Jacobus de Franceschi, 1762 – 1850 — The Defranceschi Archive

The family

No family chart is drawn for this person, and that is a statement about the data rather than about them. This archive records kin against a name — the tree on a name page gathers everyone who shares it, so it may hold one person's dates beside another's wife. Rather than hand a reader a family that might not be this person's, the chart is drawn only where the relationship is recorded person by person, which today means the direct line.

What the archive knows

The tree and this archive disagree about the birth year by 1 year, and the death year agrees. Tree 1762, here 1761. That is what an age produces. A record giving «aged N» rather than a date yields a birth year that depends on whether the birthday had passed, so the two are one year of arithmetic apart, not one of evidence. This archive keeps its own figure, which came off the register; the tree's is recorded so the difference is visible rather than silently resolved. (20 Sept 2026.) --- ⭐ 6 October 2026 — his death entry, read: and it disagrees with this archive twice. > Gologorica deaths, image M01069273, page 88: «Decembris 8° · 7 · Jacobus Defranceschi, CIVIS, munitus ss. moribundorum et sepultus die 10 hujus · 88 · febris et senectus» House 7 — the house the 1826 census gives him — «civis» where the other men on the page are «agla», last rites received, buried two days later. (doc.) ⚠ TWO TENSIONS, both recorded rather than resolved. 1. The day. This archive carries 3 December 1850; the register says 8 December, and has him buried on the 10th, which fits an 8 December death better than a 3 December one. The 3 December is not sourced anywhere in this archive's own line data. 2. The age. Eighty-eight on 8 December 1850 puts his birth between December 1761 and December 1762. This archive carries a precise 21 July 1761, which would have made him eighty-nine. *The row already noted that 1761 against the tree's 1762 is «one year of arithmetic, not one of evidence» — and the register's own age falls on the tree's side. ⚠ Neither year is changed here. A precise birth date beats an age at death if it came off a baptism — and nobody has yet written down where the 21 July 1761 came from. That is the next thing to find. --- ⭐ 6 October 2026 — SETTLED, and this archive was the one that was wrong. > Gologorica Status Animarum 1826, M01069323: «Jacobus Defranceschi · civilitas · 21 | Julii | 1762» A date, not an age — so the arithmetic this row rightly identified was this archive's own. The figure is moved from 1761 to 1762; the tree agrees; the «88» on his death entry of 8 December 1850 agrees. The person id stays frozen at jacobus-de-franceschi-1761 because a moved id is a dead URL. Published on /corrections/. --- ⭐ 9 October 2026 — an earlier appearance by forty-two years, if it is him. > 9 February 1784, Gologorica marriages: «...in Ecclesia Sanctæ Anastasiæ coram testibus Supano Martino Zabran, et Domino Jacobo de Franceschi, ambo ex hac Parochia» (doc — DAPA ZM34K-214, M01069003, the marriage register opened for the first time today.) Everything this row held of him began in 1826 — the census that gave him his birth date, and the death entry of 1850. A witnessing in 1784 is forty-two years earlier than anything else here. ⚠ The identification is inf, and the thing that strains it is the title. Born 21 July 1762, he would be twenty-one that February, and the entry styles him «Domino». The civilitas branch does carry the style — his own death entry enters him «CIVIS» where the men around him are «agla» — but an older Jacobus, otherwise unrecorded, would wear it more comfortably, and this archive holds only the one. No date is moved and no row is merged.