Marriage ages and motherhood
- From: Alan Grey <a.grey@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 12:58:34 +1200
Yvonne Purdy wrote:
It makes strange reading, in our time, that 9 year olds were being married
off.
I have a direct ancestress, baptised 25 December 1610, married on 8 March
1622/23, so 12 years old. Her husband was slightly older at not quite 15,
but at least their first recorded child was not baptised until 14 March
1626/27. I think that Will is quite correct that they weren't allowed to
live together as man and wife until they were older, although I do wonder
whether all parents/guardians took such care if great wealth or good
connections were at stake.
Under the subject "RE: Exact wording of Rogers children record" there has been much discussion over the last two days about young brides and mothers. The whole question of age at marriage is an interesting one, and important in genealogical studies. I am aware of research that has relevance to any interpretation of the issue and likelihood of the production of children at a very young age, and thought perhaps to share pertinent information. (The issue of a young marriage is less consequential than age at parenthood, as early marriages clearly happened, though the incidence was probably decreasing by the late 1600s.)
Laslett made a study of over 1,000 marriages in the diocese of Canterbury between 1619 and 1660 where the individuals were married for the first time. Only 17 women (or girls, as the case may be) were aged 16 years or under. The youngest was aged 13 years, and she was the only one (she was "one-in-a-thousand"). None were 14, four were 15 and twelve were 16 years old. The most common age was 22 and the mean was 24. [Laslett, P., The World we have lost, Methuen & co, 1965, pp.81-89]. The sample size is significant, and shows how rare a marriage would have been for the girl to be aged 12, let alone 11 (or even possibly 10 if a child was born at age 11). Granted the data is not from VA, but socially we are talking about a similar group (the one stemmed from the other).
A rather important factor which comes into play is the age of menarch (sexual maturity, and thus the possibility of having children). No doubt this is a slightly fraught area if we are thinking of understanding the subject in the 1600s, as hard data are lacking. Nevertheless, all indications are that prior to the widespread urbanisation of the 20th century, the age of menarch in women across the world was considerably higher (by several years) than it is today. Tanner showed that in Sweden between 1905 and 1949 the average age fell from 15.7 to 14.1 years; in the US, between 1904 and 1951 it fell from 14.1 to 12.9; in Norway (the longest record) it fell from 17.1 to 13.5 between 1851 and 1951 [Tanner, M.J., Growth at Adolescence, Oxford, 2nd edition, 1962, with the Norwegian figures confirmed in: Rosenberg M., Menarcheal age for Norwegian women born 1830-1960, Ann. Hum Biol. 1991 May-Jun;18(3):207-19.] This is a confirmed trend in many diverse countries across the world, such as China, UK, France, Netherlands, Spain, Brazil, Poland, Japan, Haiti etc. [refs. available if needed].
A study in Japan showed that as well as a decline in average age, there was a lowering of the earliest onset of menarch. In 1958, research conducted in Japan showed a mean menarchial age of 13.27 years (range: 10.83 to 16.92 years), whereas by 1980 the mean was 12.40 years (range: 9.63 to 15.44 years). It is notable that the lower limit declined significantly, and the the range gap stayed more-or-less constant. This is on top of a decline from an average of 15.0 years in the 1920s (and, by interpolation, a range at that time of approx. 12+ to 18+ years). Interestingly, a decline in the 1920s and 30s was reversed through the 40s, primarily, it seems, as a result of social and economic stress associated with WWII. [Hoshi, H; Kouchi, M., Secular trend at the age at menarche of Japanese girls with special regard to the secular acceleration of the age at peak height velocity. Human Biology. 1981 Dec;53(4):593-8].
In general, the decreasing trend seems to be associated with both urbanisation and increasing standards of living (e.g., nutrition). The necessity for physical work, the possibility of poor (or patchy) nutrition, and other physical and social stresses seem to act to increase the age of menarch onset. As modern sportswomen will attest, onset can be significantly delayed (by many years) because of intense physical activity. It is likely, therefore, (though not certain) that the age of onset was relatively stable back into the time in question (the late 1600s), and probably quite high in the colonial environment.
Anyway, I just wanted to highlight some interesting information, and show that there are various social and biological factors that make having children at aged 11 extraordinarily unlikely in previous times (more unlikely then than now). Firstly, hard data on ages at marriage indicate a very low probability of marriage that young. Secondly, it is highly unlikely that a girl as young as 11 would be sexually mature at that time and thus be physically able to have children. Ironically, while modern sensibilities might tend to be affronted by such a young mother, it is our time when it is more possible physically than in previous years.
All this is not to say that it did not happen as theorised over the last few days, that young Jane was a mother at an early age. It is just that it is so unlikely that there is, I believe, a high burden of proof required ... documentary evidence that shows "this" person (born at "this" time) is the legal and lawful child of "this" mother. We cannot rely on the seemingly obvious interpretation. (Mind you, this is the standard for which we aim in genealogical research anyway!)
Alan R Grey
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Well, maybe Jane Presley *was* an 11-yr. old mother!
- Next by Date: Re: Well, maybe Jane Presley *was* an 11-yr. old mother!
- Previous by thread: Giving poor Margaret Hungerford, wife of Robert Sutton, 2nd Lord Lexinton, some family
- Next by thread: "Miserere mei Deus" by Anne Vaughan Lock
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
