholisch · männlich · ALTER 73 · Lungenentzündung · versehen». Died 22 January 1849, buried the 24th, aged 73 — which puts his birth at 1775–76 and independently confirms the «24» he gave at his marriage in 1800. He is an Ausnehmer, a retired householder living on the Ausnahm, and he died at Oberfeichting 9 — not the family house 10 but his son Johann's. He had handed over and retired into it, and it is the house his grandson Martin was born in eight years earlier.

LUCIA. Book p.71: «30. — 2. Xbr [1850] · Ob. Feichtg · 9 · LUZIA KOSINA, Hüblersweib · weiblich · ALTER 55 · Lungenentzündung · versehen · Jos. Kartely». Died 30 November 1850, aged 55, so born about 1795 — and she was 38 at her marriage in January 1833, which gives 1794–95. The same woman. Entered a Hüblers-Weib, not a widow, which is right because Johann outlived her — and it explains the second wife: he is beside Ursula Sedej by 1853 because Lucia died in 1850. Same house and same disease as Franz, twenty-two months apart.

MARIA IS NOT THERE. The K section for 1836–1869 has Franz and Luzia and nobody else. So she died before 1836, after 1869, or elsewhere. The index for 1812–1835 (sig. 04634) has its K section around images 126–128 — image 130 was opened and is the R section — and has not been read. That is the next thing.

CORRECTED THE SAME DAY — see the CEMLA row. The trail was not empty; the right database had not been searched. What follows is what the PUBLISHED and COMMEMORATIVE sources gave, which was nothing.

The name does not appear in any of them. Studia Croatica, the Croatian-Argentine journal, is fully online and searchable and has no Kosina. Find a Grave has Kosina memorials in the United States and Bohemia and none in Argentina. The general literature of the Croatian community in Argentina does not name the family.

That is not surprising once the dates are laid out. If Oskar came out with the post-war emigration of the late 1940s, died in 1954 aged thirty-one, and his widow and small son then left for Germany, the Argentine chapter may be shorter than a decade — too short to leave a footprint in a community's own press, and the reason there is nobody left to write to.

Four doors are open and none has been tried. (1) The reverse of Oskar's memorial card, which is in the family's hands and has never been scanned — Croatian cards of that date carry «Ožalošćena obitelj: supruga … sin …», which would give the widow's name, and the front carries no printer's imprint, so the printer is on the back too. (2) CEMLA, the Buenos Aires port arrival books, 4.4 million people 1882–1960, free but behind a CAPTCHA and therefore a job for a person — search KOSINA, KOZINA, COSINA, CAUSINA. (3) The Croatian chaplaincy in Buenos Aires: fra Leonard Rusković was the first Croatian priest in Argentina and served 1929 until his death in 1958, so he was there in January 1954; the Hrvatski katolički centar sv. Nikole Tavelića is the successor address. (4) The Boletín Oficial, where a 1954 sucesorio would name the heirs.

And FamilySearch has not been used at all, because this archive's access is signed out. It holds Argentine civil registration and Catholic parish records.

It restates the four real sources accurately and then adds a biography that is in none of them. Worth keeping precisely because it is a good example of the failure mode.

Confirmed against primary pages, and now published: Karlsruhe 1970 and the seeding of neighbouring missions; Bevanda 1970–71 and Galić 1971–78; the 1 August 1985 handover; the mission's patron and size.

NOT in any source found, and NOT published: that he reached Rome in 1945, that he was ordained in 1948, that his first German years were spent among post-war refugees, and that the 1985 handover was a transfer from diocesan clergy to the Franciscan Province of Ss Cyril and Methodius.

The tell was internal. The same summary gave his arrival in Germany as 1959 in one paragraph and 1958 in another, and every real source says 1958. A plausible story is not a source. The unverified dates are worth putting to the archdiocese as questions, and that is all they are.

A generated PDF, Anton_Kosina_Biography.pdf, arrived the same hour and is the same synthesis exported. It adds no sourced fact and one new unsourced claim — a death on 3 July 2003, at 82, which is at least arithmetically consistent with a birth on 11 February 1921. It also contains a section openly headed «A Narrative Vignette»: an invented Sunday morning in October 1972, with a time of day, a young man from a village near Split and a cup of tea gone cold. It is labelled as invention and it is good writing, and it is not evidence. The danger is not the vignette, which declares itself; it is the paragraphs around it that read identically and do not.

Two things in it were worth keeping and have been checked independently: that Ludwigshafen is BASF's town, and that West Germany and Yugoslavia signed their labour recruitment treaty at Belgrade in 1968 — the first between a NATO state and a non-aligned communist one. That date is the best thing to come out of the whole exercise, because the mission was founded in 1967: he was a year ahead of the treaty.

Eighty-six photographs, thirty-two legible memorials, and one real connection — to Arcanum rather than to the tree.

The find is a Žubrinić family tomb: an arch carved ŽUBRINIĆ above a wrought-iron cross, with four ivy-covered name-plates —

FRANJO ✽1846. †1925. · IVANJICA ✽1848. †1886. · VENCESLAV ✽1874. †19… · JU[V]ANA ✽18… †193…

«Venceslav» is why this matters. The Arcanum harvest of yesterday found, in the Mihók-féle Magyar Compass of 1908, the board of the Srpska štedionica dioničarsko društvo u Otočcu — the Serbian savings bank — with «Kassier Venzeslav Žubrinić» as its cashier. A Venceslav Žubrinić born 1874 would be thirty-four in 1908. Same rare given name, same town, right age. The printed record and the stone are very likely the same man, and this archive now has his dates and his grave.

Every Otočac surname the archive married into is still in that churchyard — Orešković (Katica ✽25.V.1882 †29.XI.1932, on a crowned-Virgin monument), Kostelac (Kata ✽10.3.1859 †2.6.1911, the best-dated stone there), Sekula, Prpić, Marić.

And one stone argues this archive's own thesis in carved letters: «OBITELJI ŽUBRINIĆ-ČUN i ŽANIĆ», Josip ✽1894 †1957 and Julka ✽1892 †1980. A nadimak, hyphenated onto the surname on a twentieth-century headstone — the practice the registers show in the 1800s, still doing its work.

Krmpote-Vodice is in the record index, under the place string «Krmpote-Vodice, Modrus-Fiume, Mađarska», and the index hands out the image ARK of every entry. Filtering 22,000 Blaževići down to the Vinodol parishes gives ahnentafel 8 and 9 as a couple in the register:

Three children to Tome Blažević i Terezija Pećanić, and none after 1884. Marija and Ivan are precisely the two siblings question 1f leans on — «Ive Blažević sin Tomin» and «Marija Blažević ćer Tomina», godparents at Marijan's baptism in 1895. They were tree-facts; they are now register entries, openable at the page in one step.

Ivan's read out: «zakonit · Toma Blažević i Tereza njegova rodjena Pećanić — rim. kat. seljaci · Smokvica kbroj 114 · kumovi Pere Pećanić i Marija Butorac supruga Jandrina». Born the 25th, baptised the 26th.

ARHiNET is gone, and what replaced it is a different search with different rules. The full account — what the old system did, what the new register search does, how to address it, and what it holds for these parishes — is in notes/arhinet-and-the-hda-register-search.md, which at 4,769 words is the longest working paper in this archive.

It was recorded in that note and nowhere else until 28 September 2026, when a gate found that seventeen notes were reachable from no page of this site. This row exists so that the search itself is in the register beside every other source, rather than only the writing-up of it.

The index gives the image, and that is worth more than any single reading. The search service is /service/search/hr/v2/personas, and each entry's payload carries the image ARK beside the child, the date and both parents — so an indexed baptism can be opened at the page without hunting a film for it. No earlier sitting used this.

Two cautions found the hard way: q.birthLikePlace does not bind — the place has to be filtered in hand on the string «Otočac, Küstenland, Austria» — and every baptism is indexed twice, once per parent role, so a raw count doubles.

276 Otočac Žubrinić entries, 1834–1862 — about 138 baptisms. Normalising the index's own spelling scatter (Zubrinić · Žubrinić · Xubrinić · Žubrinich · Zabrinić · Dubrinić · Bubrinić), the fathers run Joannes ~22 · Michael ~23 · Matthaeus 7 · Franciscus 6 · Georgius 5 · Thomas 5 · Nicolaus 2.

Michael's twenty-three are to at least eight different mothers — Maria, Catharina, Magdalena, Helena, Maria Marković, Maria Rogić, Magdalena Draženović, Anna Bobinac, Maria Maković, Helena Orešković. That is not one man; it is a village full of Michaels, which is precisely the trap question 4d is about.

