Lucija Blažević
dates unknown
The only parent on record here is not a person
| Entered as the parent | Unknown Sorting Working Blažević |
|---|
That is a sorting label — a note somebody typed into the parent's slot while working through records. No priest wrote it and nobody was called it. It is the only parent this record has, so nothing documented attaches this person to anyone. This is not a claim that the person is invented; the register entries behind them are real. It is a statement about the join. Why this matters →
| Line | Blažević · everyone of the name → |
|---|---|
| Record | @I508542@ |
Family
The mark describes the person, not the link. Of the 31 relatives drawn here, 0 have a document of their own in this archive — but that is not the same as a document tying them to this person. This archive holds no separate proof for most parent–child links; where it does, the note above this chart says so in words.
More than one person in this chart carries the same name — Nikola Blažević, Antonija Blažević, Ivan Blažević, Antonius Blažević, Antona Blažević, Jakov Blažević. That is what the source says. This archive does not merge records on a name, so they are drawn separately even where one duplicated entry is the likelier explanation.
Where this comes from
everything here comes from the family tree, and is unverified.
Where this sits in the family
Not on the direct line. They are published because they belong to one of the eight surnames this archive follows.
The register spells this surname more than one way, and the search folds the forms together — so Xubrinich and Žubrinić, Joannis and Ivan, find each other.
Where this surname sits on the map →
What the tree says that cannot be true →
Events, as the record has them
- death
Sources attached in the tree
None. This person carries no source string at all in the tree. They may still be right — but nothing here can be checked without going to the register. Method →
An online family tree is a witness, not a source. Where a citation points at a parish register or a FamilySearch image, that is the thing worth going to. Sources →