Large gaps between d.o.b. of a grandparent and one of his/her grandchildren.

[iolaus]

Perhaps I am cynical but researching s village near Cambridge I found a disproportionate number of mothers who at the time of giving birth to their last child 45 upwards, had a teenaged daughter in the house. I wonder if they were in fact covering illegitimate births?

It's possible but I know of several women who have given birth when they were grandmothers already - including one in the same week as her daughter

[Maiden Stone]

Perhaps I am cynical but researching s village near Cambridge I found a disproportionate number of mothers who at the time of giving birth to their last child 45 upwards, had a teenaged daughter in the house. I wonder if they were in fact covering illegitimate births?

It's possible but I know of several women who have given birth when they were grandmothers already - including one in the same week as her daughter

I have similar. The 2 babies were both baptised and buried within 4 weeks in 1836. Catherine, 2nd illegitimate child of eldest daughter, Barbara, was baptised 14th. Feb. Maria, 10th & youngest daughter of Barbara's mother, then aged 45, was baptised 9th March. Maria was probably premature; her sister, Elizabeth was baptised July 1835 and her brothers in May 1834 and June 1833. Catherine was buried 10th March, the day after her infant aunt's baptism. Maria was buried 15th March.

[Redroger]

Personally with the stigma on illegitimacy then and later. I think this was often used as a cover

[Maiden Stone]

You may be right. There were certainly cases of children believing that their mothers were their sisters.
 I'm going by information in parish registers for my reply #55. My naughty (or unfortunate) girl, Barbara was also pregnant in 1833. (I lost count of her pregnancies.) There was a removal order dated March that year. So far not come across a baptism for a baby of hers in 1833 or 1834. However her parents had a son baptised in each of those years. They seemed to have brought up her first child, a boy born 1829 when B. was 18, along with their own. Their 1st son died aged 2 and they had only daughters until 1833. I'm a bit suspicious about Elizabeth 1835 because there's no sign of her later. There's also a mystery 2 year old girl in the household on 1841 census; no idea who was responsible for her existence; no birth or death registration, baptism or burial. Barbara eventually married, twice, probably to the relief of her parents.

[Redroger]

Maiden Stone I have a similar situation in the late 18th century, the woman I believe to have been my 3xgreat grandmother had numerous illegitimate children and claimed for none of them on the parish. Perhaps that was her occupation and also why noone with my surname seems to match my DBS before her son.

[Maiden Stone]

Maiden Stone I have a similar situation in the late 18th century, the woman I believe to have been my 3xgreat grandmother had numerous illegitimate children and claimed for none of them on the parish. Perhaps that was her occupation and also why noone with my surname seems to match my DBS before her son.

This thought has crossed my mind more than once.
 I checked the date of a removal order for Barbara when she was "a Singlewoman, great with child and poor" and realised it was 3 years before the baptism and death of her daughter, Catherine. The removal order was set aside a few months later. Explanations may be: 1833 pregnancy ended in miscarriage or neo-natal death; the baby was palmed off to someone else; one of the sons born to her parents in 1833 or 1834 was hers; Catherine was not a baby when she was baptised. 
Barbara was not my direct ancestor. That was one of her younger sisters who also had an illegitimate child when she was 18. However he was the son of her future husband, named on birth certificate. Another sister had an illegitimate son in summer 1841. Baptism register has her father's name as the child's name which had me confused again.     She married a few years later, possibly to the real father of her son. That baby was too late for 1841 census, otherwise there would have been 2 babies and a toddler in the household as well as Barbara's 10 year-old son.
The parish church baptism register didn't note that babies were illegitimate.

[Redroger]

I have a strange one. My grandfather's neice had an illegitimate son with a farmer she was in domestic service to. Two years later she married him, but the baby stayed with my grandfather and was brought up by him and his first wife. They had no children in a forty year marriage apart from a possible infant death after about 7 years into the marriage. She died in 1894, shortly afterwards aged 66/7 he married my grandmother then aged 35. 5 months later my aunt was born! Dad was born when he was 70/1!  Dad married at40. Hence the 112 year gap between me and my grandfather. 117 in my brother's case.

[jersey2000]

I have a pretty unusual situation myself. My father was 63 at the time of my birth. When we recently found out he was adopted, things got a little crazy. Turns out his biological father was 53 at the time of his birth. That makes for a whopping 116 years between my biological grandfather and me.

[Maiden Stone]

You and you grandfather might be current board leaders, jersey.
Welcome to RootsChat.