And a correction to this morning's plan. The redirection assumed every baptism writes «e Šumećica N° X» into the Conditio column. The 1834–1846 book does not — its Conditio holds a single status word, checked at December 1839 and March 1845. The 1846–1858 book does. The house numbers are readable for 1846–1858 and the first years of 1834, and not in between.

The blocker is gone. The last sitting stopped because the folio-to-image mapping was unsolved and said the fix was to read the printed folio number at the head of each page instead of inferring it from the year. Done: the number is printed in the left margin of the left-hand page, and the left pages carry the even numbers.

That also corrects the earlier year map, which had image 232 as 1808/1809 and image 233 as 1811.

And it eliminates half the target. The marriage index put a Uroda Georgius on folio 6 and a second on folio 8. Folio 8 is 1811–1812 — too late: ahnentafel 54's daughter was born 23 April 1810. That second Georgius is another man, or a Georgius named as a father or witness, which is what this index does.

So the marriage, if it is on film, is folio 6 or folio 4. Folio 6 was read twice, at two resolutions, and no Uroda × Gerkacs entry was seen — but that negative is not being claimed. A dense abbreviated hand read at a third of full resolution is not a page read. The next sitting is two pages: image 232 left and image 231 left, entry by entry.

Also written down for the first time: Karlobag is catalogue koha:655222, DGS 5481648 / 5481649 / 5498480, and the second film is 584 images, not the 435 this archive recorded — that was the waypoint's count, not the film's.

The house numbers were not reached. The map of the book was.

And it is the right instrument. A household census lists Pagus, Domus, Nomina Familiæ and birth dates together — a Žubrinić household whole instead of one baptism at a time — and it reaches back a hundred and twenty-four years before the baptismal register begins.

The last sitting wrote this census off as a 110-opening sweep with an unreadable village margin. Both halves of that are now wrong. The Pagus is written bottom-to-top in the gutter, so a −90° rotation renders it upside down — rotate +90° and it is plain. Twenty-two openings surveyed that way give the village order of the whole census: Ottosaz · Luka · Dubrava (Biskupljak) · Novoselia · Lieška · Kostelievo Selo · Obilje · Beljue · Shumechicza · Luka · Extinctæ.

Šumećica is images 102–106. Five openings — the whole village. The job is no longer a sweep.

Read at the page: Domus 9, Josephus Dašović, nine people, with Anna uxor Petri nata Žunić; Domus 4, Mattheus Orehović, fourteen, with Martha uxor Georgii nata Orehović. The N° Domus numbers are not in order — 9 on image 102, 4 on image 103 — so the book cannot be walked to a house number; all five openings have to be read.

And a negative worth stating. No Žubrinić household has appeared at Šumećica in the openings read so far. Two of the five are unread, so this is not a finding — but the census carries births to 1846, and ahnentafel 20 is «Confiniarius, ex pago Shumechicza N° 24» in January 1834. A man in the village then should be in a book current to 1846. The Extinctæ section at 108–109 is the second place to look.

FamilySearch then refused the session: 403 on an ark fetched successfully minutes earlier, still 403 after forty seconds. The block, not the blip. The next sitting is three openings and then two — half an hour.

The volume has an alphabetical index at its front — images ~217–226 — and it indexes everyone named in an entry, not just the grooms. Same layout as the death index: Cognomen et Nomen · dies · mensis · annus · folium, with a printed letter at the head of each column — M at image 220, T at 225, U at 226.

Eleven Urode on folios 2 to 9, and two separate men called Georgius Uroda, at folio 6 and folio 8 — the same difficulty as the two men called Michaël Žubrinić, in another family. Several share a date under ditto marks, which is the tell: eleven Urode across eight folios is not eleven weddings. It lists the fathers and the witnesses too, which is what makes it worth having — a bride's father can be found through it.

The register's own years were mapped: image 230 left is folio 2 and about 1806; 231 left is 1807; 231 right runs 1807 → 1809; 232 left is 1809; 232 right is 1810. Ahnentafel 27 was born 23 April 1810, so her parents married by 1809 — and those pages were read and hold no Uroda marriage. One entry is worth carrying: 18 January 1809, a Miletich marrying «Matthææ filiæ defuncti Martini U[roda?]» — surname unconfirmed.

What is left is mechanical. The folio-to-image mapping is off by something: folio 2 is image 230's left page, but folio 6 by that count is image 232's left page and carries 10 Augusti with a Vukelić bride where the index says 2 Augusti. The fix is to read the folio number printed at the head of each page rather than infer it — one contact sheet, next sitting, and then folios 6 and 8.

The film carries an alphabetical index to the deaths — images ~168–192, a printed letter at the head of each column, Cognomen et Nomen | dies | mensis | annus | folium. It turns a fifty-seven-year register into a lookup, and this archive did not know it was there. Its folio numbers were spot-checked twice and were right both times.

Under U it lists fourteen Uroda deaths between 1808 and 1846, with day, month, year and page.

Ahnentafel 55 is confirmed to the year, and her husband gets a trade. Folio 52, 6 August 1834: «Maria uxor piscatoris Georgii Uroda annorum 45, … die 7ª hujus sepultum est Carlobagi in cœmeterio communi». The date is the tree's exactly, the age is the tree's exactly — born about 1789, and her baptism was read in August 1789 — and she is uxor, not vidua.

That one word did an afternoon's work. Her husband was alive on 6 August 1834, which rules out the Georgius Uroda who died in 1808 and the Georgius Uroda who died in 1817 — the obvious answer, the one a hurried reader takes.

Ahnentafel 54 is not settled, and is not being claimed. Folio 66, 11 January 1846: «Georgius Uroda annorum 72, piscator» — same name, same trade, the only Georgius to die after his wife. But 72 in 1846 means born about 1774, and the tree says 22 April 1777, which would make him 68. Three years out. The other candidate is worse: Joannes Uroda, civis, annorum 59, 8 December 1843 — seven years out, and a citizen rather than a fisherman.

What would settle it is the Karlobag marriage register 1804–1861, on the same film, still unopened: it would name his father and fix his age at marriage.

And if the 1846 man is him, the census household becomes legible — Uroda Maria vid., born 18 March 1789, keeping Ive (1811), Vicko (1816) and Kate Maria (1820), who bracket ahnentafel 27 of 1810. A second wife, and his grown children. A reconstruction, not a reading.

Three Uroda households, at images 64 and 65, and ahnentafel 54 is in none of them.

The book's order finally made sense: it is alphabetical once, images 8 to about 75, and the two pages of an opening run on from each other — Pavicich, Perpich, Pilepich, Potocnjak, Rukavina, Šegota, Smojver, Tomljanović, Uroda, Uzelac, Vujačić. What follows image 76 is not a second census but later additions, households entered as they formed, some running into the 1870s. That corrects what this archive published an hour earlier.

• Uroda Jone (image 64 left) — a household entered with a brother and a sister beside the head, and four children dead in ten years, the deaths written into the margin in Croatian months: † 22 svibnja 1853, † 6 sept. 1852, † 19 sept. 1855, † 5 Aug. 1862.
• Uroda Maria vid., 18 March 1789 (image 64 right) — with Ive (1811), Vicko (1816), Kate Maria (1820).
• Uroda Jure (image 65 left) — with Franica (1832) and Fedorija (1839).

The near-miss is the part worth keeping. An Uroda widow born in 1789 is exactly what ahnentafel 55 would look like — Maria Gerkacs, who married an Uroda and was born in 1789. Five months apart, same surname, same small town. It is not her: the tree gives her a death on 6 August 1834, ten years before this book was opened. Right surname, right year, right town, wrong woman — and what caught it was a death date the tree had and the census did not.

Nobody in the three households was born in 1777. Ahnentafel 54 would have been sixty-seven. His absence puts his death before 1844 — which puts it inside the Karlobag death register 1804–1861, on film and unopened. That is now the cheapest unopened document on this line.

And Ive, Vicko and Kate Maria are the right generation and town to be ahnentafel 27's brothers and sister. Candidates, not kin: what would join them is her marriage, in the Karlobag marriage register 1804–1861 — also on film, also unopened.

Five of the six differences are not disagreements. Find a Grave runs one, two or ten days later than the tree and never earlier — Susannah +1, Stanley +1, John William +2, Maurice Joseph +2, Arthur Leslie +10. That is the shape of a burial: a cemetery records the interment, a parish records the death, and the gap between them is the funeral. Read as conflicts they would have started five arguments; read as a pattern they are a lesson about what a cemetery index is.

