RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: Gallicrow on Friday 24 July 20 15:19 BST (UK)
-
I was wondering if anyone can beat the record of my x3 great uncle and his wife who had nine daughters in a row (in a mere sixteen years)?
Finally after all these girls they had a boy, but alas he died as an infant.
https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/GWHF-T1H
The other "record breaker" I wanted to mention was a woman who had six husbands, outliving five of them. Unfortunately I can't for the life of me remember who she was. It was a quite obscure relative that I was researching one evening. I was looking for a record of her death but instead kept finding yet another marriage and then upon checking finding that her latest husband had died soon after their marriage! I hope they were all natural causes...
-
My ex-husband's ancestor had 10 boys in a row.
-
I worked with a guy who had 12 children - only the second was a girl, so ten boys in a row. When the thirteenth kid was born, it was a girl! They went on to have a fourteenth but I don't know what sex.
-
Not a record at all. But after three girls a person in my tree was more or less told that the likelihood of a boy was very remote.
This was in the 1960s, so I guess by then there was some understanding of how these things work!
FS
-
Nothing to do with your original post but I do wonder why people named their children the same as their siblings children and then their children the same.
eg John Hayward, son John Hayward (fair enough), but then other sons name their children John, then their children John....
So John Hayward has 3 grandchildren called John Hayward etc all living in the same place and also other grandchildren John (children of his daughters) - you can just imagine "This is my grandson John and this is John and this is John .......)
Other names also apply.
These days you wouldn't name your child the same as your siblings children especially if you have the same surname.
-
Hi durhamgirl73.
When I first started doing this family history lark, about a year ago, I discovered that my 3xgreat grandmother was called Annie Jane Winckworth and, thinking it was a very unusual name, I assumed that any record I found for someone of that name must be the same person.
Then just yesterday I realised that "my" Annie Jane Winckworth had a cousin, also called Annie Jane Winckworth born two years later and that I had mixed up the records of both. It took me an hour or so to untangle the mess I had made.
https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/G386-3TH
https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/GWHN-MHL
-
I can appreciate people wanted to name their children after themselves, their parents, their grandparents but it should have been first come first served eg once John had been used noone else was allowed to use the name ::) well at least until the next generation
-
I can appreciate people wanted to name their children after themselves, their parents, their grandparents but it should have been first come first served eg once John had been used noone else was allowed to use the name ::) well at least until the next generation
But even if a family did that, it didn't stop their brothers with the same surname, repeating the same names even if the children were born and baptised at more or less the same date in the same place :o :o :o
I've always said they did it to annoy and frustrate future generations of researchers.....
Or cousins with the same surname from the previous generation :o :o :o
-
So John Hayward has 3 grandchildren called John Hayward etc all living in the same place and also other grandchildren John (children of his daughters) - you can just imagine "This is my grandson John and this is John and this is John .......)
That's nothing in comparison to my John set. A daughter of my 5xGGF John married a distant cousin with the same surname, called John. Guess what they called 1 of their 8 sons? It begins with J. Grandson John also had a maternal uncle John.
Meanwhile, in a neighbouring parish, another 5xGGF, Tom Moon had a family of 10, one son was Tom of course. A daughter of Tom Senior married a man from the same parish called Tom Moon. The 2 younger men were probably "Our Tom" and "Our Maggie's Tom".
The longest run of the same sex was 6 girls in a family of 13 children, 10 girls, 3 boys. 7th child & 1st boy died aged 2. The next 2 babies were girls who survived. Then eldest daughter had an illegitimate son who seems to have been brought up by his grandparents and who may have believed he was theirs.
-
My cousins paternal grandfather was born in 1888, the youngest in a family of 10 and yes, the first 9 were all girls. He was given the christian names Royal Augustus George - a long name for a long awaited son! The 10 children born over a period of 19 years.
Annette
-
My answer in reply #8 was incorrect. I mis-remembered. The most was 7 sons followed by a daughter.
-
My grandad was one of nine brothers
Regards
Panda
-
I've found a "run" of several girls, a few times, then a boy. I'd always assumed that they just "kept on going" until they got a son, to carry on the family business, for in all but one case, there were no further children born in that marriage.
-
Nothing to do with your original post but I do wonder why people named their children the same as their siblings children and then their children the same.
eg John Hayward, son John Hayward (fair enough), but then other sons name their children John, then their children John....
So John Hayward has 3 grandchildren called John Hayward etc all living in the same place and also other grandchildren John (children of his daughters) - you can just imagine "This is my grandson John and this is John and this is John .......)
Other names also apply.
These days you wouldn't name your child the same as your siblings children especially if you have the same surname.
My Great Gran was pretty obsessive about following naming patterns. My Gran chose names for my Mum and my Uncle but was ordered to change them to specific names to follow the naming pattern. My generation continued the family tradition for choosing middle names but first names are all different. My Great Gran must have been birling.
-
These days you wouldn't name your child the same as your siblings children especially if you have the same surname.
As genealogy fans it is common to note many uses of the same Christian name within a family as there were societies where strict naming conventions were followed i.e. three sons all with firstborn sons named after the grandfather. Probably more common than you would think even now. Definitely a tradition in more northern parts of Britain.
I still have a maths book from my youth with pictures of families lined up. Probability chapter. I seem to remember one family with 19 sons ranging from a babe in his mother's arms up to the eldest son towering over his father. Cannot remember the odds quoted.
deebel
-
These days you wouldn't name your child the same as your siblings children especially if you have the same surname.
As genealogy fans it is common to note many uses of the same Christian name within a family as there were societies where strict naming conventions were followed i.e. three sons all with firstborn sons named after the grandfather. Probably more common than you would think even now. Definitely a tradition in more northern parts of Britain.
I still have a maths book from my youth with pictures of families lined up. Probability chapter. I seem to remember one family with 19 sons ranging from a babe in his mother's arms up to the eldest son towering over his father. Cannot remember the odds quoted.
deebel
If you assume the odds of having a boy are 50% then there is a 25% chance of having 2 sons in a row, 12.5% chance of 3 sons in a row and so on. There would be a 0.02% chance of having 19 boys in a row.
However it is not as simple as that in practice. The divide is more 51%49%. There was a study done that suggested that if a family had 3 boys their 4th child was more likely to be a boy but it was a very small sample size so can't be considered as definitive. There are some theories that suggest that women may be more able to carry one gender or another.
-
Must be problematic for the aristocracy who are desperate to produce a son to retain a title Duke/Earl/Sir etc.
Had a school friend who was one of ten children - the five first-born being girls followed by five boys.
-
eg John Hayward, son John Hayward (fair enough), but then other sons name their children John, then their children John....
So John Hayward has 3 grandchildren called John Hayward etc all living in the same place and also other grandchildren John (children of his daughters) - you can just imagine "This is my grandson John and this is John and this is John .......)
This is not encouraging me. I am searching for a John Hayward, who married my great grandaunt and I can find no records of him before their marriage, and he didn't put any father's name on the marriage record. So I must resort to finding John Haywards and looking for clues. I may need to give up on this one.
-
I think the most of one gender I've ever seen in a row was 5, so nothing like the records that you have all included!
The thing I found strangest about naming conventions was naming younger siblings the same name as older, deceased children. Even if those older children had lived a few years.
When I first encountered it, I was convinced I was wrong, but I think someone here explained that I wasn't. I've noticed it now in several families, particularly in one region.
I don't think people would do that these days. Perhaps because we are fortunate enough that child mortality is quite low, thank goodness.
-
The thing I found strangest about naming conventions was naming younger siblings the same name as older, deceased children. Even if those older children had lived a few years.
When I first encountered it, I was convinced I was wrong, but I think someone here explained that I wasn't. I've noticed it now in several families, particularly in one region.
The family of 13 children, 10 girls and 3 boys that I mentioned in my reply #8 lost 2nd daughter and 1st son both aged 2. They were named for grandparents so the next baby of each gender to be born was given the name of the deceased sibling.
My run of 7 boys includes one (number 4 in the sequence) who was given the same name as his half-brother who had died when a baby. It was their paternal grandfather's name. The daughter born at the end of the 7 son sequence shared her name with a half-sister who died aged 6. It was their grandmother's name.
The important thing was carrying on certain names.
-
It reminds me of a lovely lady I knew who had 7 beautiful daughters.
