My ancestor, Elisabeth Glauser, from Rüti bei Lyssach was born in 1714 and married Bendicht Rösch, a schoolteacher, in 1732 at the the age of 18. The family lived in Lyssach as this is where Bendicht taught school. The parents of Elisabeth Glauser were Hans Glauser (1685) and Elisabeth Kauert (1685). It must be remembered that Rüti had a very small population with less than a dozen families living there. Hans Glauser (1685) was the only son of Hans Glauser (1641). Hans Glauser (1641) was the son of Jakob Glauser and Anna Iseli. The family lived in Mötschwil, and in the mid 1640’s they moved to Rüti. All Glausers in the parish connect to this family. Niklaus (1652) their son, had by far the most descendants, as he had 2 sons with large families, Hans Ulrich and Samuel. Hans Ulrich was the Kirchmeir in the parish. Samuel was the chorrichter. Hans Ulrich and Samuel lived to an old age. The parish clerk when recording the baptisms noted whether the father was the sohn of the Kirchmeir or Chorrichter. With all the Glauser’s in the parish by 1730 this becomes an invaluable guide as to who the children belonged to. The records often note the estate where the family lived, Ramsie or Ramsiehof. My ancestor, Elisabeth Glauser (1714) is noted as being from Ramsie in her marriage record in 1732. In fact, many of the records just mention Ramsie instead of Rüti by name. Ramsie is in the upper part of the parish near Lyssach or as I suspect it may have been a detached part. Elisabeth (1714) had a brother, Michel (1719) who continued the Glauser name through my line. He was the only Michel in the parish in this time period. He became a chorrichter and lived to an old age.
Glauser was the predominate name in the parish. There was only a few baptisms and marriages a year.The marriages ended in 1750, 1771 and thereafter all the marriages are found in Kirchberg parish registers. There are no burials, so it is uncertain of who survived. It has been calculated that about 40% never survived childhood.
This Glauser family is in the FamilyTree. The research was conducted in 1990. This is the worst tree that I have come across as many of the family connections were incorrectly connected. The person who performed the research followed no genealogical standards. The relationships were made up. A few of the baptisms were created out of witnesses to an unrelated baptism. I found numerous marriage dates that were made up. I have straightened up most of the tree, so it corresponds to what the records say. Starting in the 1820’s the getauft of the couple was included in the marriage records, so it is simple to connect that generation; however they still did not connect them correctly. So it becomes obvious that whoever did this research did not make an honest effort.