Dutch-Colonies-L Archives

Archiver > Dutch-Colonies > 1998-06 > 0896947781


From: "Lorine McGinnis Schulze" <>
Subject: Re: Weyntie (CRAY or QUICK?)
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 08:09:41 +0000


> From:

> > But, I must ask, (regardless of whether Weyntie Theunis was a CRAY or a
> > QUICK) is it possible for one woman to bear children over a period of 40
> > years and
> > until the age of 59??
> Bill:
> You obviously hit the hot button issue on Weyntie. When we had some
> discussion on her several months ago, this extraordinarily long period of
> fecundity was noted. Theoretically possible? Sure, I think so. One does
> read now and then of women of relatively advanced age who give birth, but it

Ahem.... 53 (note her age would have been 53 NOT 59) is *not* a
"relatively advanced age"......<g>

You might want to rethink that statement Ted? Lots of females on this
list near or over 53 who might take offense <VBG>

Wyntie was b. 1628 (if this is the right Wyntie) - and as I noted in
my post on this yesterday, her last child in 1681 = an age of 53 -
well within range for a late in life baby.

The only reason not more of us have these babies nowadays is we have
a few more precautions we can take!

We also don't usually continue having babies over 37 years
(1644-1681) as she did - so our baby making equipment is not quite as
efficiently working.

Come on guys! It's not impossible and it isn't unheard of!

Women in their 50s do have babies. :-)

Lorine

Lorine McGinnis Schulze

IIGS http://www.iigs.org/
Teamleader Webmaster, Historian & IRC Teams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* The Olive Tree Genealogy http://www.rootsweb.com/~ote/
* The Canadian Military Heritage Project http://www.rootsweb.com/~canmil/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This thread: