Martinus Martin Kalanj
1861–1900 · Klenovica 22, Klenovica, Croatia
A blank house-number column does not mean the household had no number
| The tree says | This archive concluded on 13 September 2026 that “the house number is a village device and it does not reach the town” |
|---|---|
| The record says | Novi Vinodolski is a town, and its registers do give house numbers — just not to this family, and not on every page |
The Senj finding stands as far as Senj goes. But the generalisation drawn from it — that the house number is <em>a village device that does not reach the town</em> — is refuted by four pages of Novi Vinodolski. On str.278 (1894) the column reads 110, 595, —, 313, 647, —, 476, —, —, —, 33, 631; on str.333 (1900) it reads —, 476, 684, 470, —, 223, 629, 103. <strong>Towns do record house numbers.</strong> On str.293 (1896) and str.314 (1898), by contrast, not one household is numbered at all. So the practice is <strong>per register and per priest</strong>. Two further things follow. A blank cell is not evidence that a household lacked a number — only that this entry does not record one. And on both pages where numbering happens, <em>Martin Kalanj's household is among the blanks while his neighbours are numbered</em> — which fits a family that came from Klenovica and may never have held a numbered house in Novi. His sister's 1864 baptism, back in the village, is entered <span class='mono'>Klenovica N° 22</span> without hesitation. Read it →
He died at Trebinje, four hundred kilometres from home
| The tree says | Martin Kalanj, born 8 November 1861 at Klenovica 22; died 5 August 1900 at Trebinje |
|---|---|
| The record says | His youngest child was baptised at Novi Vinodolski on 6 January 1900, seven months earlier |
Trebinje is in Herzegovina, occupied by Austria-Hungary since 1878 and garrisoned heavily. A Vinodol man of thirty-eight, with five children under seven at Novi Vinodolski, does not die there by accident. Military service, or work following the garrison, are the obvious readings and the archive has evidence for neither. It is recorded here because it is the kind of fact that looks like a transcription slip and is not: the place is specific, it is nowhere near any other place this family appears, and the date sits seven months after a baptism that puts him at home. <strong>Nothing here explains it.</strong> Read it →
The Krivi Put status animarum is family material after all
| The tree says | Recorded this morning as “not this family's household — no Pavelić is published here” |
|---|---|
| The record says | There are 114 Pavelići in the tree, and Lovro Kalanj married Ana Pavelić |
The page is tagged to <em>Krešimir Pavelić</em>, and because no Pavelić is <em>published</em> here — this archive publishes nine surname groups and Pavelić is not one — it was set aside as somebody else's household. That was too quick. The tree holds <strong>114 Pavelići</strong>, including a Krešimir Pavelić born 3 March 1898, which matches the household head on the page; and <a href='/TheBlazevic/people/lovro-kalanj/'>Lovro Kalanj</a> married <em>Ana Pavelić</em>. Unpublished is not the same as unrelated, and conflating the two is a failure mode this archive is structurally prone to. The household stays unattached because no published person is named on it; it is no longer described as unconnected. Read it →
| Born | 8 NOV 1861, Klenovica 22, Klenovica, Croatia |
|---|---|
| Died | 5 AUG 1900, Trebinje |
| Line | Kalanj · everyone of the name → |
| Record | @I505286@ |
Family
The mark describes the person, not the link. Of the 15 relatives drawn here, 4 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. 2relatives are named in the tree but fall outside the eight surnames and have no page.
Where this comes from
this archive has shown something recorded about them to be wrong.
4 images are attached to this person , of which 4 are documents rather than photographs.
3 corrections and notes have been recorded against this page — set out above, and listed on What changed.
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 5 AUG 1900 Trebinje
- birth 8 NOV 1861 Klenovica 22, Klenovica, Croatia "Ledenice, Modrus-Fiume, Hungary records," images, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QSQ-G99X-KW8J?view=explore : Feb 16, 2026), image 17 of 342; Hrvatski državni arhiv u Zagrebu. Image Group Number: 005494765
Documents and photographs
4 documents and 0 photographs in the MyHeritage media library carry this person's tag. None of them travelled in the GEDCOM. All of them →
A tag says somebody linked this image to this person — not that the person is in it. A register page is tagged to everyone it names. Method →
Sources attached in the tree
- Geni World Family Tree
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 →