TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-L Archives

Archiver > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM > 2009-02 > 1235357393


From:
Subject: [TGF] wetnurse, was calendar question
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 02:49:53 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <003e01c9953c$6cfa01f0$46ee05d0$@net>


As someone who was pregnant and nursing a baby at the same time, plus has heard the anecdotes of others, I'm curious about the evidence "that the births of children this
closely together almost never happened."

Charlene Pipkin

----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 3:25:10 PM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain
Subject: Re: [TGF] calendar question

>It's entirely possible that she did have twins 10 months later. Don't
forget, twins are often premature, so the gap may have been smaller
than might otherwise have been the case.

That's a wise caution--leading to another consideration (which, of course,
was not Barbara's focal point, but it would be a consideration for any of us
contemplating the possibility of children 10 months apart). In a
breast-feeding, pre-contraceptive society, the births of children this
closely together almost never happened except when (a) the earlier child
died; or (b) the mother was using a wetnurse.

In the present case, Barbara had the benefit of all the details in the
article, wherein it's clear the earlier child did live and theirs was a
primitive frontier society where hiring others to be a wetnurse would have
been an unaffordable luxury.

Elizabeth


This thread: