Genealogy Chat

Personally i dont know where our ancestors found the time and energy to make the large families! The long working hours, not to mention the hard labour - you would have thought they would have been too tired for such things at bedtime - other than sleeping. lol Mind you, i suppose it was different during the winter months - most folks worked thru the daylight hours and went to bed when it got dark - and in the winter the hours of darkness were very long. lol

Lindsay, I think Peter answered your question. If you grew old without having children there was no-one to look after you when you became frail.

What we consider shocking and what our ancestors did are different things. Before adequate access to information about contraception - and access to adequate contraception - people regarded having children as natural. In fact there was a lot of opposition to contraception information and I think people were prosecuted for providing it - even though it was to married women! Now we think of family planning as a civilised procedure. Illegitimacy was also more shocking in the town than in the country as far as I can gather. Keeping up appearances seems to be more important in the suburbs! nell

Sorry, forgot to reply to Maggie: A husband or wife being in an asylum was one of the few reasons accepted FOR divorce, so the reason was probably the expense and also the sheer scandal of having an insane wife. Most Victorians went to any lengths to disguise an insane relative, that was far worse than 'living over the brush' and having illegitimate children. Marjorie

Lindsay In my family it was about 1745 but I have read that it was quite common amongst small farmers - those who had several sons gave the farm to the first son to give him a grandson! This brings me to the peculiar practise of 'Bundling'. This took place apparently right into the early twentieth century.A young woman would become engaged and her parents would then allow the engaged couple to share a bed - but the girl would be tightly wrapped in blankets,or in some cases, even sewn into her clothes! Now, can anyone tell me what was going on in the minds of the parents, please? Had they never heard of scissors! (You can bet their daughter had). Also, more fascinating facts! Farmers didnt kick up much of a fuss if their unmarried daughter became pregnant and in fact would not allow a pregnant daughter to marry anyone 'unsuitable' i.e. undeserving of living on his Farm and just possibly inheriting it! They preferred to wait for a more suitable match, usually someone else with a farm too. There would be plenty of suitors for his daughter,and the small matter of a few illegitimate children could be easily overcome with a generous dowry, or indeed, promise of inheritance. I'm not talking massive landowners here, but someone who had, say, 20 acres. Interesting, isnt it! Marjorie

Pre tractors and the like (late 1800s) Haveing a large family was a cheep form of labour, so hences you get lots of ancestors, But as there was no Pentions NHS and welfair state, you needed some one to look after you in old age so the Children did it. Another advantage of a large family, It spred the cost in time, help and money. and as the death rate was quite high it also ment you could lose some and still have the help you needed. I have put this bluntly, but I dout if our relles would of put it that way or seen it eather. They just knew it made sence. And It also worked for other kinds of work whther it was a self owend/run buisness or if you worked for a factory ect.

Marjorie: what year are you talking about re farm heir? Granpa Jim: how were the children their insurance? Might help me clear up a few 'holes' in my tree!!!

Karen My great grandmother is shown in the 1891 census with her 2nd 'husband' and their 3 children but they didn't marry until the following year. I've no idea why this should be. They had both been married before, but her husband had died in 1876 and his wife in 1882, so why did they wait and why marry then in 1892, aged 44 and 54? Any suggestions anyone?

Our problem today is we have trouble putting our self in the same mind frame as our relles. Not haveing experianced the life stile of the time its hard to think what they would of done in any given situation. Do you think our ggg/children will look back and say things like Had to have a new Knee replacement. When then its a case of any bits can be regenarated or the shock of some of us older ones having to suffer Black and white TV (or even NO TV) And what will they make of the Hippy Cult, the list is endless. And it dose not have to be that far. what about now, I catch my self saying things to my kid about thing in the past, in a way my Dad said simaler thing to me. And I had trouble only a few years after the events thinking 'was it really like that'

Hi Karen, I don't think you can be sure uness you have seen an entry in official records wether they are state or church, a frien of my mothers had always assimed her parents were married untill for some reason she had to produce her mothers marrige cerificate. There were seven children but they just had not bothered to tie the knot. This was the early 1900,s Clive

If they didn't marry, but lived together as man & wife.....would the woman use the man's name as her surname?? I can't find the marriage of my gt grandparents, but on the census they are down as head & wife. ???? So do you think they were married or pretending???

Marjorie, Interesting - have a couple of ancestors who fit the 'having lots of kids before they married' picture!! The one I am really upset with is great great grandma Elizabeth Greek who omitted to tell me who the father of her daughter Georgina was - leaves a great big hole on my tree!! Maggie

Relatives of a friend married late in life, after the children had long flown the nest, solely to take advantage of Lloyd George's pension.

It is not so very many years ago that any man working in a bank had to ask permission to marry from the bank manager. I remember my father telling me that. Can't imagine anyone putting up with that now!

My G grandad married aged 59 - by then he had 9 children by my g Grandmother. This was because he had to wait until his first wife died. Family rumour says she was in an asylum, and you couldn't divorce spouses who were incarcerated. I have found no evidence of this and believe it was just too expensive to divorce!! maggie

Bearing in mind there was no such thing as Social Security in those days any man widowed and left with small children would need someone to look after them, And, as he probably already had a home set up he would be a good catch. Another reason why many had children before marriage was because the children were their Insurance and Pension Providers. It was no use marrying a woman and then finding out she was barren.

Thanks Marjorie That was really interesting. I'm going to print it too. Many of my ancestors were ag labourers and I was surprised at the number of unwed Mum's. Now I understand a little why that might have been. Cheers Kate PS: Just realised I never thanked you for the title of the book we were talking about on the Commonwealth Thread. Sorry, about that and thanks, I'm going to order it from the Library. :)

Marjorie I'm quite shocked at how many of mine remarried shortly after losing their first wife - would that be because they had children to bring up do you think? My gg grandad remarried in his sixties (can't be bothered to rummage through my paperwork for his age - I'm having a night off!) - what was that all about? Debby

Nell Perhaps he was waiting for Miss Right but decided to settle for Miss Alright instead? I did a double-take at one of mine - she married, for the FIRST TIME at age 76, her new hubby was 81! She was the last living of a family of 13 children, so perhaps she married for company? It must have suited her though - she died aged 99. Marjorie

My gt gt uncle married at the advanced age of 69 - I'm not sure what he was waiting for! nell