Czech Out Your Ancestors
Menu
  • About
  • Contact
  • Resources
  • DNA
  • Czech Book Club
Menu

Mianna: or, don’t just scan the page for a given name!

Posted on 12 December 2015 by Kate Challis

My ancestor Anna Šperka was the second wife of Mathias Brosch.

His first wife was also named Anna.

They were married in the Místek parish on 16 January 1725. Her father was the late Joannes Gach from upper Hodonovice.

She died 2 June 1737 at age 36. This gives her an approximate birthdate of 1701.

I guessed that she was born in Hodonovice, the village of her father.

When I checked the parish records, I scanned the pages for an entry for an “Anna” born sometime between 1700-1701 to a Joannes Gach. I found nobody.

So then I broadened the search to include 1699-1702 and still no “Anna” born to any Joannes Gach.

Then I searched for any Gach’s. I found several Gach’s, and also several born to Joannes Gach of Hodonovice.

The person I was looking for wasn’t Georgius who was born in 1699 to Joannes Gach and Anna.

It also wasn’t Magdalena born in 1702 to Joannes Gach and Anna.

When I looked through the 1700-1701 years, I noticed an entry for, “Mianna” born to Joannes Gach and Anna in Hodonowitz.

This is not a common surname. As you can see above the Mianna, there is a Marianna. I wondered if this was perhaps a diminutive form of Marianna? If so, why does an internet search lead to nearly no results for any given name of “Mianna” except modern day creations of Myanna?

I feel 95% confident that this is actually the Anna I am looking for, and that the parish priest writing this down accidentally wrote Mianna instead. Or maybe when they asked for her name, she said, “mý Anna,” aka, “My Anna.”

1 thought on “Mianna: or, don’t just scan the page for a given name!”

  1. Tom says:
    28 December 2015 at 11:27 am

    I always enjoy your posts. A couple of notes:

    I suppose in the second last paragraph you mean "not a common given name"?

    I tend to your first theory, that the priest meant 'Marianna'. I would think he would have insisted on a saint's name.

    Third, it appears to say filio (son) not filia above the name. Of course, I can only see a small fragment.

    I know from my own research how exhausting and time consuming this type of work is. At least this priest printed very legibly. I appreciate all the insights you've provided me.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Search

Categories

Archives

  • March 2025
  • July 2021
  • January 2021
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • October 2019
  • August 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • September 2015
  • July 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
©2025 Czech Out Your Ancestors | WordPress Theme by SuperbThemes