When the last one was born, dad went to the telephone box on the corner (no phones/no fathers at the birth) to check up.
When she came home with new baby daughter, she asked one of the girls, ‘What did your daddy say when he told you about the new baby?’
The child gave a big sigh as she imitated her daddy, ‘Another girl.’
Needless to say, he was very proud of all his daughters. :)
-
I have one family who had seven Sons, then after a gap of three years they had a Daughter. Two of the Sons married Sisters.
Carol
-
My grandmother, in my avatar, had 7 sons in a row, including a set of triplets. Although many of my other ancestors had large families (every 2 years or so until menopausal), they were all mixed :D
-
In one census that asked how many years married and how many living children, the wife of my OH's ancestor wrote 18 (eighteen) children.
There was only one girl Frances Phoebe.
-
My gg-grandparents had eight sons and two daughters; the last six were all sons.
-
My h-sister's lot. She's a Kerr her GG Uncle, a sailor had 10 girls.
Don
-
My great great Smith grandparents had six sons in a row before their daughter Annie Alberta Louisa was born,then another son followed by two more daughters.
Sadly Annie was only 5 years old when she died. The last daughter was also called Annie presumably after her sister.
Their mother died two years after the last child was born. By coincidence Annie Alberta Louisa was born the same date in October as my late father.
-
A 25 year old woman gave birth to 9 babies in Morocco who have all survived, 5 girls and 4 boys :o
Carol
-
What a horror show. Nine is a decent sized litter for a dog.
-
This is not encouraging me. I am searching for a John Hayward, who married my great grandaunt and I can find no records of him before their marriage, and he didn't put any father's name on the marriage record. So I must resort to finding John Haywards and looking for clues. I may need to give up on this one.
Janpearey - where is your John Hayward supposed to be? I have a few lot in my tree!
Liz
-
What a horror show. Nine is a decent sized litter for a dog.
[/quote
Well, the poor soul had no control over it did she!
I can’t imagine how she will cope ,or how well organised support will be !
Just hope the babies are not turned into a sort of “ peep show”.
Viktoria.
-
I don't know how anyone, even if they had the support of an extended family, could look after 9 babies. Hope they will be ok. Erato, I think your comment was lacking empathy to say the least.
-
Nine seems unimaginable! And the publicity that ensues (Canadian Quintuplets?) often wrecks any "normal" life for the whole family, it seems.
-
"lacking empathy"
Damn right. I do not understand, sympathize with or share the feelings and view point of this person. What she did was outrageous, irresponsible and selfish, and will only take resources away from other families and children who need them.
-
Nine seems unimaginable! And the publicity that ensues (Canadian Quintuplets?) often wrecks any "normal" life for the whole family, it seems.
Problem was with the Dionne Quins, is that the family got on the gravy train to help raise the quins. Not realising, that once the Gravy Train gets up to speed, there is no getting off.
-
Ah, that was the surname - I couldn't remember it, but that was the family I was thinking of.
From Errato's comments, I assume it was overenthusiastic fertility treatment? More embryos allowed to survive and develop? I've no knowledge of the full story, but feel that a natural pregnancy and survival to birth, even via caesarean, of so many foetuses would be unlikely?
-
I too do not know the full history of this-nine babies- nothing was said in the news flash I saw and I have not researched it hence me thinking the mother has no control over the number of babies.
I will look it up now though.
Viktoria.
-
It was said by an attending Dr, that there had been no fertility treatment but IVF was mentioned in another article .
So—— ?
However ,the pressure on a woman to have children in a country like hers ,would be very strong.
Gosh ,only a pound or so each!
Viktoria.
-
One of my great-great grandmothers was the 6th daughter of eight girls and also had a stillborn twin.
Six out of the eight lived to adulthood and two died during childhood.
She also had 3 half-sisters and 2 half-brothers from her father's first marriage!
She would go on to have 12 children herself, 4 boys and 2 girls in her first marriage and 4 girls and 2 boys in the second marriage.
-
My grandfather - the eldest child had six younger sisters - their mother my g-grandmother if asked how many children she had would reply I have six daughters and each one has a brother.
Those seven children between them produced seven children between them in the next generation and in the following generation there were only seven children.