Isak Jacob / Jakob Glaser

Marriage record: POSTOLOPRTY (o. Louny) 1654 O 1866-1893 (15/21)

According to the known records of their lives, Isak Jakob Glaser and Isak Jacob / Jakob Glaser—let us call them "Isak-1" and "Isak-2"—were both born in Deutschrust (Podbořanský Rohozec) in the early 19th century to a father named "Abraham Glaser" and a mother whose name began with "C" or "Z" (pronounced the same in German): "Zirl" in the case of Isak-1, "Zäcilie" or "Cäcilie" in the case of Isak-2. Both lived as adults in Weitentrebetitsch (Široké Třebčice): Isak-1 with his wife Karolina, born Schneider, whom he married in 1849, and Isak-2 with his wife Amalia, born Kohn, whom he married in 1885. The marriage record of Isak-2 states that he was a widower. As it happens, Karolina, the wife of Isak -1, died just the year before, in 1884. Further, when Isak-1 died in 1894, his death record stated that he was "verheiratet"—married, not widowed: thus, it is clear that Isak-1 remarried after the death of his first wife.

All of these puzzle-pieces fit together in a single picture on the assumption that Isak-1 and Isak-2 were the same person—except for one piece, namely that, while the records of marriage and death of Isak-1 indicate that he was born between 1817 and 1820, the marriage record of Isak-2 states very clearly that he was born on 10 July 1828, or about ten years later. If this date is correct, then the two Isak Jakobs cannot be the same person. For my part, I find it easier to believe that the date of birth, despite its appearance of precision, is erroneous than that all the other alignments between the two Isak Jakobs are mere coincidence. I add in support of this opinion that there was another Isak Glaser whose father was named Abraham and who was born in Deutschrust in the early 19th century: as this one died in 1884, ten years before Isak-1, there is no room for doubt that he, at least, was a distinct person. So while it is extraordinary that there should be two Isaks, sons of two Abraham Glasers, born in the same town within a period of ten years, that there could be three if them defies belief. But considerations of plausibility may not be enough to outweigh the date of birth in that marriage record. —M.R.