You may be interested in these documents von ehefrau of Emanuel, son of Schoppen Kersten.



Descendants of Johan Kortlüken



1  Johan Kortlüken        

.    +Catharina Möller   m: 03 Sep 1716 Ladbergen (entry #15)  

...........    2  Catharina Liesabeth Kortlüken, eigen  b: Abt. Jan 1717 Lad. (baptized January 17, 1717 ,#1)    d: 14 May 1772 Ladbergen #26

...............      +Herman Emanuel Schoppenhorst b: 17 Apr 1709 Ladbergen (son of Schoppen Kersten, per baptism entry) m: 16 Sep 1736 Ladbergen (both eigen, entry #8) d: 20 Jan 1789 Lad. (wittwer & frey, age 79,  8 months) (#3)




John,  in a  preliminary reading, translated the 17 January 1717 baptism (entry #1) of daughter Catharina Liesabeth/Elisabeth:


"the  17 January Johan Kortlucke's daughter was baptized and named Catharina Elisabeth.  The baptismal witnesses were Catharina Möllershe (that means Catharina, wife of Colonus Möller), Liesabeth Todtlugische, Toleinnen Johan Holscher"



Guten tag,



Martin and Jane,


I have looked at this entry again.  The part that bothered me before was Liesabeth Todtlugische, Toleinnen. I believe that should read Liesabeth todt Hogische tho Lienen, Johan Hölscher.  That litterally says," Liesabeth dead Hogische at Lienen, John Hölscher".  I am not sure what to make of the assertion that one of the baptismal witnesses was dead. but that is a better reading than the nonsensical Todtlugische, Toleinnen Johan Hölscher.


In re-reading I notice that what I read as "lu" is in fact "Ho" I am sure of that. The comma (,) was my insertion, not in the original. I missed the h in tho at the end of the third line.  Very careless omission!  the first word in the fourth line is definitely lienen, not leinnen as in my preliminary reading.  It serves me right for replying so quickly with a translation without actually studying the image. 


Hope this clears up the confusion of my original translation, even while adding the mystery that at present I have no answer for.