The sixth is real. Leonard James died on 25 March — both sources agree to the day — and the tree says 1985 where Broken Hill says 1983. Same day, same month, two years apart, which is the shape of a typed digit. This archive does not know which is right, and says so. There is a photograph of the headstone on Find a Grave.

Three records, and this archive had already read all three — Ljubomir's marriage of 1920, Anka's of 1919, and Marijan's baptism at Krmpote in 1895. He is a name in the parents' column of each and none gives his age.

One small new thing: at Marijan's baptism the priest wrote him Ivko — a fourth form of the name, beside Juraj, Jurko and Georgius.

The negative is the useful part: the Senj marriage film is not indexed for 1888, so finding anything in it means reading it, which is what was then done.

Images 129–147 verified against their printed pages — pag. 10 is 1862, pag. 18 is 1865. One entry read out in full and deliberately not claimed. On 14 September the identification was revised down: the 1859 marriage is now less likely to be his, and the note says so rather than quietly dropping it.

The register has no column this archive wanted: it does not give the fathers' villages.

Two found, both confirming the tree to the day and both adding a house number it did not have. Ahnentafel 50: “Die 1ª Aprilis 1832”, house 39, “Georgius Jellicich, Antonii” — a patronymic that names his father. Ahnentafel 51: “Die 8ª Maji 1842”, entry 147, house 204.

The archive had published a question claiming the register contradicted the tree here. It did not. The question was withdrawn and the reason stated: the tree was reached for as the likely culprit because it usually is — which is a bias, not an argument.

Seven more direct ancestors are in this book and its companion, and the two houses — 39 and 204 — still do not match.

Found, and thin on purpose. Mauda (Montrose, Saint John NB, 11 Feb 1926), Nikdla (Regina, Halifax, 28 Mar 1928) and Vinka (Minnedosa, Saint John NB, 19 Feb 1930) all sailed from Liverpool — and these are UK outbound lists, which do not name a Croatian village.

The St Albans, Vermont border crossings are thinner still: country of birth and nothing else. Recording that is the point — it stops the next person spending a subscription day on a seam that cannot carry what they need.

No Vroda, Vrodich, Urodich or Uroda parent or godparent read in these 12 images. Not a finding of absence (see what was missed).

No marriage, death or child of a Caetanus Bachi in Pag or Nin. The index has the Pag father — Angelus Bacchi, apothecary, died 19 January 1764 aged about 68 ([snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#pag-death-1764-01-angelus-bacchi-aromatarius)) — so Angelo lived eleven years after the Karlobag Caetanus's marriage (1753) and about four years after that Caetanus was dead (before October 1760); his death names no son. A Bachi household at Nin ([Dna Viena Bachi, 6 October 1768](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#nin-death-1768-10-dna-viena-bachi), Elisabetta 1777, Antonio 1787) — the mainland coast across from Pag; not shown to be the Pag family. And a possible Bachi at Karlobag itself in 1715 — a son Luca of a Mikule «Bach[…]» ([snapshot](https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#karlobag-baptism-1715-10-luca-son-of-mikule-bach)); the surname is cut by the page edge and the index's «Bachi» is not firm. A Karlobag baptism of 13 June 1761, «Georgius Stephanus, son of Jacobus and Catharina Bal[…]», is indexed «Baci» but the page's surname is hidden in the gutter and may be another name.

No marriage of Georgius and Maria under any «Urod*» spelling. The index does list Dume's children, under «Urode»: Franica 1739, Giakova (Jakov) 10 May 1744, Marta 1745, Lucia 17 December 1746 (new). Dume baptisms of 1690–1716: only three of April 1700 (Cerklyacić, Pavelić, Marasović) and one of 1706 (Sikić), none Uroda or Kovačević.

104 Jacob Pilipić: not baptised at Karlobag — no Pilipić baptism there 1700–1738, a Jakov father in 1739, the captain's children 1748–56; two Jacobus Pilepich baptised at Kastav (5 Jul 1705, 25 Jun 1708) are candidates, index only. 212 Josiph Smojver Vukić: not indexed, none seen on the pages of 1730–31; an Osip Smojver is a father in 1733. 220 Nicolaus Gerkacs: no Gergacs baptism at Karlobag before 1779; the exact spelling is scattered in the north (Varaždinske Toplice 1703, Velika Ludina 1771) — an incomer. Later (12 Oct 2026): image 53 read slowly (3x) for Josiph — no Smojver child seen April 1730 – early 1732. (An apparent gap in the book was a misreading of 1731/1732 and was withdrawn.)

Nicolaus, 1834, at Šumećica 24, Confiniarius — and a Josephus in 1845 whose mother is née Marković where the 1834 mother is née Orešković. Five Frontier offices came out of the godparent columns of two pages.

The two mothers are the whole of question 4d: one Michaël Žubrinić with two wives, or two men of the same name. The books that would settle it — Otočac marriages before 1834, and deaths 1834–45 — are unopened.

Toma Blažević, tuberculosis, aged 69 (p.162, 1903) and Stanko Papić, scarlatina at twenty months (p.225, 1907) — the second in an outbreak that killed four children in eight days.

Two pages of one register. Everything else in the Senj death books is unread, and the archive's own name-reuse table leans on that silence without saying so.

Her own baptism at str. 122 — and a registrar's margin added in 1971 citing her death entry at page 280, line 37. A parish clerk closed the loop eighty-five years later and left the reference behind for us.

Her eight siblings' baptisms are attached in the tree as images and none has been read.

Two children born at the same house number seven years apart, HDA 111 p.104 and HDA 176 p.168 — and two different men called Ivo Blažević standing godfather, one the son of Mate and one the son of Toma.

That is what made the archive stop calling Smokvica 114 a household. It is a zadruga — an extended family under one roof and one number — and the correction runs through every page that counted people by house.

Her household is entered Confiniarii — a Military Frontier family, which is a legal status and not a description. Seven Perpić children sit on the one page.

Only the page her entry falls on has been opened.

Written on the Senj archive's own instruction, and all three sent on 15 September 2026. Two have since answered and are recorded separately — Državni arhiv u Rijeci, and Župa Krmpote. This row is now the Senj parish office alone. Denis Rukavina named three doors; these are the letters that went through them. Pending here now means awaiting a reply, not awaiting posting — the same state the Gospić row has been in since the 14th.

To Državni arhiv u Rijeci — the 1892 baptism of Ljubomir Blažević at Rijeka, which this archive has never searched for and which would say why a Krmpote peasant household had a child in the city and then went home; the three Senj deaths after 1907 — Milka Papić, Zvonimir Vukelić in 1915, Tereza Žubrinić in 1931; Jurko Blažević's baptism before 1879; and any status animarum.

To the Župni ured Senj — mons. dr. Richard Pavlić, Ogrizovićeva 4 — the same three deaths, the baptisms of January and February 1895 that fall one year past the film, and a question about this parish's own practice: Senj entries carry no house number where every village book around it does.

To the parish of Krmpote — which has no parish house and is administered from Ledenice, at Klenovica, itself a village in this family's story — Jurko's baptism, marriage and death, the Butorac household that stood godparent twice, and the illegible «Pere ?ećanić».

What these three say that the first two could not. Every ask now states where the film stops: Krmpote's begins in 1879 against a catalogue label of 1815; Senj baptisms stop at 1894 and deaths at 1907; Krmpote has no filmed marriage register at all; and the whole of 1888 in the Senj marriage book has now been read — thirty-nine entries — without finding the marriage. One ask carries a page and a line: a 1971 registrar's annotation pointing at page 280, line 37 of a Senj death register.

Addresses verified from the diocese's and archdiocese's own directories, not from a search engine.

She is the emptiest person on the direct line — a name, two tree links, and nothing else. Her father is a surname with no given name; her mother is not in the tree at all.

The name is probably not her name. MyHeritage carries her as «Ana Shambul Marić» and, elsewhere, «rođen Shumbul Marić». This archive has seen that shape before: the nadimak, the household name written beside the surname and underlined by the priest — Antich Papa, Jellichich dictis Jurešina. «Shumbul Marić» looks like a by-name flattened into a double surname by a tree program. If so the surname to search is Marić, and Šumbul is the house name — the only thing separating this family from every other Marić in Lika. (Hypothesis. It is deliberately not being added to the by-names data, which holds only phrases read off a page.)

