Comments on: Poll: Larger families in days gone by? http://blog.myheritage.com/2012/10/poll-larger-families-in-days-gone-by/ Wed, 22 May 2013 08:02:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Kim Ricord http://blog.myheritage.com/2012/10/poll-larger-families-in-days-gone-by/#comment-38708 Kim Ricord Wed, 03 Oct 2012 01:19:21 +0000 http://blog.myheritage.com/?p=27620#comment-38708 I agree with all the comments thus far. A number of my grandparents and great-grandparents had many siblings. The further back, the more spouses with children. Disease and accidents took the lives of children and parents. Being from a New England background, with all its Puritanism, relations were strictly for reproduction. As with everything else, it was work; and we have a very strong work ethic. I agree with all the comments thus far. A number of my grandparents and great-grandparents had many siblings. The further back, the more spouses with children. Disease and accidents took the lives of children and parents. Being from a New England background, with all its Puritanism, relations were strictly for reproduction. As with everything else, it was work; and we have a very strong work ethic.

]]> By: Wesley http://blog.myheritage.com/2012/10/poll-larger-families-in-days-gone-by/#comment-38701 Wesley Tue, 02 Oct 2012 20:32:02 +0000 http://blog.myheritage.com/?p=27620#comment-38701 Larger families were the norm due to spiritual beliefs, childhood mortality rates, disease, and the fact hat there was much labor required to do most everything including a large segment being rural based. My family had 14-20 children easily and my own mother had 8 of us. As the economy stagnates, the birthrate typically drops. I remember one ancestor who had 12 of his own children and worked to be successful in agriculture to be sure that each son had an equal amount of farmland and each daughter a suitable dowry. He then got news that his sister and brother-in-law died and he adopted all of her kids and worked harder to assure that they had the same inheritance as their cousins. Family bonds were stronger and there was greater familial support for the aged. Larger families were the norm due to spiritual beliefs, childhood mortality rates, disease, and the fact hat there was much labor required to do most everything including a large segment being rural based.

My family had 14-20 children easily and my own mother had 8 of us. As the economy stagnates, the birthrate typically drops.

I remember one ancestor who had 12 of his own children and worked to be successful in agriculture to be sure that each son had an equal amount of farmland and each daughter a suitable dowry. He then got news that his sister and brother-in-law died and he adopted all of her kids and worked harder to assure that they had the same inheritance as their cousins.

Family bonds were stronger and there was greater familial support for the aged.

]]> By: Chris van der Watt http://blog.myheritage.com/2012/10/poll-larger-families-in-days-gone-by/#comment-38688 Chris van der Watt Tue, 02 Oct 2012 16:08:25 +0000 http://blog.myheritage.com/?p=27620#comment-38688 The families was larger due the high mortallity and due the the wars. In war time there is an increase in the birth rate. My four grandparets had 12, 10, 4, 6 siblings, six of them past away as infants The families was larger due the high mortallity and due the the wars. In war time there is an increase in the birth rate.

My four grandparets had 12, 10, 4, 6 siblings, six of them past away as infants

]]> By: steven http://blog.myheritage.com/2012/10/poll-larger-families-in-days-gone-by/#comment-38687 steven Tue, 02 Oct 2012 16:06:17 +0000 http://blog.myheritage.com/?p=27620#comment-38687 larger families were needed to work the farms larger families were needed to work the farms

]]> By: John Hersey http://blog.myheritage.com/2012/10/poll-larger-families-in-days-gone-by/#comment-38673 John Hersey Tue, 02 Oct 2012 08:33:41 +0000 http://blog.myheritage.com/?p=27620#comment-38673 Families were larger because of a lack of contraception, children were seen as assets (worked and could care for the aged later), and women saw it as their duty, function and life's purpose, to reproduce offspring. It's interesting in researching my family history, how much closer and more loving these large families were. Notices were published annually for years after a death in remembrance of lost loved ones, and the loss and heartbreak expressed is palpable in the writings. Families were larger because of a lack of contraception, children were seen as assets (worked and could care for the aged later), and women saw it as their duty, function and life’s purpose, to reproduce offspring.

It’s interesting in researching my family history, how much closer and more loving these large families were. Notices were published annually for years after a death in remembrance of lost loved ones, and the loss and heartbreak expressed is palpable in the writings.

]]> By: Vic Trigg http://blog.myheritage.com/2012/10/poll-larger-families-in-days-gone-by/#comment-38670 Vic Trigg Tue, 02 Oct 2012 07:43:21 +0000 http://blog.myheritage.com/?p=27620#comment-38670 Larger families were probably due to lack of birth control plus greater infant mortality made survival of enough children to support parents less likely, so more children may have been felt to be needed to allow for likely deaths. My 4 Grandparents had 4, 9, 9, and 11 siblings Larger families were probably due to lack of birth control plus greater infant mortality made survival of enough children to support parents less likely, so more children may have been felt to be needed to allow for likely deaths.

My 4 Grandparents had 4, 9, 9, and 11 siblings

]]>