Genealogy Chat

For one child to be born in 1897 and for there to be no other child until 1915? the mother would have been 44 when the 2nd child was born.

It sounds unusual, but is by no means unique. Is it possible that they were in a different country between times? If they were married in Scotland, and moved to England, Ireland, or parts more distant and then returned any births would not appear on the relevant records. As for an age of 44, I have a similar one on my wife's side of the tree. She was 47 when the last child was born, he suvived only 6 days. Paul

I have similar my grandfather was born 1899 and my Aunt wasn't born until 1910, as far as i know no others in between. The Aunt said she wasn't wanted as they only ever wanted one child! Her mother was born im 1869 so 41 when second child born. Kim

There could have been miscarriages or infant deaths in between. As women get older (late thirties is 'old' for babies!) there are more likely to be complications. What was the husband's occupation? Could he have been working away from home? Was he in prison?

He was a " Soldier on Furlongh" whatever that could be! Think I'll post what anyone may think it is. Thank you for your kind replies.

Soldier on Furlough means he was on leave from the army, abscence on active service with the Army might explain long gaps between children, Remember there were the Boer Wars etc round 1899

Wow thanks for that! that's fantastic information!

There was 12 years between my grandfather and his older sister. I later discovered there were four children who died in between. My grandfather was born when his mother was 46 and father 56! Its a miracle I'm here at all. He lived to be 83! Anne