Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: 40 year old woman giving birth in the 1700s?  (Read 11077 times)

Offline Peter Spering

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 48
    • View Profile
Re: 40 year old woman giving birth in the 1700s?
« Reply #9 on: Wednesday 08 April 15 15:14 BST (UK) »
The main confusion stems from the fact that there is always multiple people of the same name from the same area so I can never be sure.

Offline Jebber

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,385
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 40 year old woman giving birth in the 1700s?
« Reply #10 on: Wednesday 08 April 15 16:33 BST (UK) »
As has already been said, not at all surprising. It would take too long for me to list all the women in my tree who had children into their forties :)

Just one example Ann Brown MARLOW bap.16 August 1789, married 1 July 1812, died 20 November 1855 had eleven children, the last Thomas bap. 8 Sep. 1837, making Ann 48 years old.

Jebber
CHOULES All ,  COKER Harwich Essex & Rochester Kent 
COLE Gt. Oakley, & Lt. Oakley, Essex.
DUNCAN Kent
EVERITT Colchester,  Dovercourt & Harwich Essex
GULLIVER/GULLOFER Fifehead Magdalen Dorset
HORSCROFT Kent.
KING Sturminster Newton, Dorset. MONK Odiham Ham.
SCOTT Wrabness, Essex
WILKINS Stour Provost, Dorset.
WICKHAM All in North Essex.
WICKHAM Medway Towns, Kent from 1880
WICKHAM, Ipswich, Suffolk.

Offline LizzieW

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,948
  • I'm nearer to finding out who you are thanks DNA
    • View Profile
Re: 40 year old woman giving birth in the 1700s?
« Reply #11 on: Wednesday 08 April 15 17:58 BST (UK) »
My g.gran was 50 when she gave birth to her youngest son in 1893.

Offline iluleah

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Zeya who has a plastic bag fetish
    • View Profile
Re: 40 year old woman giving birth in the 1700s?
« Reply #12 on: Wednesday 08 April 15 18:08 BST (UK) »
Quote from: Peter Spering on Wednesday 08 April 15 15:14 BST (UK)
The main confusion stems from the fact that there is always multiple people of the same name from the same area so I can never be sure.

Then if that is the case your research stop on that line, unless you are prepared to guess and are well aware that anyone before her may or may not be related to you. It is always difficult especially those dates as it is hard to find connecting records to prove one or another is 'your' ancestor
Leicestershire:Chamberlain, Dakin, Wilkinson, Moss, Cook, Welland, Dobson, Roper,Palfreman, Squires, Hames, Goddard, Topliss, Twells,Bacon.
Northamps:Sykes, Harris, Rice,Knowles.
Rutland:Clements, Dalby, Osbourne, Durance, Smith,Christian, Royce, Richardson,Oakham, Dewey,Newbold,Cox,Chamberlaine,Brow, Cooper, Bloodworth,Clarke
Durham/Yorks:Woodend, Watson,Parker, Dowser
Suffolk/Norfolk:Groom, Coleman, Kemp, Barnard, Alden,Blomfield,Smith,Howes,Knight,Kett,Fryston
Lincolnshire:Clements, Woodend

Offline jaybelnz

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,762
  • My Runaway Bride! Thanks to Paula Too!
    • View Profile
Re: 40 year old woman giving birth in the 1700s?
« Reply #13 on: Monday 13 April 15 11:07 BST (UK) »
"We analyse the evidence to draw a conclusion. The better the sources and information, the stronger the evidence, which leads to a reliable conclusion!" Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk.

MATHEWS, Ireland, England, USA & Canada, NZ
FLEMING,   Ireland
DUNNELL,  England
PAULSON,  England
DOUGLAS, Scotland, Ireland, NZ
WALKER,   Scotland
WATSON,  England, Ayrshire, Scotland, NZ
McAUGHTRIE, Ayrshire, Scotland, NZ
MASON,     Scotland, England, NZ
& Connections

Offline Ruskie

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 26,198
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 40 year old woman giving birth in the 1700s?
« Reply #14 on: Monday 13 April 15 11:14 BST (UK) »

Offline jaybelnz

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,762
  • My Runaway Bride! Thanks to Paula Too!
    • View Profile
Re: 40 year old woman giving birth in the 1700s?
« Reply #15 on: Monday 13 April 15 11:52 BST (UK) »
Agreed, but my point is the woman's body is still capable of carrying a child, or in this case, children.
It's a wonder her body isn't worn out!  13 children already?

Actually, it's just showing on the TV right now!

Cheers
Jeanne  😃
"We analyse the evidence to draw a conclusion. The better the sources and information, the stronger the evidence, which leads to a reliable conclusion!" Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk.

MATHEWS, Ireland, England, USA & Canada, NZ
FLEMING,   Ireland
DUNNELL,  England
PAULSON,  England
DOUGLAS, Scotland, Ireland, NZ
WALKER,   Scotland
WATSON,  England, Ayrshire, Scotland, NZ
McAUGHTRIE, Ayrshire, Scotland, NZ
MASON,     Scotland, England, NZ
& Connections

Offline Nanna52

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
  • Edwin WB Vincent, my actor, (1881-1940)
    • View Profile
Re: 40 year old woman giving birth in the 1700s?
« Reply #16 on: Monday 13 April 15 12:09 BST (UK) »
I found a report that my great grandmother gave birth in her early forties in 1883, but on further investigation found that she was the illegitimate child of one of her older daughters.  It could have been feasible as my grandfather was only a couple of years older than her.
James -Victoria, Australia originally from Keynsham, Somerset.
Janes - Keynsham and Bristol area.
Heale/Hale - Keynsham, Somerset
Vincent - Illogan/Redruth, Cornwall.  Moved to Sculcoates, Yorkshire; Grass Valley, California; Timaru, New Zealand and Victoria, Australia.
Williams somewhere in Wales - he kept moving
Ellis - Anglesey

Gedmatch A327531

Offline LizzieW

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,948
  • I'm nearer to finding out who you are thanks DNA
    • View Profile
Re: 40 year old woman giving birth in the 1700s?
« Reply #17 on: Monday 13 April 15 13:06 BST (UK) »
People have suggested that my 50 year old g.gran's baby was one of her elder daughters, but not so as they were both pregnant themselves at the time, and her other daughter (my gran) was only 9, so definitely not hers.

Lizzie

ps  My g.grandfather was much younger than my g.gran, he was only about 33-34 at the time.
Pages: 1 [2] 3