What is reachable, cheapest first. The couple's children are Lucca (1853), Marija (about 15 Sept 1858), Jacobus and Tereza (1867); Otočac births are filmed 1834–1858. So Lucca's and Marija's baptisms are both inside the book — and the Otočac entries already read name the mother with her maiden surname and fix the household by village and house number. Then Ana's own baptism, about 1834–1838, which names both her parents — two walls in one entry. Then the Stanje duša, where a Marić household would appear with dates of birth for everyone in it.

What is not reachable, and is said so: their marriage (by 1852; the Otočac marriage film begins 1859) and Tereza's own baptism of 1867 (the birth film stops at 1858).

And one thing to check before building on any of it: Nikola was nineteen when Lucca was born. That is possible, and it is also the shape of a wrong attachment — the same confusion as the two men called Michaël in question 4d.

Sent 13 September 2026 to zahtjevi@arhiv-gospic.hr, and acknowledged the next day by Marija Fajdić, viši arhivist, Voditelj Odjela: «potvrđujemo primitak vašeg zahtjeva. O njegovu rješavanju bit ćete pravodobno obaviješteni kada vaš zahtjev dođe na red za obradu.»

A queue acknowledgement with a named archivist. Still open. The three asks are unchanged — the Kalanj × Perković marriage at Brinje, Otočac baptisms for Prozor 1875–1895, and the one-man-or-two question — and each was written with names, years and house numbers rather than as a general enquiry, because that is the kind an archivist can answer in an afternoon.

The older Senj marriage book has never been opened. It is the volume that would carry ahnentafel 12's own marriage — Juraj “Papa” Antić of Selce to Matija Filipić — and with it the join between the Selce house and the Senj one.

It is held, it is filmed, and nothing but sitting hours stands between this archive and it.

Not one page of the Brinje register has ever been opened, and Brinje is not in this archive's gazetteer. It got onto the list because a 1910 American manifest gave a Kalanj's residence as Brinje, which sent someone back to re-read a Latin baptism of 1864: “Brinjensis parochiae ruricolae” — country people of the parish of Brinje, forty kilometres inland from the coast where this archive had always put them.

An entire country known from two words on a later record. No route into it has been identified yet, which is a different thing from having searched and found nothing — and this row exists so the difference stays visible.

A third failure state, and it is not either of the two this archive had already written down.

fetch('/service/search/hr/v2/personas?…') → 503
location.hostname → «ident.familysearch.org»
document.title → «Sign-in to your account»

Every request — API and page alike — redirects to the sign-in host. Not a 403 on the tile service: a 503 and a redirect, with the browser sitting on the login page.

How to tell it from the other two. A rate-limit blip and a session block both leave you logged in — the catalogue, the record index and the ordinary site keep answering, and only the deep-zoom tiles refuse. A sign-out takes everything.

It cannot be waited out and must not be worked around. The only fix is for the account holder to sign in again in this browser. No credentials were typed and none will be — not the user's, not from a password store. The right move is to say the session expired, name what it blocks, and stop.

What carried on regardless: Arcanum, which needs no FamilySearch session, and the local data work. The sitting lost seven items and kept the rest.

And it arrived after a long run of catalogue and record-index queries, not after heavy tile fetching — so it reads as ordinary session expiry rather than anything provoked. Written into tools/familysearch.md beside the blip-versus-block test.

«You have no active subscription.» Arcanum returns the full-text snippet free and paywalls the scan. Every quotation this archive has taken from it is therefore an extract with the OCR's own errors left in, and is labelled that way rather than tidied — a cleaned-up quotation would claim a reading that did not happen.

The paywall is recorded, not worked around. What it costs is precise: the Magyar Compass entry for the Otočac savings bank would give the whole board, and the casualty lists would give the house numbers beside the Kalanj birth years.

Tried and could not be reached from this machine. collections.arolsen-archives.org refuses the connection here, in the browser and in a direct fetch alike, while arolsen-archives.org itself loads normally. That is this end, not theirs, and it is recorded rather than worked around.

What is waiting there is worth saying out loud. Hedviga's second husband, Santou Isaac Codron, was born on Rhodes in 1913 — a Sephardic community of about 1,700 people that was deported to Auschwitz in July 1944 and almost entirely destroyed. How he came to be alive to marry her in about 1973 is the largest unanswered question in this archive, and the Arolsen collections are the single most likely place to hold the answer. The three Arolsen cards this site already publishes reached it through a family tree, not through Arolsen.

The site stopped answering. After two long sessions and heavy tile traffic the viewer returned Access Denied, Error 15.

Work stopped rather than retried from another angle. The symptoms and the avoidance are written down in tools/familysearch.md so the next session paces itself. Access returned the following day.

It returned on 15 September 2026, harder. From about 04:21 UTC every request to the site — search, catalogue and scans alike — answered 403 Error 15 with a full «Access Denied» interstitial. It survived a 35-second wait, a fresh navigation to a different service, and a retry four minutes later, so it is the block and not the blip. The decisive test was the tile path: register pages are read from /service/records/storage/deepzoomcloud/…, a different edge from the API, and a known-good ark read successfully the day before returned 403 on image.xml and 403 on a single tile. No index, no catalogue, no page. Client IP 168.140.255.212. This stopped seven items of the work list on the spot, and it is recorded here because a wall that is not written down gets mistaken next week for a source that held nothing.

A clean negative, and it points somewhere. Lucia Labornik died 30 November 1850; Franziska was baptised 19 September 1853 and entered ehelich. So the marriage to Ursula Sedej falls between those two dates, and this volume covers them.

Book pages 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 and 71 were read — April 1850 to February 1853, without a gap. Around forty marriages. There is no Kozina on any of them.

The likeliest reason is the ordinary rule: a marriage is celebrated in the bride's parish. Johann's first marriage is in this book because Lucia Labornik was local — Kranj–Šmartin, January 1833. If Ursula Sedej was not, the entry is in her parish's book, and both sets of parents with it.

So the finding is about her and not about him: Ursula Sedej came from outside this parish, on the evidence of where her marriage is not. Which parish is the open question, and the neighbouring books — Stara Loka, Kranj, Šenčur, Preddvor — are all on Matricula and free.

(Matricula was slow on the night this was read: several image fetches timed out and had to be retried three times. Not a block, but budget for it.)

NOT THERE, AND THE ABSENCE IS INFORMATIVE. Franz was 24 at his marriage on 27 October 1800, so he was born between late 1775 and late 1776. The register was walked from October 1775 to January 1777 — images 329 to 340, every Infans and Parentes column read — and there is no Kosinar in it at all.

That is not a null result the way an unsearched book is. The same surname is all over this parish's register fifty years later: Johann's children in 1834, 1836, 1853 and 1856, and Gertraud's Martin in 1841. In the mid-1770s it is absent.

Three explanations, and this archive cannot choose between them yet. (1) Franz was born somewhere else and came into the parish — he married into Feichting house 10 at twenty-four, which is what a man who marries a household does. (2) The age is wrong: «24» in a marriage register is often a round number. (3) The surname is written unrecognisably in the 1770s hand, as it already proved to be in 1814 when «Kosinar» was read as «Kosnar» and a candidate wrongly killed.

The way to settle it is his DEATH, not his birth. A death entry carries an age, and an age gives a birth year without depending on a bridegroom's estimate. Franz should die somewhere between about 1815 and 1860 — sig. 04634 (death index 1812–1835), sig. 04635 (1836–1869) and the books behind them. Not looked at yet.

Method note. Year headings were found by probe — image 300 is 1773 and image 350 is March 1778, about ten openings to the year — then the window was narrowed with «1776» on image 331 and «1777 Januarius» on image 340. The scan itself read only two columns of each opening, cropped and stacked three openings to a sheet. The page itself (snapshot, kept on the site).

No, and the negative is a proper one. The full text of Bojničić's Der Adel von Kroatien und Slavonien (Nürnberg, 1899) — the standard register of Croatian and Slavonian noble families and their arms — was downloaded and searched: zero occurrences of Kosina, Kozina or Kossina. The search is sound rather than a broken regex: the same file returns Korjenić 119 times and Kovačić 13. The ZRC SAZU database Plemiška heraldika na Slovenskem likewise has no Kozina.

The prior question is the one that matters, though. Arms are granted to a PERSON and descend in that person's line. There is no such thing as arms belonging to everyone who shares a surname, so the sites selling a «Kosina family crest» are selling a picture attached to a string of letters. What can be asked is whether an armigerous family of the name existed in these lands, and the answer is no.

