Scottish Pensioner becomes Great (x3) Grandmother

[CeeJay]

Did anyone else see the report that "A Scottish pensioner has become a great, great, great grandmother with six generations alive at the same time."? I find this quite amazing, I only ever knew 1 grandparent and she died 55 years ago. A quick glance at my tree shows that the Great (x3) generation were all born between 1772 and 1813, and died 1828 to 1895, even my great grandparents were all gone 90 years ago. Can anyone come close to rivalling six generations alive?

 

[peter]

I saw it and was somewhat shocked that it was thought to be an achievement. She's only 86, which is no great age - the secret of their success if you can call it that (I wouldn't) is that each mother had her first child at the age of 18 or younger.

 

[jorghes]

I have evidence in my tree (although not in the direct branch I have found so far) of five generations alive at once. It was reported in the local papers twice - once in 1908 and the second time in 1920 (with the same individuals present in both photos). There were no known great-great-great grandchildren known (otherwise I think they would have been added).

Personally, my 3x great grandparents were all gone before 1913, and at that point only one of my grandparents was alive.

 

[peter]

I have at least one example of 5 generations in my tree. My great-great-great grandmother Jane Till was born in 1819 and lived to 1907 (she was 87 when she died).

Her first illegitimate child (at the age of 16) was my great-great grandmother Emma Till, who married and had her first child at 18. Emma's second child was George Edward Bright, whose wife bore their first child when he was 20. Matilda Mary Bright bore her first child at 22 in 1899, but she was pipped at the post by her younger sister who had married at 17 and had her first child in 1898.

So at the age of 79 Jane Till was a great-great grandmother for the first time, and by the time she died she had at least five great-great grandchildren.

 

[canadianbeth]

Emma's second child was George Edward Bright

I have an ancestor in my tree, Edward Colston Bright, b1868, who married my 1st cousin 2r Laura Barratt. I wonder if he is connected to your George Edward.

 

[peter]

I have an ancestor in my tree, Edward Colston Bright, b1868, who married my 1st cousin 2r Laura Barratt. I wonder if he is connected to your George Edward.

Bright is a common surname, so I think it's unlikely. A marriage search suggests your cousin married in Bristol, whereas my Bright family were from Essex, though great-grandfather moved his family to London in the late 19th century.

I assume that Edward Colston Bright was named in 'honour' of the Bristol slave trader whose statue was memorably toppled, rather than related to him?

 

[JimP]

I lived in Newfoundland for 7 years. "5-generation pictures" are very common there, I even recall seeing one that was 5 generations on the matrilineal line.

The reasons they are common are (1) longevity: if a person makes it to their late 60s, they have a very good chance of making it to their 90s, (2) even today, women have their first child before the age of 20, so there is a shorter interval between generations, and (3) historically, families were large, so even if one child died young or delayed childbearing, there were others to carry on (I knew one man who, when he died at 89, left 16 surviving children, 40-some grandchildren, 160 or more great-grandchildren, and about a dozen great-great-grandchildren)

In my own family, even 7th-great-grandmother Mary (Slaughter/Slafter) Wellman (1688-1793) did not live to see her great-great-grandchildren.

 

[canadianbeth]

I assume that Edward Colston Bright was named in 'honour' of the Bristol slave trader whose statue was memorably toppled, rather than related to him?

Ha ha, I have no idea, since I have never heard of that slave trader. Hopefully, he was not the same person.