Monday, December 9, 2019

Hartman Jenta 1778 - 1819

Hartmann 1778 son of Kaspar School teacher Jenta
Hartmann Jenta 28 May 1778 married 18 March 1799  death 14 May 1819
Verena Anlier from Birr, Canton Aargau divorced Hartmann in 1801 and in
1811 she married Sep Jakob Gratz

Zürich Court hearing
Actum (made out, prepared, written) Saturday, July 8; 1801 by order of the District Court of Zurich The municipality of Zurich. As the citizen Hartmann Jenta von Ettnhausen leaves (Wezikon, District Uster), his wife Verena Anlier, loveless Weis (in a loveless way) , and now thought of his marriage. After the death of his wife, Jenta is requested to be shorn, the aforementioned citizen is perermptorisch  (perermptorisch = in final form, finally, definitively, peremptory) requested to appear before the District Court in Uster on the right hand side next August 4, to answer for the request for separation brought forward by his fine wife in the form of rights, in the absence of which he will recognize this matter in Contumatiam (in Contumatiam = in abesence of the the defendant (Hartmann Jenta) = even he does not show up before court than he still will be prosecuted) and no further hearing will be given to Jenta afterwards. (Zürcherisches Wochenblatt, Number 60, 27 July 1801)

Da der B. Hartmann Jenta von Ettenhausen / municipality of Wetzikön / district of Uster / lovelessly abandoned his wife Verena Anlier / and we thought his wife would be demanded by him; so said B. Jenta is peremptorily requested to leave his wife in the next 24th year of his life. B. Jenta is asked perermptorisch (perermptorisch = in final form, finally, definitively, peremptor) to appear before the district court in Uster on August 24th to answer for the separation request in the form of rights, which has not been presented by any wife: in the absence of such a request, the matter will be recognized in Contumatiam (in Contumatiam = in abesence of the the defendant (Hartmann Jenta) = even he does not show up before court than he still will be prosecuted) and lhme/ Jenta/ will not be heard any further, or in the event that she is not heard any further. Act/ July 8, 1801 District Chancellery Uster" (Zürcherische Freitagszeitung, Number 31, 31 July 1801)

Marriage Courts
Since the Reformation reduced the sacraments from seven to two (baptism) and Last Supper), marriage lost its previously sacramental character in Protestant territories and thus also ceased to be indissoluble. The new Protestant marriage law granted the judges of marriage and morals courts the power to dissolve marriages under certain conditions, for example, in cases of impotence or if a marriage was so damaged that there was no longer any hope of a sufficient reconciliation between the spouses. However, there were characteristic differences among the Reformers in this regard:

Luther limited the grounds fo divorce with a right or remarriage for the "innocent party" to impotence, adultery,,... and refusal to perform the "conjugal work." Irreconcilable differences" between spouses, however, permitted only a separation of table and bed. Zwingli expanded the grounds for divorce by adding "malicious abandonment" and infectious diseases, reasons that had led to separation already under canon law.
As another reason for divorce, the authorities in Basel added the case where one spouse was found guilty of a capital crime. However, the new, Reformed morals courts by no means dealt primarily with divorces. In Basel, "only l224 of 1355 cases heard between 1550 and 1592 were suits for divorce. In the sizable Huguenot community in southern French city of Nimes, the activities of the communal morals court are documented by voluminous registers...In addition to cases of prostitution and adultery, the morals court also dealth with blasphemy, magical practices, lax attendance at sermons or catechism lessons, and with verbal confrontation, brawls, gambling, drinking, dancing, indecent dress and participation in a charivari put on by a neighborhood or young boys. 
(Religion and Culture in Early Modern Europe, 1500-1800 by Kasper von Greyerz)

Hieronymus Jenta 4 Sept 1799 Hieronymus is only considered if her parents aren't married the day she is born. So she was legitimate. She was born 5 months 17 days after Hartman married.

Hartmann Wetzikon E lll 139.21 p 1736

FamilySearch microfilm 008191940 page 355

Hartmann Jenta from Jenta Family of Wetzikon by Julius Billegter page 3