And the family's own records agree. Martin Kozina is a trgovac; his mother a posjednica with a dash where the father belongs; Pavao's godfather another merchant. A trading household out of a Carniolan hill parish, with a surname meaning goatskin.

What is real: the arms of Kranj — Krainburg in the marriage entry — are a red eagle with spread wings on a silver field, and the same eagle is the ancient device of Carniola, the Kranjska named in the cell that told this archive where the family came from.

Sent 15 September, answered the same day by the parish priest. From vlč. Jakov Filipović, župnik:

«Poštovani, Matice i arhiva svih župa kojim upravljam je predata u Riječku Nadbiskupiju. Koliko mi je poznato oni su istu predali na skrb Državnoga Arhiva. Budući mi ovdje na župama nemamo dodir sa starijim Maticama, za daljnje informacije kontaktirajte Ured riječke nadbiskupije. Srdačan pozdrav uz želju da dostignete svoj cilj.»

«The registers and archives of every parish I administer have been handed to the Rijeka Archdiocese. As far as I know they passed them to the care of the State Archive. Since we in the parishes have no contact with the older registers, contact the Office of the Rijeka Archdiocese for further information. Warm greetings, with the wish that you reach your goal.»

It is a nil return that corrects an assumption this archive was working on. The reasoning behind writing to parish offices at all — the Senj archive's own instruction, and the belief that the books the films do not cover are the ones that never left parish custody — is wrong for Krmpote. These registers left. The parish has no contact with its own older books.

And it names a door nobody has tried: the Ured riječke nadbiskupije, the Rijeka Archdiocesan Office. That is a third kind of holder — neither a state archive nor a parish — and it is the one the priest says received the books first.

It also sharpens the question already put to Rijeka. The State Archive answered on the same day that it «does not carry out genealogical research of this complexity» and did not say what it holds. The priest says the books went to the State Archive's care. So the unanswered question — do you hold these registers — is now asked from two directions, and is the one thing worth putting to the Archdiocese and to Rijeka again.

Sent 15 September 2026, answered the same day, and the answer is no. From Boris Zakošek, Državni arhiv u Rijeci:

«Poštovani, Državni arhiv u Rijeci ne provodi ovako složena rodoslovna istraživanja. Istraživati možete sami u čitaonici Arhiva ili putem internetske stranice familysearch.org»

«The State Archive in Rijeka does not carry out genealogical research of this complexity. You may research yourself in the Archive's reading room, or through the website familysearch.org.»

It is a refusal of the service, not an answer about the holdings — and that distinction is the whole of what this row now records. The letter asked one question that needed no research at all: «If you hold, or can say who holds, the Rijeka baptismal register covering 1 March 1892…». That question is unanswered. The 1892–99 baptismal volume is missing from the film and from its Kazalo both; whether Rijeka holds the original is still not known.

And the reply points back at FamilySearch, which the letter had already said — with the volume list quoted — has been read to the end and has a gap precisely where Ljubomir Blažević's baptism falls. That is worth recording plainly rather than resentfully: the archive has not understood the request, or has not read past the first paragraph, and either way the door is shut by the same route it was opened.

What remains open. The reading room is offered and is real: this is material that can be consulted in person at Rijeka, by David or by a paid local researcher. That is now the only stated route to the 1892 entry.

Seventeen openings read, and the book turns out to stop earlier than its label.

The catalogue calls it Vjenčani 1866–1891. The last entry is 9 August 1891 — image 716 is the END OF FILM target and 715 is a ruled blank struck through. Every marriage from April to 9 August 1891 has now been read at the page, entry numbers 115 to 207, and there is no Blažević and no Žubrinić among them.

The names are the finding in their own way. This is a port city register, not a Lika one — Cesare, Demarchi, Marchesi, Buzzoduro, Colella, Magarelli, Duggeri Rolla, Bellini, Capudi beside Kljun, Zadnik, Vrsalović, Mihalčić, Matejčić, Zorčić, Žurić, Marušić. Two surnames of this archive's own appear and are not ours: Michaël Papić × Agnes Brunović, and Josephus Prpić × Marica Zinić, both June–July 1891.

And the structural point matters more than the negative. Ljubomir was born at Rijeka on 1 March 1892. A marriage between 9 August 1891 and that birth would not be on this film at all — it falls into exactly the same filming gap that swallows his baptism, where the births jump 1891 → 1900. Two documents, one hole.

What is not claimed: the couple could have married at Rijeka in 1889, 1890 or early 1891. That is images 1–698 of this film and was not opened.

The tree's Lucca is not in the register, and this time the negative can be trusted.

When this was first noticed the objection was obvious: the index may simply not cover 1853. It does. Otočac Žubrinić entries by year —

1853 sits in the middle of its neighbours. It is not a gap.

And in that year there is no Lucca and no Luce Žubrinić baptised at Otočac, and no child at all to a father called Nicolaus. The only Lucia of 1853 is Lucia Kostelac, daughter of Stephanus Kostelac and Barbara Žubrinić — a Žubrinić mother, not a Žubrinić child. The Žubrinić Lucias either side are Luce, 30 June 1850, to Mio Žubrinić and Jele Orešković, and Lucia, 16 March 1855, to Jacobus Žubrinić and Martha.

So the entry that would make ahnentafel 10 a father at nineteen has no register behind it. The tree gives Tereza a sister Lucca born 1853 and dead in 1871; the parish that would have baptised her, in a year the index covers normally, did not.

Stated carefully: an index is a finding aid, not a register, and a single missed page is always possible. But the density test is the thing that was missing in the morning, and it has now been run.

Question 13 has an answer and it is a negative.

Rijeka's baptisms are filmed almost continuously from 1594. The volumes run

• Rođeni 1880–1886 · 1886–1890 · _1890–1891_ · _1900–1901_

There is no 1892–1899 birth register on the film, and the birth Kazalo runs 1800–1889 and then 1895–1902. Ljubomir's 1892 baptism cannot be reached on FamilySearch by image or by index. It has to come from the Rijeka state archive or the parish — which is exactly what the drafted, unsent letter asks for. That letter is now the only route.

One target is reachable. Vjenčani 1866–1891, DGS 5497940, 720 images, covers «Juraj's marriage to Tereza before 1892» — the document question 1b asks for. Fixed point read at the page: image 701 = May 1891, entries 115–121; image 720 ends the book. Images 699, 700 and 701 were read name by name — Cesare, Kljun, Zadnik, Martić, Leopar, Švić, Vrsalović, Mihalčić, Terzaga, Matejčić, Sirola, Larber, Demarchi, Peharović. Rijeka town names. No Blažević and no Žubrinić in April–May 1891.

Images 702–720 — June to December 1891 — are the remaining window, and expectation should be a negative: a Lika man and an Otočac woman would marry in her parish or his, and Otočac marriages stop in 1872 while Krmpote has no marriage book at all. If Rijeka does not hold them, the marriage is not on FamilySearch anywhere — and that turns question 1b into a letter.

Reachable, and not worth returning to unsubscribed. 4,603 hits for Zubrinic, but every date is masked — the unsubscribed view renders births and deaths as xxxx — and the free hits are «Public Member Photos» and «Private Member Stories»: user-submitted trees, not records. This archive does not treat another family's tree as evidence, which is the whole reason it exists.

Recorded so nobody spends another sitting on it. Ancestry would need a subscription to be worth anything here, and even then its Croatian record coverage is thin — the church books are FamilySearch's.

Nothing, and the nothing is informative. «Šumbul» Otočac returns 0. «Šambul» returns 348 hits and every one is a Moroccan legionnaire tried at Cluj in 1936. «Marić» Otočac returns 149, all twentieth-century passport notices, none of them ours.

Marić is too common a surname for a press search without a given name and a date — which is precisely why the odd first element of her name matters. See the next row.

Both returned nothing, and both nothings are worth having.

Šumećica — the hamlet the American manifests made important, and the birthplace of ahnentafel 10 — appears nowhere in the Hungarian press. A place can be central to a family and invisible to an empire.

Senj 1943 returns nothing to this press, and that is not a silence about the raid: the raid falls under the Italian occupation, after Hungarian administration ended. This is the wrong press for it. The right one — the Italian occupation press, or Arolsen — has still to be opened.

Also recorded so nobody repeats it: the Hungarian spelling «Blazsevics» returns 2,168 hits and almost every one is a modern footballer.

Every cemetery of this family that exists on Find a Grave is empty.

Gradsko groblje Senj – Sv. Vid — 0 memorials. Krivi Put — 0. Groblje Karlobag — 0. Groblje Otočac and Otočac II — 0 and 0. Groblje Selce — 0. Groblje Novi Vinodolski — 0. Smokvica Krmpotska, Krmpote and Klenovica have no cemetery listed at all.

