Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've had some fathers who had kids into their seventies (with younger women, obviously). And some women who have had kids into their mid-forties to early fifties. Obviously now with birth control that does not happen very often. One man had his first child in 1863 (with wife number one) and his last child in 1919 (with his second wife, who died in 1939. He lived from 1845-1926.
Has anybody else noticed old parents on your family trees?
I've had some fathers who had kids into their seventies (with younger women, obviously). And some women who have had kids into their mid-forties to early fifties. Obviously now with birth control that does not happen very often. One man had his first child in 1863 (with wife number one) and his last child in 1919 (with his second wife, who died in 1939. He lived from 1845-1926.
Has anybody else noticed old parents on your family trees?
This is not intended to be sarcastic, but in the 1700/1800s where most of my work is, a man in his 60s was considered "old" and in his 70s and above "very old" and the women were "baby factories". and when each wife wore out and died the man married a younger woman who was able to take care of the kids already on the ground and start another batch. As a hobby I locate and document abandoned cemeteries and graves and never cease to be saddened by the great number of kids who died before their fifth birth date.
I've noticed some fathers who had children into their seventies-- and the amazing fertility of almost everybody prior to 1900 brings a tree into numbering in the thousands pretty quickly.
But I've also noticed, especially on sites like Ancestry/One World Tree, that sometimes people who are just getting into genealogy have ascribed Zedekiah Junior's children to Zedekiah Senior. Understandable, since they both at some point married women named Mary or Ann and had daughters named Martha. But kind of hard to unravel sometimes.
I've noticed some fathers who had children into their seventies-- and the amazing fertility of almost everybody prior to 1900 brings a tree into numbering in the thousands pretty quickly.
But I've also noticed, especially on sites like Ancestry/One World Tree, that sometimes people who are just getting into genealogy have ascribed Zedekiah Junior's children to Zedekiah Senior. Understandable, since they both at some point married women named Mary or Ann and had daughters named Martha. But kind of hard to unravel sometimes.
And they "recycled" names over and over through the generations and in one branch of my Tree there were times they used Thomas Charles and other times Charles Thomas.
And they "recycled" names over and over through the generations and in one branch of my Tree there were times they used Thomas Charles and other times Charles Thomas.
<groan>
Yes, in my mother's family I've got more Christie/Kirsty/Christina/Christines and Anguses-- with one of two last names-- than I can count. And then they marry each other, and name the babies the same thing. I'm beginning to see the merit of naming babies Apple and Fifi Trixiebelle.
I've had some fathers who had kids into their seventies (with younger women, obviously). And some women who have had kids into their mid-forties to early fifties. Obviously now with birth control that does not happen very often. One man had his first child in 1863 (with wife number one) and his last child in 1919 (with his second wife, who died in 1939. He lived from 1845-1926.
Has anybody else noticed old parents on your family trees?
Both my husband and I are the children of the youngest parents in a generation who had kids when they were old (mid 30s). It sure makes it easy to track relatives - my grandparents were born in the 1880s and so where his. My great grands were 1840-50s and his in 1850s. Our 2nd g-grands were in the 1820s and earlier and his 3rd g-grands in the Rev. war period.
Names? we chase the same names generations after generation and find it easy....... A man usually named the first son for his father or his oldest brother, the second for another older relative, etc. Easy to track groups in families that way as they move place to place in censuses.
Oh, we had our kids in our very late 20s/early 30s. They will have the same short # of generations to deal with
I've had some fathers who had kids into their seventies (with younger women, obviously). And some women who have had kids into their mid-forties to early fifties. Obviously now with birth control that does not happen very often. One man had his first child in 1863 (with wife number one) and his last child in 1919 (with his second wife, who died in 1939. He lived from 1845-1926.
Has anybody else noticed old parents on your family trees?
Scads of them----------on both sides. Both of my grandfathers were born ca. 1880 (parents ca. 1930) and I was born in 1957.
People today seem to think that it's unusual when a woman has a baby when she's over 40. I think why, my great-grandmother had my grandfather when she was 40 and that was in 1912!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