Sixty-six Blažević memorials do exist in Croatia — almost all of them at Mrkopalj in Gorski Kotar and at Lovinac, which are other families.

The Senj entry is the sharp one: this archive publishes a photograph of the Blažević plot in that cemetery, with six names cut into it, and the world's largest index of gravestones has nothing there at all. What this archive holds is not a duplicate of a public record. It is the record.

The whole year is read and he is not in it. 1888 runs from image 214 to image 221 and holds 39 marriages, entry 1 on 12 January to entry 39 on 15 November. No Blažević married a Žubrinić at Senj that year. No Blažević married anyone.

That matters because ahnentafel 4 has no birth date and no death date at all — his wife has 1867–1931 and all four children have dates — and a marriage entry gives a groom's age, his father and his village in one line.

If they married in 1888 they married elsewhere, and the obvious elsewhere is the bride's parish: Otočac, whose marriage register on film stops in 1872. Krmpote has no marriage register filmed at all, Novi Vinodolski's stop in 1859, Ledenice's in 1882. Three routes to this man's dates now end at the same wall.

Three entries were worth carrying away regardless: Vinko Antić × Julka Vukelić on 21 June — two of this archive's surnames marrying each other at Senj — Martin Kozina × Anjelika Boras in January, and Josip Draženović × Marija Jovanović of Otočac in September.

The whole of 1888 is written out in notes/senj-1888-marriages.md — all thirty-nine marriages, with what each one rules out. The note exists because a negative this size is only worth anything if the next person can see exactly what was covered.

Opened, read at full resolution, and it is a different family.

Page 50 of the Senj baptismal register, entry 55: Georgius, born 22 April 1861, baptised 28 April, legitimus — father Antonius Blažević, mercator, mother Anna nata Trbuhović.

Ahnentafel 4's father is Toma Blažević, a nadničar, a day labourer of Smokvica Krmpotska, who in 1861 was twenty-three. The name and the year fit; the father does not, and the father decides.

The citation had been carried in the tree since 2014 with a question mark on it. Answering a question mark is worth as much as finding something, and this one is now answered.

Matricula holds no Croatian registers at all. Its fonds are Germany (9,123), Austria (2,857), Slovenia (723), Switzerland (292), Luxembourg (277), Italy (106), Poland, Serbia, Bosnia — and there is no Croatia entry. The Italian holdings are Reggio Calabria and Bolzano-Brixen; nothing Istrian, nothing on the Kvarner.

Searched by place all the same, because a fonds list is a claim and a search is a test: Senj, Otočac, Karlobag, Krmpote, Novi Vinodolski, Crikvenica, Rijeka, Fiume, Gospić — nothing. Selce and Brinje return hits that are Slovenian villages of the same name, and Kroatien matches a parish in Regensburg. Rhodes returns nothing, which closes it for Hedviga's second husband too.

The method was checked against a control — Wien returns a hundred parishes — so this is the portal's coverage and not a broken query. Matricula can be struck off the list for this family, and that is worth writing down once so nobody spends an evening on it again.

A nil return with a map, answered in a day. Denis Rukavina, 14 September 2026: «Sabirni centar u Senju nema u svom posjedu arhivsku građu kojom bi se moglo udovoljiti Vašem zahtjevu. S istim zahtjevom obratite se Državnom arhivu u Rijeci, Državnom arhivu u Gospiću i nadležnim Župnim uredima.»

The Senj outpost does not hold this material — and that is now known rather than assumed. Three doors are named in its place, and one of them, the parish offices, is a route this archive has never tried at all. The Krmpote registers after 1896 and the Senj ones after 1907 are in parish custody or at Rijeka.

It does not touch the four plans the film ranges killed. Those books exist; this only changes which address holds them. A third letter — to Rijeka, and to the Župni ured of Sv. Jakov Krmpote and of Senj — is the obvious next move and is not yet written.

The true figure is zero. The 63 was an artefact of searching by filename. It was caught before it deployed, and it is recorded here because an archive that logs only its external searches will keep believing its own arithmetic.

Not in this collection, and the catalogue said otherwise. Senj deaths on film stop at 1907; Senj births stop at 1894. Both sisters fall one year outside, and the death that widowed Milka at twenty-eight falls eight years outside.

Four published research plans depended on these two books. They were written against a catalogue label, and checking the film killed all four in an afternoon. That is the most useful negative this archive has recorded.

No Uroda groom or bride, in any spelling I could recognise, from the first entry of the book (image 313, p. 1, 4 May 1752) to the end of November 1763. Image 311 right is the title page («Liber Matrimoniorum 1752–1787»); the book proper starts at image 313 (the water-stained leaf 313 left and image 312 are blank), and the volume before it (image 300 is 1709) is an older book. Page map: 313 = May 1752, 314 = Oct–Nov 1752, 315 = Jan–May 1753, 316 = Mar–Jul 1753, 317 = Nov 1753, 319 = Jan–Feb 1754 (318 is a second frame of it), 320 = Mar–Jun 1754, 321–322 = Oct–Nov 1754, 323 = Jan–Feb 1755, 324 = Feb–Apr 1755, 325 = May–Sep 1755, 326 = Nov 1755–Jan 1756, 327 = Feb–May 1756, 328 = May–Jul 1756, 329 = Oct–Dec 1756, 330 = Feb 1757, 331 = Jun–Jul 1757, 332 = Jul–Oct 1757, 333/334 (duplicate frames) = Oct 1757, 335 = Nov 1757–Feb 1758, 336 = Mar–Jun 1758, 337–338 = Aug–Nov 1758, 339–343 = Jan–Dec 1759, 344–359 = Jan 1760–Nov 1763. Latin prose, four or five entries to a page, spouses' surnames noted in the left margin. The Šibenik index has no Uroda marriage. Barach of the S. Benedicti suburb turns up (14 Nov 1761, 5 Oct 1763) and is the only candidate for Maria's maiden name.

The book is Latin prose, one entry a paragraph, with the house number in the left margin and the parents named («filiam Joannis et Margaritae Drozovich»), so a marriage entry here WOULD name the bride's parents. Structure found: the marriages cluster on a few mass days (16 October 1806 about eight entries; 13 October 1807 about eight; 17 February 1811 several); the priest is Michael Kombol, chaplain; 1808 is headed «Nullus» — no marriage at all that year; 1809 and 1810 have one entry each. Georgi Jelličić × Margarita Brozović is not in what was read of 1806 – 1811; Jelličić appear only as witnesses and as grooms to other brides (13 October 1807, Joannes Jelličić × Helena Drozovich; 18 March 1810 Stephanus Dos(?) × Lucia Jelličić). Their first child is dated 22 March 1809, so the marriage is before March 1809 and, with 1808 empty, probably before 1806 or in 1807.

No Margarita to a Joannes and a Catharina Drozovich in 1778–1783 at the size read (the surname appears in these years only as sponsors: Joanne Drozovich, Barbara Drozovich; as parents Lucas and Barbara Drozovich, Gregorius and Helena Drozovich in 1779). Together with the clean 1783–85 pages, her baptism is not on the Selce film from 1778 to October 1785, so she was probably born before the film opens in 1778 (a bride of about twenty-three in 1800) — or in another parish. The Drozović family is present at Selce all through these years.

Entries read from January 1756 to 25 November 1776 (years 1756 to 1764 whole; May–July 1765 has no entries on the pages, which pass from 23 April to 1 August; images 295 and 296 show the same 1763 spread): no Georgius Uroda as a groom and no Maria as his bride. Two Uroda facts on the way: a Georgius Uroda is already a WITNESS in February 1770 (image 303 left) and on three entries of 1776, so he was an adult in the parish by 1770; and in November 1767 (image 300 right) a Joannes «Senjensis» (the given name read as Joannem at 6x on 11 October, with an underlined word after it) married «Mariam filiam defuncti Dominici Uroda» (witnesses Joannes Buttorach the younger, Joannes Matkovich the chancellor) — a Maria née Uroda, but with a different groom, so not ahnentafel 109 as far as the entry shows (the tree and the 1777 baptism name only «Georgio, et Maria Uroda, Conjugibus»; a wife takes the husband's surname in that book). On image 305 right (February–June 1772) the overwritten marriage entry's witnesses read as «Georgio Urodal» at the line end, again a witness, not a groom. Incidental: on 20 October 1760 (image 293 left) Paulus Perpich married «Annam viduam Caetani Bachi» — a Caetanus Bacchi dead by then, probably the bride's father of the 1774 Smojver × Bacchi marriage. The couple may have married outside Karlobag, in the bride's parish: Georgius is called a fisherman (piscator) in 1834 and no Uroda groom or bride appears on the pages read.

No Luckinić child and no Vicko Luckinić as sponsor on book pages 91, 92 and 93 (23 November 1727 to a July 1732 entry at the foot of page 93; the dates are out of sequence). The page called faded is legible at about 4x. Together with the earlier reads, her baptism is absent from June 1717 to 1732.

Oliva + Bacchi (fuzzy) + Karlobag: five rows, none an Oliva Bacchi or Bachi in Karlobag. Caetan* + Bachi* + Karlobag 1720–1775: three rows, none a Caetanus. A broader Bacchi (fuzzy) + Karlobag 1700–1810 search (878 rows, only the first ten read) leads with the index's «Caetani Antonÿ Bechi», 12 January 1779, parents Angelo Bechi and Catharina (the tree's Caetano) — the index spells the surname Bechi.

Every opening's groom and bride columns read, January 1881 to November 1899 (several hundred marriages; the entries are numbered afresh each year and run to about 15–26 a year): no Kozina/Kosina groom or bride that fits. The one Kozina in the volume is Marija Kozina of Čirče 23, born 6 February 1866, who married the widower Anton Žiherl on 16 November 1898 — not Anna or Maria. The villages named are (Stražišče, Zgornje, Srednje and Spodnje Bitnje, Breg, Drulovka, Zabukovje).

Both pages of every opening re-read, January 1756 to 25 October 1763: no Uroda groom or bride and no Georgius marrying a Maria. With the earlier reads (1742–1755, 1763–1776) the book has no such wedding from January 1742 to the start of 1776 apart from the unread places below. The index puts the first known child on 6 May 1764, so the marriage was before about August 1763; the 1791 death entry of the Dominus Georgius Uroda gives no age (an earlier version of this row wrongly took the age 72 of ahnentafel 54's 1846 death for his), so the marriage may be outside Karlobag.

No Uroda parent and no Uroda by-name in these images. In 1706–1712 the families carry patronymic surnames (-ović, -ić) and «Uroda» does not occur; it first appears in the 1730s as a by-name («Dume urode alliti Horaca», 1734). So a baptism of Dume would be written under another surname and a blind read for «Uroda» cannot find it. Map: 12 = Aug 1706 – Jan 1707, 13 = Nov–Dec 1707 left and 1706 right (book pages 18–19, out of order), 14 = Nov 1709 – Aug 1710, 15 = Sep 1710 – Apr 1711, 16 = May 1711 – Jan 1712, 17 = Jan – Oct 1712; 52 = Oct 1729 – Jan 1731, 53 = 1730, 54 = Jan – Jun 1732, 55 = Jun – Dec 1732; image 18 ≈ 1712, 28 ≈ 1714, 38 ≈ 1721, 45 ≈ 1724.

No maiden name. Godparents: 1767 the criminal judge Antonius Dorliga and the wife of Antonius Iurich; 1769 the Chancellor Josephus Kumanović and Sancina, wife of Antonius Dorligo; 1772 Kumanović and his wife Joanna; 1773 Antonius Pomsick and Aloysia, wife of Josephus Collini; 1780 the standard-bearer Antonius Klein and Catharina, wife of the pro-tribune Joannes Kallinich de Zirfeld; 1784 Nicolaus Samanich and Heva, wife of Joannes Butorović. Only Kumanović stands twice. Georgius and Maria are «Dominus» and «Domina», «Cives» of the town. Snapshots: [https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#karlobag-baptism-1767-petrus-jacobus-uroda) · [https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#karlobag-baptism-1769-heva-joanna-uroda) · [https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#karlobag-baptism-1772-maria-catharina-uroda) · [https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#karlobag-baptism-1773-maria-heva-uroda) · [https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#karlobag-baptism-1780-antonius-uroda) · [https://daviddef.github.io/TheBlazevic/snapshots/#karlobag-baptism-1784-dominicus-christianus-uroda).

Duim Kovačević's daughters are there as the index lists them (Marta 1697, Rozana and Petra 1699, Maria 1703); no Duima son and no Simona. Map: 8 = Dec 1697 – Mar 1699 (book pages 4–5), 9 = Dec 1699 – Nov 1702 (pages 10–11), 10 = Sep 1702 – Aug 1704 (pages 12–13), 11 = Feb 1705 – Dec 1705 (pages 14–15).

«Cajetanum Bachi et Annam filiam defuncti Alexij Lukatelli … Praesentibus Wolffgango Suvich ac Joanne Radkovich» — no father, no town. The index shows no later Caetanus Bachi at Pag, and no burial of one.

Andrea, 28 November 1835: Simeone Uroda and Giovanna Barran, both «a Betina»; 1829 (Maria «Urodan», ref. 20) and 1839 (Antonio «Urada», ref. 33) are the same printed form. Residents of Betina, nineteenth century, no origin stated.

No marriage notice or wedding report. Trove holds 10 articles for Zubrinich, 2 for Zubrinic and 3 for Zubrenich in the whole decade, none dated 1906 or 1907: a 1900 school-attendance case (J. Zubrinich, his daughter attended), coursing results of September 1901 (J. Zubrinich's dog), the Port Pirie Show of 1902, a school picnic race of 1905 («I. Zubrenich»), and Len Zubrinich in Port Pirie football and cricket teams of 1909. A search of the Port Pirie Recorder for «wedding» and «marriage» with «Murphy» in 1906–07 returned three articles, none a Zubrinich wedding. Recorded as a negative result; it does not say the wedding was not reported, only that Trove's index holds no report of it under these spellings.

No Luckinić child is baptised in January–May 1726 or January–September 1727; the only Luckinići in those pages are sponsors. On 10 March 1726 «Mara», wife of Vicko Luckinich, is godmother (image 48 left page); on 21 December 1725 a Vicko Luckinich is godfather (image 47 right page); on 24 August 1727 the godmother is «Morica», wife of Vicko Luckinich (already recorded). And a gap in the book: the last entry on image 48's right-hand page is dated 4 May 1726 and the next entry, on the back of that leaf (image 49, left page), is dated 11 January 1727 — nothing May–December 1726 is written between them, and the foot of the page is blank with the January 1727 entry showing through from behind. A baptism of the second half of 1726 would not be in this volume's sequence. notes/karlobag-1727-no-luckinic-baptism.md Image 50, read later the same day, carries November 1727 to July 1729 on one right-hand page — about ten entries, so the book is thin in these years — and none is a Luckinić child; the lower third of that page is faded and its entries of 1728–29 could not be read. The page itself (snapshot, kept on the site).

No Margarita is baptised to a Joannes and a Catharina at Selce in 1784, or in the part of 1785 read. The 1784 page does carry a Joannes and a Catharina, surname read as Brozović (the first letter could be D), who baptise a son Petrus on 18 October 1784 (left-margin number 106, godparents Antonio and Helena Lončarić), so a couple of those names is at Selce that year. The tree's 1784 for Margarita is therefore not confirmed, and it may be an age counted back from her death (8 May 1842, age not legible at the first reading), not a baptism. The register itself is thin and early: it opens in 1778 with three or four entries a year, a house number in the left margin of each, and a historian's pencil notes in Croatian in the margins. 1783 was then read entry by entry (image 11, right page): six entries, none to a Brozović; the 30 August 1783 baptism of a Margarita is to a Michael and Helena Antić, not to the tree's couple. So 1783, 1784 and most of 1785 are read and carry no Margarita Brozović.

No baptism of a Catherina Luckinić (or of any Luckinić daughter) in August 1719 – December 1722. What is there: 9 December 1719, image 35 left — «krstih sina Vicha Luckinicha imenom Mikola», the Mikola the index lists, now read from the page; 11 August 1722, image 40 right — a godmother, «Jele[?] … xena Vicka Lukinicha». With the Mara of March 1726 and the Morica of August 1727 that makes three different given names for the wife of a Vicko Luckinich in five years. A Lukšić family (written «Luksicha») baptises sons in July 1720 and September 1721 and is NOT the Luckinić surname. Images 41–46 (December 1722 – July 1725), read the same way, have no Luckinić child either. Image 42 is a duplicate exposure of image 41 (same two pages, the same page numbers 74–75). Luckinić sponsors again: «Vicho Lukcinich» as godfather on 2 February 1724 (image 44). The index's «Mare Luckinić, baptised 13 April 1725» IS on the film, out of sequence: image 47's left page carries the entries of 4, 12 and 13 April 1725 near its foot, and the entry of 13 April reads «Vicka Luckinicha, nyegove xene mare imenom Anu» — by the book's own pattern a daughter ANA to Vicko Luckinić and his wife MARE. It is the only baptism to a Vicko Luckinić in the pages read, it has the index's date and father, and it makes the child Ana and Mare her mother (on /corrections). (Image 46's left page ends on 1 April 1725 and its right page begins on the 21st; the 2–20 April entries are on 47.) Images 31–34 (January 1718 – July 1719), read afterwards, have no Luckinić child either — but image 31 names «Vicko Luckinich a kuma nyegova xena Jelena» as godparents on 23 January 1718, clearly read, which turns the doubtful «Jele» of August 1722 into the same Jelena: Vicko Luckinich has a wife Jelena in 1718 and 1722 and a wife Mara/Morica in 1726–27, a first and a second wife, or one woman named loosely.

No Ana, Anna or any child of a father Marić or Marich, and no Šumbul or Štrumbulko, between May 1835 and September 1837. Together with the September 1834 – May 1835 pages read on 9 October (images 8–11, at a smaller size), that makes the first three years and one month of the film, to September 1837, examined, which is most of the window that her first child (1853) allows. Near-misses recorded so that nobody counts them again: 20 September 1835 an Anna to «Michaël Mezrick/Medrick» and Joanna née Antić, house 18 of the village written Podjeze/Poljice (not Marić); 16 September 1836 a Magdalena to «Thomas Marković» and Lucia née Orešković, Dubrava (Marković, not Marić). The Orešković wife is worth a note: a Lucia Orešković is not ahnentafel 21's mother Lucia Sekula, so these are different houses. The printed Latin table makes the parents' names clear: the child's name, village and house number, then the father, then the mother with «nata» and her maiden name.

Not in these pages. The long Latin prose entries (about three to a page, groom and bride each named with their fathers, and the village and house number in the left margin) were read for a groom Andreas Sedej and a bride Gertrudis Roje between February 1815 and January 1826, and neither appears. The Sedej name does occur — as «Seley» (a Stephanus Seley, colonus ex Koprivnik fathers a bride in May 1815 and a Martinus Seley ex Koprivnik in February 1824), which is the same surname in this hand — so the family is real in the parish and the spelling has to be read with that in mind. The marriages of 1826 itself are in sig. 01590, whose first pages were read on 28 September (no Sedej × Roje).

No Sedej death was found in the part that could be read. The deaths of May 1826 to June 1827 are Latin prose, a paragraph each, with village and house in the margin, and none is a Gertrudis Sedej or an Andreas Sedej. From August 1827 the register changes to a printed German-ruled table in Kurrent script, and at this sitting's magnification it could not be read reliably, so 1827 onwards, which is where a death of Gertrudis between 1827 and 1829 would fall, was left unread. The volume has 95 images for 1785–1841; image 60 is July–August 1817 and image 74 is January–June 1827.

No Luckinić baptism on or near 30 March 1727. The entries of that March are Croatian in Latin letters, a paragraph each, by Fra Frane Potoenyak and then Andrij Kollekar, each naming the child, father, and godparents. «Na 30 Marca 1727» is a daughter, Jela, of one Lovri Bulanich. The surnames read on the January–April page (Lukatalich, Kintelich, Bartula Jurse, Bulanich, Zubrich…) include no Luckinić. The only Luckinić in 1727 is as a godparent: on 24 August 1727 «a kuma [gospoja] xena Vicka Luckinicha imenom Morica» — Vicko Luckinić's wife, called Morica (Marica), is godmother at another family's baptism. So Vicko is alive at Karlobag in 1727 and married to a Morica; that is consistent with him being the father of ahnentafel 105 and says nothing more. notes/karlobag-1727-no-luckinic-baptism.md

No Luckinić, Lukinić or similar surname is in the L column of the Kazalo. Its first column of the right-hand page runs folios 1 to about 101 in date order (Locatelli, Lukšetich, Lukšić, Lazarich, Lenach, Lulich, Lucich), with no entry for 30 March near folio 44 — the folio that holds January–April 1727 on image 49 — and none for the 13 April 1725 baptism of Mare Luckinicha (about folio 37), which the FamilySearch record index does list. So the index either files the name under another letter or spelling, or leaves it out; the Kazalo cannot be used to find this family under L. The folio numbers agree with the register: folio 44 (15 February) and 47 (29 June) fall in 1727, as the leaf numbers on images 49 and 50 do. notes/karlobag-1727-no-luckinic-baptism.md

No Marić, and no «Štrumbulko», among the baptisms of September 1834 to May 1835 at the size read. The book is a printed Latin table, six or seven entries to a page, with the parents' surnames in the fourth column (Mišković, Kožić, Žubrinić, Radočić, Tomljanović and the like). The film begins in September 1834, so a baptism before that cannot be in it. Ahnentafel 10 (Nicolaus Žubrinić) was born 24 January 1834 and their first child is dated 1853, which puts her birth about 1830–1836: at best half of the likely range is on this film. The Otočac index lists only three Marić at Otočac in all (1844, 1844 and 1852), none of them hers. notes/ana-maric-plan.md

1773 is found, and no Kosina or Kosiner baptism is in it on the date the index gives. Page 306 right begins «1773 Januarij»; 307 holds January and February («Februarij» heading on the left page's lower half); 308 holds late February and «Martius» — and its first March entry is dated 10 March, not 2 March, with Gertrud entries on 10 and 15 March to other couples (Thomas Pation × Barbara, Caspar × Helena). The parents' surnames read on these pages (Kerfal, Novak, Zakotnik, Gollmayr as baptiser, Pogacar, Sattler…) include no Kosina/Kosiner/Kozina; the house column reads «Superior Feichting» for several entries but none is Kosina. notes/the-kozina-of-zgornje-bitnje.md

Nothing found, and it was a sample, not a walk. The volume is a printed form (Geburts- und Tauf-Buch), about 19 entries to a spread, village and house number in the left column and father and mother in the right, so a Kozina would be quick to spot. Pages 26 (February–April 1874) and 28 (June–July 1874) have no Kozina and no Kodran; a Paul Kodrič, gost appears in February 1874 (a different surname). Years by image: 25–26 = early 1874, 28 = mid-1874, 40 = November–December 1875.

No marriage of a Papa or Papić to a Pilipić was found in either parish for 1856 or 1857, in the pages listed. At Karlobag the Croatian-language entries of 1856 and 1857 were read for their groom and bride names at about twice the resolution of the spread and none was a Juraj, a Papa or a Pilipić. At Selce the 1856 list closes «Godina 856 Vjenčanje parova 8» and the 1857 page holds about eight more; every groom and bride is a Selce Antić, Lončarić, Jelčić, Bonić or Tobor, and none is the Juraj Papa of house 51, b. 1838. The Senj marriages 1820–1858 (waypoint 9RK1-W3P, 592 images) are the remaining place, and that volume is not one book: it holds several sequences in Latin and Croatian whose years are not in image order (1836, 1848 and 1856 entries were found out of sequence on images 304–322), so a reader cannot jump to 1856-57 and has to walk it. notes/papa-pilipic-marriage-not-at-karlobag-or-selce.md Senj, in part: the Cathedral-parish entries of 1856 and 1857 on image 302 (27 January and 30 March 1856; 23 February, 14 June, 4 July and 25 October 1857) are all of other couples, mostly Millinovich, Marcovich and similar, and none is a Papa and a Pilipić. The Senj volume is not chronological even inside a page (image 274 left opens with an entry of 20 January 1857 and then runs 1832, 1852, 1853), so what was read of it is a sample and not a walk.

Not there. Every marriage entered at Nova Oselica from 17 January 1851 to 31 January 1853 was read in the groom and bride columns (17 January 1851, 10 November 1851, 4, 11, 11 and 23 February 1852, 31 January 1853, and the 1853 entries on image 21): no groom is a Kozina and no bride is a Sedej, and none is from Zgornje Bitnje. So the marriage of Johann Kozina and Ursula Sedej is in neither the Kranj-Šmartin book (walked earlier) nor the Nova Oselica book for the years that matter, which leaves a third parish or an unrecorded marriage. The register is a printed German-headed Trauungs-Buch with groom, bride, ages and house numbers in one row, and it is much faster to read than the baptisms. notes/ursula-sedej-marriage-not-at-nova-oselica.md